RECENT  POSTS:  » Maggie Gallagher forfeits right to ever again talk about gay-related 'slippery slopes' » Extremely anti-gay FRC to lecture folks how to 'rightly' respond to 'wrong' SCOTUS decision » This is such a corrosive idea to put out into the world » Audio: Will you please stop 'attacking' NOM president for saying your sexual orientation, family are 'disordered'? » Video: Mike Huckabee, Republican candidate for increased book sells, vows to defy pro-equality SCOTUS ruling » Reliably tacky NOM turns Memorial Day into day of anti-gay politicking » Ireland: Not only a practical win, but also another tremendous psychological shift » Hillary Clinton campaign honors Harvey Milk, LGBTQ rights » You don't have to pounce on every less-than-pro-gay retailer, anti-gay conservatives! » Video: Tony Perkins tells pastors they 'may have five years' before being 'dragged kicking and screaming from your church'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

06/12/2012

Corvino: Flawed, destined-to-be-misused study comes at expense of actual child welfare

by Jeremy Hooper

John Corvino has a great takedown of that flawed gay parents study that's gaining unfortunate steam with slight-hopeful conservatives:

[Mark] Regnerus’s analysis purports to debunk the claim that children from same-sex families display no notable disadvantages when compared to children from other family forms, including intact, biological, two-parent families—what Regnerus calls the “no differences” paradigm. Had the study actually focused on “same-sex families,” it might have shed some light on the issue.
FULL: Are Gay Parents Really Worse For Children? How a New Study Gets Everything Wrong [TNR]

ALSO: Jim Burroway's excellent take: First Look at Mark Regnerus’s Study on Children of Parents In Same-Sex Relationships [BTB]

The far-right is already doing everything it can to turn this misrepresentative/under representative analysis into the gay parenting gospel, invoking shades of that "ex-gay" Spitzer study that the researcher now does everything in his power to repudiate. They want something to cling to—they need something to cling to—and so many, like Maggie Gallagher, are itching to have this be a "protect marriage" movement hole-ace. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if we see it in the ads NOM runs in the upcoming ballot states.

We must do all we can to get in front on it now.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails