New Study On Homosexual Parents Tops All Previous Research

[bripat9643]

I can't wait to see what kind of logical inanities come up with to explain this away:

Family Research Council

In a historic study of children raised by homosexual parents, sociologist Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin has overturned the conventional academic wisdom that such children suffer no disadvantages when compared to children raised by their married mother and father. Just published in the journal Social Science Research,[1] the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted on this issue found numerous and significant differences between these groups--with the outcomes for children of homosexuals rated "suboptimal" (Regnerus' word) in almost every category.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

There are eight outcome variables where differences between the children of homosexual parents and married parents were not only present, and favorable to the married parents, but where these findings were statistically significant for both children of lesbian mothers and "gay" fathers and both with and without controls. While all the findings in the study are important, these are the strongest possible ones--virtually irrefutable. Compared with children raised by their married biological parents (IBF), children of homosexual parents (LM and GF):

•Are much more likely to have received welfare (IBF 17%; LM 69%; GF 57%)
•Have lower educational attainment
•Report less safety and security in their family of origin
•Report more ongoing "negative impact" from their family of origin
•Are more likely to suffer from depression
•Have been arrested more often
•If they are female, have had more sexual partners--both male and female

The high mathematical standard of "statistical significance" was more difficult to reach for the children of "gay fathers" in this study because there were fewer of them. The following, however, are some additional areas in which the children of lesbian mothers (who represented 71% of all the children with homosexual parents in this study) differed from the IBF children, in ways that were statistically significant in both a direct comparison and with controls. Children of lesbian mothers:

•Are more likely to be currently cohabiting
•Are almost 4 times more likely to be currently on public assistance
•Are less likely to be currently employed full-time
•Are more than 3 times more likely to be unemployed
•Are nearly 4 times more likely to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual
•Are 3 times as likely to have had an affair while married or cohabiting
•Are an astonishing 10 times more likely to have been "touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver."
•Are nearly 4 times as likely to have been "physically forced" to have sex against their will
•Are more likely to have "attachment" problems related to the ability to depend on others
•Use marijuana more frequently
•Smoke more frequently
•Watch TV for long periods more frequently
•Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense
​

 

[Katzndogz]

I'm surprised to see that. It took decades before we finally figured out that divorce was not optimal for children.

 

[The Rabbi]

It stands to reason. Homosexuals themselves are significantly sicker in every way than heterosexuals, suffer from drug abuse, alcohol abuse, and other mental and physical ailments more often than heteros. So not surprising that households made up of them tend to be more dysfunctional and produce children with more dysfunction.
The only response from the Left will be:
1) The study was flawed.
2) I know/am a homosexual and my family is great.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

The claims Mark Regnerus makes about his findings on gay parenting play into a pattern of conservative scholars and activists misinterpreting the data on LGBT families.

A study released this week suggests that, contrary to what years of academic research has said, children of gay parents actually fare worse than others.

According to the study's author, Mark Regnerus, a professor at University of Texas at Austin, the research "clearly reveals that children appear most apt to succeed well as adults — on multiple counts and across a variety of domains — when they spend their entire childhood with their married mother and father." Regnerus says that his study shows stark differences between such children and those with gay parents: the latter are more likely to be unemployed, consider suicide, use drugs, have an STD and fall victim to sexual abuse. Discussing his study in Slate, Regnerus writes that children of same-sex parents experience greater "household instability" than others, and that it could be too much of a "social gamble" to "support this new (but tiny) family form."


The trouble is, this is not what Regnerus' study shows. Not by a long shot. And the claims he makes play into a long-standing pattern of conservative scholars and activists misinterpreting the data on LGBT families.

While Regnerus critiques "same-sex couples" raising kids, his study does not actually compare children raised by same-sex couples with those raised by different-sex couples. The criterion it uses is whether a parent "ever ha[d] a romantic relationship with someone of the same sex." In fact, only a small proportion of its sample spent more than a few years living in a household headed by a same-sex couple. Indeed, the study acknowledges that what it's really comparing with heterosexual families is not families headed by a same-sex couple but households in which parents broke up. "A failed heterosexual union," Regnerus writes in the study, "is clearly the modal method" — the most common characteristic for the group that he lumps in with same-sex-headed households. For example, most of the respondents who said their mothers had a lesbian relationship also endured the searing experience of having their mothers leave the household as the family collapsed.

In other words, Regnerus is concluding that when families endure a shattering separation, it is likely to shatter the lives of those in them. And this is news?

