Adult Children of Gay Couples Suffer Poorer Outcomes

[Seawytch]

That would make sense only if there weren't a vast number of problems encountered in traditional families. You can't just say that statistically things are a better; you have to show that they'd be overwhelmingly better.

Yes, that is the situation you see when you compare a traditional nuclear family with single parent households.

"overwhelmingly better".

Contrasting the numbers from homosexual couple families would give us an useful scale for judging the issues.

Judge them to what end? No one is going to make the single mom give up her children to a 'better' set of parents.

I think it is important for people to have good information when making decisions.

IMO, the vast myth that Single Moms are just as good as the Traditional Family has led millions of women to make bad choices and screw up their lives.

Nobody says that. In fact, all studies show that children do best in two PARENT households.

Single mothers 'do just as good a job as couples'
Fail.

Your post doesn't disprove what I said. Children do best in homes with two parents. That's undisputed.

 

[Correll]

Strange. YOu did not answer my question. YOu dodged it.

Why are you afraid?


Now, Do you have personal experiences or observations that have led you to the conclusion yourself that homosexual couples will NOT have good outcomes (compared to nuclear families) for children?

A homosexual couple with a child is a nuclear family.

Take the inaccuracy and homophobic bias out of your question and I might answer it.

YOu have well internalized the Orwellian liberal tactic of taking control of the language as a dishonest tool of Power.

But, save it for someone who might be fooled.

I haven't forgotten that you refuse to answer a very simple yes or no question.

Now, Do you have personal experiences or observations that have led you to the conclusion yourself that homosexual couples will NOT have good outcomes (compared to nuclear families) for children?

I have no idea what your question is asking. I fully support the right of gays to marry, to have children, to adopt children.

Work it out for yourself.

Don't play stupid.

It's a simple question.

I think the answer is yes. You do know of such a couple, someone close to you. That's why you are playing dumb.

And it didn't work out very well. And that's why you want to change the subject so bad.

Because you know the facts are not on your side of this issue.

I do not know a single gay couple with children that have had problems.

I don't know why on earth you would think that would be conclusive one way or another.

If the answer was a simple "No" then why didn't you say that pages ago?

Yep. I'm afraid, I don't believe you at this late date.

YOur denial now is not credible.

 

[playtime]

Funny, the children of uneducated Rednecks among the worst of all.

The children of liberal blood sucking leeches on society overwhelmingly turn out to be liberal blood sucking leeches on society. Makes you think doesn't it?

Log Cabin Republicans | Keynote Address from Mary Cheney at the Log Cabin Republicans 2014 Spirit of Lincoln Event

Good speech...but I feel sorry for her having to be the daughter of Darth Vader.

It's probably the LCRs that have kept her 'normal'. It certainly wasn't growing up with that 'straight' thing that is her father.

Wow. Cheney Derangement Syndrome and a real bad case.

Seek professional help.

Actually, if you understood the point you would have said 'liberal derangement syndrome' to your fellow homophobe... but one cannot expect rationale from the likes of a rw nutter.

 

[konradv]

All the libs celebrate Single MOthers as heroes instead of selfish bitches who are sabotaging their own children.

Apparently so does Rabbi.

 

[Seawytch]

The Regenerus study, however, HAS been disproven repeatedly.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yes, that is the situation you see when you compare a traditional nuclear family with single parent households.

"overwhelmingly better".

Contrasting the numbers from homosexual couple families would give us an useful scale for judging the issues.

Judge them to what end? No one is going to make the single mom give up her children to a 'better' set of parents.

I think it is important for people to have good information when making decisions.

IMO, the vast myth that Single Moms are just as good as the Traditional Family has led millions of women to make bad choices and screw up their lives.

Nobody says that. In fact, all studies show that children do best in two PARENT households.

Single mothers 'do just as good a job as couples'
Fail.

Your post doesn't disprove what I said. Children do best in homes with two parents. That's undisputed.

Wrong.
What you said was "Nobody says single moms are as good as couples." I disproved that.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Regenerus study, however, HAS been disproven repeatedly.

LOL. No, actually it hasnt. It has been the subject of highly partisan attacks and picked apart to destroy what is an obvious truth.
Im surprised the author hasnt had his house burned down.

