“All the other studies that have come out on how kids do in same-sex homes are all done by lesbian activist scholars,” Stanton noted. “They have found either there’s no difference between the two kinds of homes, or that the kids actually do better (in homosexual-led households).Research shows that children do best in an intact family with both a mother and a father. These latest studies support that research. But read the study results for yourself. We're busy engaging in social experimentation with the building block of the culture, traditional marriage and the intact family, claiming it makes no difference to the children. That's a politically correct false construct and these studies put it to the lie. Check the science.
“Regnerus’s study shows nothing could be further from the truth. It compares not just homosexual and heterosexual homes, but married intact biological families, divorced, single-parent and cohabiting families,” he added. “All the other studies have just lumped those together.”
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Children Raised in Same Sex Household at Greater Risk than Peers
Two studies published in the journal, Social Science Research, illustrate the damage to children from same sex parenting. But truth isn't likely to enter this politically correct debate so watch for the media to either completely ignore the results or attack them unmercifully. Check out the article which links to several studies on this issue. Heather may have two mommies, but she's also likely to be depressed, suicidal, get STDs, smoke, and do drugs. Here's a snippet from the article:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It shouldn't supriose me that you spread more malicious lies. Firts of all Stanton claims that all studies that show kids faring well with same sex couples are dome by "lesbians". He is basically claiming that they are ALL lesbians, and that they ALL liedand that they ALL have no scientific integrity which he doesn't prove or care to prove because like you, Stanton is professional liar.
ReplyDeleteNow a study funded byt religious right wing hate groups all think tanks is "credible". maynbe because the author is not "lesbian".
But liar he is: The paper is fundamentally flawed and intentionally misleading. It doesn’t even measure what it claims to be measuring. Most of the children examined in the paper were not being raised by parents in a committed same-sex relationship—whereas the other children in the study were being raised in two-parent homes with straight parents.
Given its fundamental flaws and ideological agenda, it’s not surprising that the paper doesn’t match the 30 years of solid scientific research on gay and lesbian parents and families. That research has been reviewed by child welfare organizations like the Child Welfare League of America, the National Adoption Center, the National Association of Social Workers and others whose only priority is the health and welfare of children and that research has led them to strongly support adoption by lesbian and gay parents.
In addition, the paper’s flaws highlight the disconnect between its claims about gay parents and the lived experiences of 2 million children in this country being raised by LGBT parents. Americans know that their LGBT friends, family members and neighbors are wonderful parents and are providing loving and happy homes to children.
The paper fails to consider the impact of family arrangement or family transitions on children, invalidating any attempt on its part to assess the impact of sexual orientation on parenting. The paper inappropriately compares children raised by two heterosexual parents for 18 years with children who experience family transitions – like foster care – or who live with single or divorced parents, or in blended families. Moreover, the limited number of respondents arbitrarily classified as having a gay or lesbian parent are combined regardless of their experiences of family instability.
But then why would you care about "truth" as long as you can spread propagandistic lies.
Well, you're back with the same incivility. I decided to publish your comment anyway even though it starts with calling names. I find it interesting that you focus, not on the study itself, but on a comment of the Focus on the Family spokesman. You are pretty eager to label and dismiss all the participants in the study which included a team of researchers from UVA, Penn State, Brigham Young, Sand Diego State, and UT at Austin. They were also a diverse group of researchers from the fields of sociology, demography, and human development. As for the two organizations funding the study, they had no input. And that is a criticism that can equally be leveled at studies by leftwing researchers. I imagine you would have no problem with a study funded by the Rockefeller foundation. Do you think Kinsey with his "research" using child molesters was scientific?
ReplyDeleteYour criticisms of the study sound like the talking points from gay propagandists which are already all over the internet. Did you read the study or are you just parroting?
As Regnerus points out the reporting on gay families has moved from saying they provide outcomes equal to intact biological families to saying they are better which is the true propaganda. He makes no extravagant claims for the results which did in fact include varying types of families including same sex families where the partners were together for at least five years.
His final conclusion is that the data shouldn't be used to make policy, but indicates more research is needed.
As for Glenn Stanton, he is a well-respected researcher and author and participates in a project of the American College of Pediatricians whose objective is promoting the well-being of children. They are medical professionals who work with children every day. But no doubt you dismiss them too since they believe the optimal setting for children is the mother/father intact family unit. For readers who want more information on the ACP program on youth here's a link. http://factsaboutyouth.com/posts/are-children-with-same-sex-parents-at-a-disadvantage/
Regardless: stanton said whjat I said that he said: he accused that all other researchers havebneen "lesbians" (a lie) and tus their research should not be trusted ( a lie) insinuating that theiy have no scientific integrity. Stanton lies for living. That is his job.
ReplyDeleteRegnerus is well known for his ultra-conservative ideology and the paper was funded by the Witherspoon Institute and the Bradley Foundation - two groups commonly known for their support of conservative causes. The Witherspoon Institute also has ties to the Family Research Council, the National Organization for Marriage, and ultra-conservative Catholic groups like Opus Dei.
So Stanton can claim that ALL other research in sham because of who performed the studies but I can not say the same thing for a man who obviously is a researcher-for-hire for anti-gay hate groups.
AND I did point the obvious flaws in this study. You instead started faluanting "credentials" because you can not dabete about the merits or flaws of the study.
You are a liar Mary Ann. Always have been and always will.
Stanton may be right. You haven't proved he's not. I haven't personally researched the studies claiming same sex parents are good for kids so I can't say.
ReplyDeleteBut you are doing exactly the same thing you accuse him of doing -- claiming that studies done by researchers who support traditional marriage are necessarily biased. Who do you think is funding those studies?
And, no, you did not point out any specific flaws in the study; you made numerous statements that it's flawed and then attacked the researchers. I responded by defending them and their credentials.
But one fact that is well known is where the initial information on gay sex came from and the bogus 10% claim -- Alfred Kinsey. He has been exposed as a charlatan who paid pedophiles and convicted child molesters to masturbate children including infants and measure their "orgasms." Some of the babies went into convulsions. But he continues to be an icon for the gay movement. So I'm curious, do you admire Kinsey and his methodology? Do you consider what he did legitimate science?
Well, Anonymous, back to the tirade and the name calling. I'm not posting it. Put it on your own blog.
ReplyDeleteAre you kidding? Reread your post. Everybody who disagrees with you is guilty of "anti-gay hate propaganda" and you threw in more name-calling at Robert George. And you called me a liar AGAIN. So you're back in my spam folder, this time for good.
ReplyDelete