« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
12/20/2006
Who knows better about research than the researchers responsible? Why, Focus on the Family, of course!
So you may remember last week, when we told you how Focus on the Family's James Dobson was lashing out against Mary Cheney's pregnancy in the pages of Time magazine. Then you may remember this week we showed you how Wayne Besen of Truth Wins Out had taken the initiative to get quotes and even VIDEO FOOTAGE from two of the researchers that Dobson quoted in his Time piece (Carol Gilligan and Kyle Pruett), wherein they wholly refuted the way he misrepresented their work in his commentary. Well, today Dr. Dobson has said he is sorry for the misrepresentation and vowed to never stretch the truth about anything ever again.
Oh, wait a minute. That last line is actually what we would have written if Mr. Dobson and his organization operated on a plane of reality wherein actual data and facts trumped baseless theories that they pull out of their arses because they're convenient to their gay-unfriendly cause. Unfortunately, however, they instead operate in Fanatical Religious Extremism Land, where if they say something is so, then it simply is so. End of debate, case closed.
This alternate reality-based citizenship must be the reason why the group is now responding to the researchers who Dobson misrepresented and those who've brought the researchers' clarifications to light by saying that it's "the left" who is stretching the truth. From Focus on the Family's CitizenLink:
"The attack against Dr. Dobson has been as unceasing as it has been baseless," said Carrie Gordon Earll, director of issue analysis for Focus on the Family. "The only thing that can explain the vehemence with which gay activists have responded to his commentary is that it galls them for a major publication like Time -- with a circulation of more than 4 million -- to give a platform to someone like Dr. Dobson, who stands for everything they oppose."
The first attack came in claims from two researchers whose work Dr. Dobson cited in his piece that he had "twisted" their science. They only spoke up, it is worth noting, after being contacted by a gay activist with a long history of personally vilifying pro-family leaders; in fact, he once called Dr. Dobson "a Scripture-spitting, simple-minded, superstitious savage." No matter why the researchers weighed in, though, their objections are off-base, according to Dr. Bill Maier, Focus on the Family's psychologist in residence.
"These are well-respected scientists who probably feel they have no choice but to cry 'foul' because they work in a field that is so dominated by liberal groupthink," Maier explained. "But the fact they aren't happy their data was used to reach a conclusion they disagree with doesn't mean the data was not properly applied. Dr. Dobson never claimed these researchers share his view on this issue -- they clearly do not. But there is no denying that the data they compiled can be appropriately cited to show the unique contributions mothers and fathers make in the lives of their children.
"Many 'progressive' academics would prefer to ignore these unique contributions and claim that mothers or fathers are 'optional,' " he added. "But anyone who takes the time to read the research in question will find that Dr. Dobson quoted the researchers accurately. While these individuals may personally hold positions on same-sex parenting that are different from his, their findings on gender differences clearly support his thesis. The sad fact is that gay parenting intentionally -- and permanently -- deprives a child of either a mommy or a daddy."
Uhm...wait a second. "The fact they aren't happy their data was used to reach a conclusion they disagree with doesn't mean the data was not properly applied"? Uhm, actually it does! For example, this is how one of the two researchers, Dr. Kyle Pruett, responded to Dobson's misuse of his work:
"You cherry-picked a phrase to shore up highly, in my view, discriminatory purposes. This practice is condemned in real science, common though it may be in pseudo-science circles. There is nothing in my longitudinal research or any of my writings to support such conclusions. On page 134 of the book you cite in your piece, I wrote, “What we do know is that there is no reason for concern about the development or psychological competence of children living with gay fathers. It is love that binds relationships, not sex.”
Yet Mr. Dobson had said of Pruett's research in his Time piece:
"The voices that argue otherwise tell us more about our politically correct culture than they do about what children really need. The fact remains that gender matters--perhaps nowhere more than in regard to child rearing. The unique value of fathers has been explained by Dr. Kyle Pruett of Yale Medical School in his book Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child. Pruett says dads are critically important simply because "fathers do not mother." Psychology Today explained in 1996 that "fatherhood turns out to be a complex and unique phenomenon with huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children." A father, as a male parent, makes unique contributions to the task of parenting that a mother cannot emulate, and vice versa."
You can't just take a line or two from someone's extensive research and use it for purposes that they did not intend! It is Mr. Pruett's research, not Dr. Dobson's! For Focus on the Family to try and defend this misuse against the researchers OWN WORDS is beyond appalling! Ms. Earrl and Mr Maier defend their boss by saying "he quoted the researchers accurately." He may have quoted the words accurately, but that is not the same thing as quoting his theories and work accurately! If those responsible for the work say, "No, that's not what I mean," nobody has the right to claim that they themselves know better than the author!
This is far from the first time Mr. Dobson or FOF have been accused of misrepresentation. But when they are called out by the researchers, they NEVER issue one smidgen of a reconsideration or apology or indication that they will take into consideration the words of those who should know best! Instead, they just try and make those who condemn their malfeasance look like looney liberals with political agendas. But what they never understand or acknowledge is that one's political agenda is usually not disconnected from what they know about the world. If Mr. Pruett and Ms. Gilligan are fully committed to the study of parenting and relationships, then they are not likely to risk their careers by saying something that runs opposite to what their research tells them to be true! FOF paints it as if they wrote one thing and are now saying another in order to comply with what they call "liberal groupthink." But our opposition never stops and considers that maybe it is the fact that these researchers DO ACTUALLY CONDUCT SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH that leads them to their conclusions!
But of course Focus on the Family desperately denies wrongdoing when folks call them out, as those who stand up for what's right and factual will always come across as threatening to their world. For when the veil is lifted and folks learn that the man behind the curtain has been pulling their legs all these years, FOF's highly profitable, extremely misleading, very dangerous enterprise will implode. But with technology being what it is and access now on a truly global level, we "progressives" now have full access to every single word and deception that these folks foist upon their unsuspecting followers, in the hopes that they'll just accept the fallacy at face value. The voices of dissent are growing at a rapid rate. With bona fide truth and actual science on our side, it's really only a matter of time before their spurious anti-gay empire crumbles.
We're "apoplectic" because they're so unapologetic!
Left Apoplectic Over Dr. Dobson's Time Platform [FOF CitizenLink]
comments powered by Disqus