 

[jillian]

As if no one could have predicted it, the largest study to date of adult children of same sex couples shows that they suffer poorer outcomes than adult chidlren of traditional couples. This would be a big "Duh" except the Gayhaddis kept quoting small selective studies that showed the opposite. But politicized science and small samples are no match for a broad wide range study. And the results are just what you would expect.
Cue "bigoted Texans"meme in 3...2...1....
Adult Children of Parents in Same-Sex Relationships Report Varied Outcomes

Regnerus' "research" was disavowed by his own department head

Regnerus has conducted research on the impact of a child having a parent who has been involved in a same-sex relationship. A 2012 population-based study of his in Social Science Research[9] generated protracted debate and controversy.[10][11] This included a disavowal by Regnerus' department chair at the University of Texas-Austin, in which Christine L. Williams cites the American Sociological Association, "which takes the position that the conclusions he draws from his study of gay parenting are fundamentally flawed on conceptual and methodological grounds and that findings from Dr. Regnerus’ work have been cited inappropriately in efforts to diminish the civil rights and legitimacy of LBGTQ partners and their families."[12] Two hundred social scientists, led by Gary Gates, signed the "Letter to the editors and advisory editors of Social Science Research",[13] in which they express their concern "about the academic integrity of the peer review process for this paper as well as its intellectual merit."[14] Regnerus continues to defend the research.[15][16]

The controversy also resulted in an audit of the review process used by Social Science Research.[17] Critics have largely focused their attention on the few same-sex relationships in the data, faulting Regnerus for comparing the adult children of intact (heterosexual) families with those whose parents may have purportedly formed same sex relationships after the dissolution of a heterosexual union.[18][19] In June 2012, 27 scholars signed a response to the Regnerus Controversy in defense of Regnerus' research, stating: "we think much of the public and academic response to Regnerus is misguided for three reasons."[20] They also argue that "it is possible to interpret Regnerus’s findings as evidence for the need for legalized gay marriage, in order to support the social stability of such relationships," which contrasts with Regnerus' own conclusion published in Slate: "[this study] may suggest that the household instability that the NFSS reveals is just too common among same-sex couples to take the social gamble of spending significant political and economic capital to esteem and support this new (but tiny) family form".[21] Major academic organizations including the American Sociological Association, American Academy of Pediatrics and American Medical Association dispute the validity of Regnerus' data and conclusions reached thereof, arguing that unlike previous studies, the statistically tiny number of same sex couples in a study whose sample group largely consisted of failed heterosexual marriages where one of the parents was allegedly homosexual, make it impossible to extrapolate any information about same sex parenting. A review carried out by the American Medical Association noted that:[18]


... The data does not show whether the perceived romantic relationship ever in fact occurred; nor whether the parent self-identified as gay or lesbian; nor whether the same sex relationship was continuous, episodic, or one-time only; nor whether the individual in these categories was actually raised by a homosexual parent (children of gay fathers are often raised by their heterosexual mothers following divorce), much less a parent in a long-term relationship with a same-sex partner. Indeed, most of the participants in these groups spent very little, if any, time being raised by a “same-sex couple.”[18]

Some argue that the project's funding source, the Witherspoon Institute, a conservative think tank, ultimately biased the results;[22][23] New York Times writer Mark Oppenheimer speculated that Regnerus' Catholic faith may have shaped the way he approached the study of same-sex relationships.[10] When asked whether his funding source (the Witherspoon Institute) is conservative, Regnerus responded by stating, "Yes. And the Ford Foundation is a pretty liberal one. Every academic study is paid for by someone. I’ve seen excellent studies funded by all sorts of interest groups."[24]

Regnerus contributed to an amicus brief in opposition to same-sex marriage[25] and appeared as an expert witness in a 2014 federal court hearing regarding Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage. Citing widespread criticism of NFSS methodology, Judge Bernard A. Friedman rejected Regnerus' testimony, alleging the arguments derived from methodologically flawed data were "not worthy of serious consideration" and served rather to please the conservative organizations (Witherspoon Institute and Bradley Foundation) that underwrote the survey research project.[26]

Mark Regnerus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

perhaps when trying to spread bigotry, you would do better not to rely on "studies" that have been ridiculed by the "author's" field... especially when that "author" was paid by social "conservatives" to create the "study".

 

[Correll]

Yes, that is the situation you see when you compare a traditional nuclear family with single parent households.

"overwhelmingly better".

Contrasting the numbers from homosexual couple families would give us an useful scale for judging the issues.

Judge them to what end? No one is going to make the single mom give up her children to a 'better' set of parents.