Not only is it not news, it keeps alive the mistaken impression that social science is on the side of anti-gay policy and law. Ever since same-sex marriage started to become a reality in the U.S., conservative groups such as the National Organization for Marriage and the Witherspoon Institute, which helped fund the Regnerus study, have cited research that — it's claimed — shows that gay parenting is a bad idea. In 2003, Maggie Gallagher, a co-founder of NOM, wrote in the Weekly Standard of "a consensus across ideological lines based on 20 years' worth of social science research" that children do better with a married mother and father. Writing in The Times in 2004, Pepper-

dine University professor Douglas Kmiec claimed that children who grow up in gay households "are more likely to be confused sexually" and to "face a heightened chance of being the victim of sexual abuse." Citing such research, opponents of same-sex marriage have settled on the talking point that "children need a mother and a father" to thrive.

The trouble is that no scholarly research, including the Regnerus paper, has ever compared children of stable same-sex couples to children of stable different-sex couples, in part because an adequate sample size is hard to come by. (Regnerus acknowledges he was unable to find an adequate sample size, but he went ahead and made the comparison anyway.) Like the Regnerus paper, all these studies show is that divorce and single-parenthood raise risks for kids. Indeed, the basis of the 20-year "consensus" is that two parents are better than one, not that parents have to be different genders.

Mark Regnerus' study on gay parenting is hopelessly flawed - Los Angeles Times

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

*kicks up feet to watch the fireworks*

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

I'm surprised to see that. It took decades before we finally figured out that divorce was not optimal for children.

This study is widely panned because of the fact that their were only two - count them TWO same-sex parents in the entire study.

 

[Vox]

It stands to reason. Homosexuals themselves are significantly sicker in every way than heterosexuals, suffer from drug abuse, alcohol abuse, and other mental and physical ailments more often than heteros. So not surprising that households made up of them tend to be more dysfunctional and produce children with more dysfunction.
The only response from the Left will be:
1) The study was flawed.
2) I know/am a homosexual and my family is great.

some are, some are not.

However, if one bases the thinking on the beloved slogan of the homosexuals "we are born that way" ( and some really are) then, knowing what causes are most often the reasons for being born that way, one would conclude that the abnormality of sexual interest is not a single abnormality and therefore those other abnormalities should preclude the decision of entrusting children to homosexual couples.

There should also be a study to differentiate between lesbian couples and homosexual ones. Plus there should be a difference when evaluating upbringing OWN biological children and adopted ones.
Because the results might differ as well.

 

[Vox]

I'm surprised to see that. It took decades before we finally figured out that divorce was not optimal for children.

This study is widely panned because of the fact that their were only two - count them TWO same-sex parents in the entire study.

except that is NOT TRUE.

read the real study, not the HuffPost articles about it.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X12000610

 

[The Rabbi]

It stands to reason. Homosexuals themselves are significantly sicker in every way than heterosexuals, suffer from drug abuse, alcohol abuse, and other mental and physical ailments more often than heteros. So not surprising that households made up of them tend to be more dysfunctional and produce children with more dysfunction.
The only response from the Left will be:
1) The study was flawed.
2) I know/am a homosexual and my family is great.

some are, some are not.

However, if one bases the thinking on the beloved slogan of the homosexuals "we are born that way" ( and some really are) then, knowing what causes are most often the reasons for being born that way, one would conclude that the abnormality of sexual interest is not a single abnormality and therefore those other abnormalities should preclude the decision of entrusting children to homosexual couples.

There should also be a study to differentiate between lesbian couples and homosexual ones. Plus there should be a difference when evaluating upbringing OWN biological children and adopted ones.
Because the results might differ as well.

As a population generally homosexuals are sicker than heterosexuals. Obviously you can find individual examples but that isn't really germane.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I can't wait to see what kind of logical inanities come up with to explain this away:

Family Research Council

In a historic study of children raised by homosexual parents, sociologist Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin has overturned the conventional academic wisdom that such children suffer no disadvantages when compared to children raised by their married mother and father. Just published in the journal Social Science Research,[1] the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted on this issue found numerous and significant differences between these groups--with the outcomes for children of homosexuals rated "suboptimal" (Regnerus' word) in almost every category.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

There are eight outcome variables where differences between the children of homosexual parents and married parents were not only present, and favorable to the married parents, but where these findings were statistically significant for both children of lesbian mothers and "gay" fathers and both with and without controls. While all the findings in the study are important, these are the strongest possible ones--virtually irrefutable. Compared with children raised by their married biological parents (IBF), children of homosexual parents (LM and GF):

•Are much more likely to have received welfare (IBF 17%; LM 69%; GF 57%)
•Have lower educational attainment
•Report less safety and security in their family of origin
•Report more ongoing "negative impact" from their family of origin
•Are more likely to suffer from depression
•Have been arrested more often
•If they are female, have had more sexual partners--both male and female