I think it is important for people to have good information when making decisions.

IMO, the vast myth that Single Moms are just as good as the Traditional Family has led millions of women to make bad choices and screw up their lives.

Nobody says that. In fact, all studies show that children do best in two PARENT households.

Single mothers 'do just as good a job as couples'
Fail.

Your post doesn't disprove what I said. Children do best in homes with two parents. That's undisputed.

Remember the way Dan Quayle was savaged by the media for slamming Murphy Brown?

Here is what he said that outraged the pop culture talking heads.

"Bearing babies irresponsibly is simply wrong. Failing to support children one has fathered is wrong and we must be unequivocal about this. It doesn’t help matters when primetime TV has Murphy Brown, a character who supposedly epitomizes today’s intelligent, highly paid professional woman, mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another lifestyle choice. I know it’s not fashionable to talk about moral values, but we need to do it! Even though our cultural leaders in Hollywood, network TV and the national newspapers routinely jeer at them, I think most of us in this room know that some things are good and other things are wrong. And now, it’s time to make the discussion public. It’s time to talk again about the family, hard work, integrity and personal responsibility. We cannot be embarrassed out of our belief that two parents married to each other are better, in most cases, for children than one."


He was figuratively lynched in the media for speaking this heresy.

 

[jillian]

The Regenerus study, however, HAS been disproven repeatedly.

LOL. No, actually it hasnt. It has been the subject of highly partisan attacks and picked apart to destroy what is an obvious truth.
Im surprised the author hasnt had his house burned down.

it was rejected by his field. it is only defended by rightwingnutts who don't like peer reviewed studies

 

[The Rabbi]

As if no one could have predicted it, the largest study to date of adult children of same sex couples shows that they suffer poorer outcomes than adult chidlren of traditional couples. This would be a big "Duh" except the Gayhaddis kept quoting small selective studies that showed the opposite. But politicized science and small samples are no match for a broad wide range study. And the results are just what you would expect.
Cue "bigoted Texans"meme in 3...2...1....
Adult Children of Parents in Same-Sex Relationships Report Varied Outcomes

Regnerus' "research" was disavowed by his own department head

Regnerus has conducted research on the impact of a child having a parent who has been involved in a same-sex relationship. A 2012 population-based study of his in Social Science Research[9] generated protracted debate and controversy.[10][11] This included a disavowal by Regnerus' department chair at the University of Texas-Austin, in which Christine L. Williams cites the American Sociological Association, "which takes the position that the conclusions he draws from his study of gay parenting are fundamentally flawed on conceptual and methodological grounds and that findings from Dr. Regnerus’ work have been cited inappropriately in efforts to diminish the civil rights and legitimacy of LBGTQ partners and their families."[12] Two hundred social scientists, led by Gary Gates, signed the "Letter to the editors and advisory editors of Social Science Research",[13] in which they express their concern "about the academic integrity of the peer review process for this paper as well as its intellectual merit."[14] Regnerus continues to defend the research.[15][16]

The controversy also resulted in an audit of the review process used by Social Science Research.[17] Critics have largely focused their attention on the few same-sex relationships in the data, faulting Regnerus for comparing the adult children of intact (heterosexual) families with those whose parents may have purportedly formed same sex relationships after the dissolution of a heterosexual union.[18][19] In June 2012, 27 scholars signed a response to the Regnerus Controversy in defense of Regnerus' research, stating: "we think much of the public and academic response to Regnerus is misguided for three reasons."[20] They also argue that "it is possible to interpret Regnerus’s findings as evidence for the need for legalized gay marriage, in order to support the social stability of such relationships," which contrasts with Regnerus' own conclusion published in Slate: "[this study] may suggest that the household instability that the NFSS reveals is just too common among same-sex couples to take the social gamble of spending significant political and economic capital to esteem and support this new (but tiny) family form".[21] Major academic organizations including the American Sociological Association, American Academy of Pediatrics and American Medical Association dispute the validity of Regnerus' data and conclusions reached thereof, arguing that unlike previous studies, the statistically tiny number of same sex couples in a study whose sample group largely consisted of failed heterosexual marriages where one of the parents was allegedly homosexual, make it impossible to extrapolate any information about same sex parenting. A review carried out by the American Medical Association noted that:[18]


... The data does not show whether the perceived romantic relationship ever in fact occurred; nor whether the parent self-identified as gay or lesbian; nor whether the same sex relationship was continuous, episodic, or one-time only; nor whether the individual in these categories was actually raised by a homosexual parent (children of gay fathers are often raised by their heterosexual mothers following divorce), much less a parent in a long-term relationship with a same-sex partner. Indeed, most of the participants in these groups spent very little, if any, time being raised by a “same-sex couple.”[18]

Some argue that the project's funding source, the Witherspoon Institute, a conservative think tank, ultimately biased the results;[22][23] New York Times writer Mark Oppenheimer speculated that Regnerus' Catholic faith may have shaped the way he approached the study of same-sex relationships.[10] When asked whether his funding source (the Witherspoon Institute) is conservative, Regnerus responded by stating, "Yes. And the Ford Foundation is a pretty liberal one. Every academic study is paid for by someone. I’ve seen excellent studies funded by all sorts of interest groups."[24]

Regnerus contributed to an amicus brief in opposition to same-sex marriage[25] and appeared as an expert witness in a 2014 federal court hearing regarding Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage. Citing widespread criticism of NFSS methodology, Judge Bernard A. Friedman rejected Regnerus' testimony, alleging the arguments derived from methodologically flawed data were "not worthy of serious consideration" and served rather to please the conservative organizations (Witherspoon Institute and Bradley Foundation) that underwrote the survey research project.[26]

Mark Regnerus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

perhaps when trying to spread bigotry, you would do better not to rely on "studies" that have been ridiculed by the "author's" field... especially when that "author" was paid by social "conservatives" to create the "study".

Oh that seals it.
LOL. Of course the political fall out was tremendous and the gayhaddis wanted his head. Proves nothing but people hate truth.

 

[jillian]

Judge them to what end? No one is going to make the single mom give up her children to a 'better' set of parents.

I think it is important for people to have good information when making decisions.

IMO, the vast myth that Single Moms are just as good as the Traditional Family has led millions of women to make bad choices and screw up their lives.

Nobody says that. In fact, all studies show that children do best in two PARENT households.

Single mothers 'do just as good a job as couples'
Fail.

Your post doesn't disprove what I said. Children do best in homes with two parents. That's undisputed.

Remember the way Dan Quayle was savaged by the media for slamming Murphy Brown?

Here is what he said that outraged the pop culture talking heads.

"Bearing babies irresponsibly is simply wrong. Failing to support children one has fathered is wrong and we must be unequivocal about this. It doesn’t help matters when primetime TV has Murphy Brown, a character who supposedly epitomizes today’s intelligent, highly paid professional woman, mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another lifestyle choice. I know it’s not fashionable to talk about moral values, but we need to do it! Even though our cultural leaders in Hollywood, network TV and the national newspapers routinely jeer at them, I think most of us in this room know that some things are good and other things are wrong. And now, it’s time to make the discussion public. It’s time to talk again about the family, hard work, integrity and personal responsibility. We cannot be embarrassed out of our belief that two parents married to each other are better, in most cases, for children than one."


He was figuratively lynched in the media for speaking this heresy.

he wasn't "lynched". that is a specific thing which should not be minimized by wingnut rhetoric any more than the word Nazi or slavery should.

he was made fun of and ridiculed because he was pretty stupid.

 

[jillian]

As if no one could have predicted it, the largest study to date of adult children of same sex couples shows that they suffer poorer outcomes than adult chidlren of traditional couples. This would be a big "Duh" except the Gayhaddis kept quoting small selective studies that showed the opposite. But politicized science and small samples are no match for a broad wide range study. And the results are just what you would expect.
Cue "bigoted Texans"meme in 3...2...1....
Adult Children of Parents in Same-Sex Relationships Report Varied Outcomes

Regnerus' "research" was disavowed by his own department head

Regnerus has conducted research on the impact of a child having a parent who has been involved in a same-sex relationship. A 2012 population-based study of his in Social Science Research[9] generated protracted debate and controversy.[10][11] This included a disavowal by Regnerus' department chair at the University of Texas-Austin, in which Christine L. Williams cites the American Sociological Association, "which takes the position that the conclusions he draws from his study of gay parenting are fundamentally flawed on conceptual and methodological grounds and that findings from Dr. Regnerus’ work have been cited inappropriately in efforts to diminish the civil rights and legitimacy of LBGTQ partners and their families."[12] Two hundred social scientists, led by Gary Gates, signed the "Letter to the editors and advisory editors of Social Science Research",[13] in which they express their concern "about the academic integrity of the peer review process for this paper as well as its intellectual merit."[14] Regnerus continues to defend the research.[15][16]