The high mathematical standard of "statistical significance" was more difficult to reach for the children of "gay fathers" in this study because there were fewer of them. The following, however, are some additional areas in which the children of lesbian mothers (who represented 71% of all the children with homosexual parents in this study) differed from the IBF children, in ways that were statistically significant in both a direct comparison and with controls. Children of lesbian mothers:

•Are more likely to be currently cohabiting
•Are almost 4 times more likely to be currently on public assistance
•Are less likely to be currently employed full-time
•Are more than 3 times more likely to be unemployed
•Are nearly 4 times more likely to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual
•Are 3 times as likely to have had an affair while married or cohabiting
•Are an astonishing 10 times more likely to have been "touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver."
•Are nearly 4 times as likely to have been "physically forced" to have sex against their will
•Are more likely to have "attachment" problems related to the ability to depend on others
•Use marijuana more frequently
•Smoke more frequently
•Watch TV for long periods more frequently
•Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense
​

Ooh the FRC? Well, they're certainly non-partisan, unbiased, and fair. I'm convinced.

Science, I'm ashamed to say, is the 2nd most political area of inquiry these days after politics itself. Googling the author of the study, he's hardly an impartial researcher:

Mark Regnerus, Sociologist and Author - Home

"Mark Regnerus is associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin, a research associate of the university's Population Research Center, and a senior fellow at the Austin Institute for the Study of Family and Culture. His areas of research are sexual behavior and family formation. He's the author of two books (2007 and 2011) on the sexual behavior of teenagers and young adults."

Austin Institute for The Study of Family and Culture

Looking around here it's obviously a propaganda site using questionable science to push an anti-gay agenda.

And response from the academic world is therefore easily predictable, and by his own admission the 'study' wasn't even about gya parents:

Mark Regnerus’s “family structure” study has been a hot topic since it was released in June, namely because every single anti-gay conservative organization has cited it as evidence that same-sex couples are inferior parents. An internal audit by the academic journal that originally published it found the conclusions to be “bullshit” because Regnerus’s criteria was whether a kid’s parent ever had a same-sex relationship, regardless of how long it lasted or what role in played in parenting. In a new interview with Focus on the Family — a group invested in continuing to cite the study to oppose LGBT equality — Regnerus admits that the foundation of his study is too weak to draw the conclusions that many have made:

more at,
Mark Regnerus Admits His 'Family Structures' Study Wasn't About Gay Parenting | ThinkProgress

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

I'm surprised to see that. It took decades before we finally figured out that divorce was not optimal for children.

This study is widely panned because of the fact that their were only two - count them TWO same-sex parents in the entire study.

except that is NOT TRUE.

read the real study, not the HuffPost articles about it.

How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study

I've read and re-read the damn thing - the study is so flawed that it generally considered to be the worst pile of horse shit to be hoisted on the American people since WMD.

The ASA takes time in the study to show that few — if any — of the studies cited by opponents of marriage equality actually measured same-sex parenting whatsoever. Many attempt “apples-to-oranges” comparisons between stepparents, divorce parents, or single parents and same-sex parents, without actually studying any same-sex parents. Others draw comparisons between biological parents and adoptive parents — again ignoring same-sex parents entirely — even though neither DOMA nor Prop 8 had any implications for heterosexual couples who adopt or have children through other assisted means. The ASA also noted that some researchers have even objected to their studies being improperly manipulated in this manner.

What’s particularly notable about this brief is the time it takes to unpack everything that was flawed about Mark Regnerus’s study that claimed that children who had parents in same-sex relationships fared worse. The study has been called “bullshit” by an internal audit of the journal that originally published it, and even Regnerus has admitted that he really didn’t capture any valid information about gay fathers or lesbian mothers. Nevertheless, conservatives repeatedly cite it as evidence against same-sex parenting, including in the arguments for DOMA and Prop 8. In brief, here was how ASA debunked the study:

* Regnerus did not study children born or adopted into same-sex parent families, only those who seem to recollect one of their parents ever having a same-sex relationship.

* Regnerus compared that group, most of which had experienced family dissolution, only to stable, married, opposite-sex families — i.e. he compared unstable to intact.

* Regnerus ignored whether the children lived with or were raised by the parents who had a same-sex relationship.

* Regnerus only identified these “gay” parents based on the recollection of the children, not based on how the parents actually identify or live their lives.

Most of the factors Regnerus analyzes were adult outcomes, not childhood outcomes, and could very well have had nothing to do with the relationships of the children’s parents.

In a footnote, the ASA also mentioned how researcher Douglas Allen distorted data from another study in a similar way to result in a false comparison between unstable and stable households.

For anyone interested in the question of same-sex parenting;

http://www.asanet.org/documents/ASA/pdfs/12-144_307_Amicus_ (C_ Gottlieb)_ASA_Same-Sex_Marriage.pdf


As it concludes: “The social science consensus is both conclusive and clear: children fare just as well when they are raised by same-sex parents as when they are raised by opposite-sex parents.”