The controversy also resulted in an audit of the review process used by Social Science Research.[17] Critics have largely focused their attention on the few same-sex relationships in the data, faulting Regnerus for comparing the adult children of intact (heterosexual) families with those whose parents may have purportedly formed same sex relationships after the dissolution of a heterosexual union.[18][19] In June 2012, 27 scholars signed a response to the Regnerus Controversy in defense of Regnerus' research, stating: "we think much of the public and academic response to Regnerus is misguided for three reasons."[20] They also argue that "it is possible to interpret Regnerus’s findings as evidence for the need for legalized gay marriage, in order to support the social stability of such relationships," which contrasts with Regnerus' own conclusion published in Slate: "[this study] may suggest that the household instability that the NFSS reveals is just too common among same-sex couples to take the social gamble of spending significant political and economic capital to esteem and support this new (but tiny) family form".[21] Major academic organizations including the American Sociological Association, American Academy of Pediatrics and American Medical Association dispute the validity of Regnerus' data and conclusions reached thereof, arguing that unlike previous studies, the statistically tiny number of same sex couples in a study whose sample group largely consisted of failed heterosexual marriages where one of the parents was allegedly homosexual, make it impossible to extrapolate any information about same sex parenting. A review carried out by the American Medical Association noted that:[18]


... The data does not show whether the perceived romantic relationship ever in fact occurred; nor whether the parent self-identified as gay or lesbian; nor whether the same sex relationship was continuous, episodic, or one-time only; nor whether the individual in these categories was actually raised by a homosexual parent (children of gay fathers are often raised by their heterosexual mothers following divorce), much less a parent in a long-term relationship with a same-sex partner. Indeed, most of the participants in these groups spent very little, if any, time being raised by a “same-sex couple.”[18]

Some argue that the project's funding source, the Witherspoon Institute, a conservative think tank, ultimately biased the results;[22][23] New York Times writer Mark Oppenheimer speculated that Regnerus' Catholic faith may have shaped the way he approached the study of same-sex relationships.[10] When asked whether his funding source (the Witherspoon Institute) is conservative, Regnerus responded by stating, "Yes. And the Ford Foundation is a pretty liberal one. Every academic study is paid for by someone. I’ve seen excellent studies funded by all sorts of interest groups."[24]

Regnerus contributed to an amicus brief in opposition to same-sex marriage[25] and appeared as an expert witness in a 2014 federal court hearing regarding Michigan's ban on same-sex marriage. Citing widespread criticism of NFSS methodology, Judge Bernard A. Friedman rejected Regnerus' testimony, alleging the arguments derived from methodologically flawed data were "not worthy of serious consideration" and served rather to please the conservative organizations (Witherspoon Institute and Bradley Foundation) that underwrote the survey research project.[26]

Mark Regnerus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

perhaps when trying to spread bigotry, you would do better not to rely on "studies" that have been ridiculed by the "author's" field... especially when that "author" was paid by social "conservatives" to create the "study".

Oh that seals it.
LOL. Of course the political fall out was tremendous and the gayhaddis wanted his head. Proves nothing but people hate truth.

a badly constructed study is a badly constructed study.

more rightwingnut confirmation bias.

poor dear.

 

[Correll]

I think it is important for people to have good information when making decisions.

IMO, the vast myth that Single Moms are just as good as the Traditional Family has led millions of women to make bad choices and screw up their lives.

Nobody says that. In fact, all studies show that children do best in two PARENT households.

Single mothers 'do just as good a job as couples'
Fail.

Your post doesn't disprove what I said. Children do best in homes with two parents. That's undisputed.

Remember the way Dan Quayle was savaged by the media for slamming Murphy Brown?

Here is what he said that outraged the pop culture talking heads.

"Bearing babies irresponsibly is simply wrong. Failing to support children one has fathered is wrong and we must be unequivocal about this. It doesn’t help matters when primetime TV has Murphy Brown, a character who supposedly epitomizes today’s intelligent, highly paid professional woman, mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another lifestyle choice. I know it’s not fashionable to talk about moral values, but we need to do it! Even though our cultural leaders in Hollywood, network TV and the national newspapers routinely jeer at them, I think most of us in this room know that some things are good and other things are wrong. And now, it’s time to make the discussion public. It’s time to talk again about the family, hard work, integrity and personal responsibility. We cannot be embarrassed out of our belief that two parents married to each other are better, in most cases, for children than one."


He was figuratively lynched in the media for speaking this heresy.

he wasn't "lynched". that is a specific thing which should not be minimized by wingnut rhetoric any more than the word Nazi or slavery should.

he was made fun of and ridiculed because he was pretty stupid.

Actually what he said was completely right as seawytch agreed.

And describing what happened to him as a figurative lynching is completely reasonable.

 

[SwimExpert]

Single mothers 'do just as good a job as couples'
Fail.

So, I guess the whole "children need a mother and a father" argument is now blown to shit.

 

[g5000]

As if no one could have predicted it, the largest study to date of adult children of same sex couples shows that they suffer poorer outcomes than adult chidlren of traditional couples. This would be a big "Duh" except the Gayhaddis kept quoting small selective studies that showed the opposite. But politicized science and small samples are no match for a broad wide range study. And the results are just what you would expect.
Cue "bigoted Texans"meme in 3...2...1....
Adult Children of Parents in Same-Sex Relationships Report Varied Outcomes

The methodology of that study has been criticized.

Regnerus Fallout

The study is controversial because of its methodological flaws, how it was financed, its clear anti-same-sex-marriage motivations, and the suspiciously fast and sloppy way it was published in a peer review journal.

The major religious right groups in the U.S. – many of which are have ties to the Witherspoon Institute – immediately promoted and defended the study, including the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, the National Organization for Marriage, NOM’s Ruth Institute, the Liberty Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom, and, of course, the Witherspoon Institute.

But Regnerus’ stated findings were incredibly misleading. Regnerus did not compare children raised by stably coupled same-sex parents with children raised by stably coupled opposite-sex parents. Remember, he only found two respondents who said they were raised by two lesbian parents for their entire childhoods, but he lumped these respondents in with all of the respondents who said their mother had a same-sex relationship. Thus, his conclusion that he had debunked the “no differences” theory is not supported by the data he analyzed. Instead, Regnerus had effectively measured children raised in stable household to children whose households were characterized by instability. Many critics of this study, including Regnerus’ professional organization, the American Sociological Association, have pointed out that the negative outcomes were predictable rather than revelatory.

The Witherspoon Institute, a conservative think tank based in Princeton, N.J., funded the bulk of the New Family Structures Study, to the tune of nearly $700,000. Initially, the Witherspoon Institute, which has been advocating against same-sex marriage for years, gave Regnerus a $55,000 planning grant and followed it up with a $640,000 grant.

So you want to select out all the screwed up gays and only use the few that are no screwed up?

The children of stable gay couples should be compared to the children of stable straight couples.

It isn't hard to grasp...if you want to.

The instability of same sex relationships is part of the difference, selecting that out would give you false data.

You have nothing but your own bigotry to show same sex relationships are more unstable than straight relationships.

Every other straight marriage ends in divorce, so I would be very careful with your assumptions.

 

[Correll]

As if no one could have predicted it, the largest study to date of adult children of same sex couples shows that they suffer poorer outcomes than adult chidlren of traditional couples. This would be a big "Duh" except the Gayhaddis kept quoting small selective studies that showed the opposite. But politicized science and small samples are no match for a broad wide range study. And the results are just what you would expect.
Cue "bigoted Texans"meme in 3...2...1....
Adult Children of Parents in Same-Sex Relationships Report Varied Outcomes

The methodology of that study has been criticized.

Regnerus Fallout

The study is controversial because of its methodological flaws, how it was financed, its clear anti-same-sex-marriage motivations, and the suspiciously fast and sloppy way it was published in a peer review journal.

The major religious right groups in the U.S. – many of which are have ties to the Witherspoon Institute – immediately promoted and defended the study, including the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, the National Organization for Marriage, NOM’s Ruth Institute, the Liberty Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom, and, of course, the Witherspoon Institute.

But Regnerus’ stated findings were incredibly misleading. Regnerus did not compare children raised by stably coupled same-sex parents with children raised by stably coupled opposite-sex parents. Remember, he only found two respondents who said they were raised by two lesbian parents for their entire childhoods, but he lumped these respondents in with all of the respondents who said their mother had a same-sex relationship. Thus, his conclusion that he had debunked the “no differences” theory is not supported by the data he analyzed. Instead, Regnerus had effectively measured children raised in stable household to children whose households were characterized by instability. Many critics of this study, including Regnerus’ professional organization, the American Sociological Association, have pointed out that the negative outcomes were predictable rather than revelatory.

The Witherspoon Institute, a conservative think tank based in Princeton, N.J., funded the bulk of the New Family Structures Study, to the tune of nearly $700,000. Initially, the Witherspoon Institute, which has been advocating against same-sex marriage for years, gave Regnerus a $55,000 planning grant and followed it up with a $640,000 grant.

So you want to select out all the screwed up gays and only use the few that are no screwed up?

The children of stable gay couples should be compared to the children of stable straight couples.

It isn't hard to grasp...if you want to.

The instability of same sex relationships is part of the difference, selecting that out would give you false data.

You have nothing but your own bigotry to show same sex relationships are more unstable than straight relationships.

Every other straight marriage ends in divorce, so I would be very careful with your assumptions.

LOL. Selecting out the higher rate of unstable relationships is a way of creating a false picture of what is going on.

 

[Seawytch]

Judge them to what end? No one is going to make the single mom give up her children to a 'better' set of parents.

I think it is important for people to have good information when making decisions.

IMO, the vast myth that Single Moms are just as good as the Traditional Family has led millions of women to make bad choices and screw up their lives.

Nobody says that. In fact, all studies show that children do best in two PARENT households.

Single mothers 'do just as good a job as couples'
Fail.

Your post doesn't disprove what I said. Children do best in homes with two parents. That's undisputed.

Wrong.
What you said was "Nobody says single moms are as good as couples." I disproved that.

Even the article you posted didn't actually say that.

 

[Seawytch]

Single mothers 'do just as good a job as couples'
Fail.

So, I guess the whole "children need a mother and a father" argument is now blown to shit.

It was 'blown to shit' a while ago. Children need parents.

 

[Seawytch]

As if no one could have predicted it, the largest study to date of adult children of same sex couples shows that they suffer poorer outcomes than adult chidlren of traditional couples. This would be a big "Duh" except the Gayhaddis kept quoting small selective studies that showed the opposite. But politicized science and small samples are no match for a broad wide range study. And the results are just what you would expect.
Cue "bigoted Texans"meme in 3...2...1....
Adult Children of Parents in Same-Sex Relationships Report Varied Outcomes

The methodology of that study has been criticized.

Regnerus Fallout

The study is controversial because of its methodological flaws, how it was financed, its clear anti-same-sex-marriage motivations, and the suspiciously fast and sloppy way it was published in a peer review journal.

The major religious right groups in the U.S. – many of which are have ties to the Witherspoon Institute – immediately promoted and defended the study, including the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, the National Organization for Marriage, NOM’s Ruth Institute, the Liberty Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom, and, of course, the Witherspoon Institute.

But Regnerus’ stated findings were incredibly misleading. Regnerus did not compare children raised by stably coupled same-sex parents with children raised by stably coupled opposite-sex parents. Remember, he only found two respondents who said they were raised by two lesbian parents for their entire childhoods, but he lumped these respondents in with all of the respondents who said their mother had a same-sex relationship. Thus, his conclusion that he had debunked the “no differences” theory is not supported by the data he analyzed. Instead, Regnerus had effectively measured children raised in stable household to children whose households were characterized by instability. Many critics of this study, including Regnerus’ professional organization, the American Sociological Association, have pointed out that the negative outcomes were predictable rather than revelatory.

The Witherspoon Institute, a conservative think tank based in Princeton, N.J., funded the bulk of the New Family Structures Study, to the tune of nearly $700,000. Initially, the Witherspoon Institute, which has been advocating against same-sex marriage for years, gave Regnerus a $55,000 planning grant and followed it up with a $640,000 grant.

So you want to select out all the screwed up gays and only use the few that are no screwed up?

The children of stable gay couples should be compared to the children of stable straight couples.

It isn't hard to grasp...if you want to.

The instability of same sex relationships is part of the difference, selecting that out would give you false data.

You have nothing but your own bigotry to show same sex relationships are more unstable than straight relationships.

Every other straight marriage ends in divorce, so I would be very careful with your assumptions.

LOL. Selecting out the higher rate of unstable relationships is a way of creating a false picture of what is going on.

You just described the OP's study.