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Pub that published it even called it bs. From above,

"An internal audit by the academic journal that originally published it found the conclusions to be “bullshit” because Regnerus’s criteria was whether a kid’s parent ever had a same-sex relationship, regardless of how long it lasted or what role in played in parenting."

 

[GHook93]

I can't wait to see what kind of logical inanities come up with to explain this away:

Family Research Council

In a historic study of children raised by homosexual parents, sociologist Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin has overturned the conventional academic wisdom that such children suffer no disadvantages when compared to children raised by their married mother and father. Just published in the journal Social Science Research,[1] the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted on this issue found numerous and significant differences between these groups--with the outcomes for children of homosexuals rated "suboptimal" (Regnerus' word) in almost every category.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

There are eight outcome variables where differences between the children of homosexual parents and married parents were not only present, and favorable to the married parents, but where these findings were statistically significant for both children of lesbian mothers and "gay" fathers and both with and without controls. While all the findings in the study are important, these are the strongest possible ones--virtually irrefutable. Compared with children raised by their married biological parents (IBF), children of homosexual parents (LM and GF):

•Are much more likely to have received welfare (IBF 17%; LM 69%; GF 57%)
•Have lower educational attainment
•Report less safety and security in their family of origin
•Report more ongoing "negative impact" from their family of origin
•Are more likely to suffer from depression
•Have been arrested more often
•If they are female, have had more sexual partners--both male and female

The high mathematical standard of "statistical significance" was more difficult to reach for the children of "gay fathers" in this study because there were fewer of them. The following, however, are some additional areas in which the children of lesbian mothers (who represented 71% of all the children with homosexual parents in this study) differed from the IBF children, in ways that were statistically significant in both a direct comparison and with controls. Children of lesbian mothers:

•Are more likely to be currently cohabiting
•Are almost 4 times more likely to be currently on public assistance
•Are less likely to be currently employed full-time
•Are more than 3 times more likely to be unemployed
•Are nearly 4 times more likely to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual
•Are 3 times as likely to have had an affair while married or cohabiting
•Are an astonishing 10 times more likely to have been "touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver."
•Are nearly 4 times as likely to have been "physically forced" to have sex against their will
•Are more likely to have "attachment" problems related to the ability to depend on others
•Use marijuana more frequently
•Smoke more frequently
•Watch TV for long periods more frequently
•Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense
​

Ooh the FRC? Well, they're certainly non-partisan, unbiased, and fair. I'm convinced.

Science, I'm ashamed to say, is the 2nd most political area of inquiry these days after politics itself. Googling the author of the study, he's hardly an impartial researcher:

Mark Regnerus, Sociologist and Author - Home

"Mark Regnerus is associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin, a research associate of the university's Population Research Center, and a senior fellow at the Austin Institute for the Study of Family and Culture. His areas of research are sexual behavior and family formation. He's the author of two books (2007 and 2011) on the sexual behavior of teenagers and young adults."

Austin Institute for The Study of Family and Culture

Looking around here it's obviously a propaganda site using questionable science to push an anti-gay agenda.

And response from the academic world is therefore easily predictable, and by his own admission the 'study' wasn't even about gya parents:

Mark Regnerus’s “family structure” study has been a hot topic since it was released in June, namely because every single anti-gay conservative organization has cited it as evidence that same-sex couples are inferior parents. An internal audit by the academic journal that originally published it found the conclusions to be “bullshit” because Regnerus’s criteria was whether a kid’s parent ever had a same-sex relationship, regardless of how long it lasted or what role in played in parenting. In a new interview with Focus on the Family — a group invested in continuing to cite the study to oppose LGBT equality — Regnerus admits that the foundation of his study is too weak to draw the conclusions that many have made:

more at,
Mark Regnerus Admits His 'Family Structures' Study Wasn't About Gay Parenting | ThinkProgress

I love how you state he uses propaganda and then use thinkprogress as your source. Thinkprogress (along with moveon) is the most slanderouse source on the net. They don't care about the truth, they only care about slandering conservatives!

 

[The Rabbi]

Two responses of exactly what I predicted. We dont like the results so the study must be flawed. Classic.

 

[JakeStarkey]

New Study On Homosexual Parents Tops All Previous Research

So the anarchists wants the government to step in?

 

[Whereisup]

I can't wait to see what kind of logical inanities come up with to explain this away:

Family Research Council

In a historic study of children raised by homosexual parents, sociologist Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin has overturned the conventional academic wisdom that such children suffer no disadvantages when compared to children raised by their married mother and father. Just published in the journal Social Science Research,[1] the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted on this issue found numerous and significant differences between these groups--with the outcomes for children of homosexuals rated "suboptimal" (Regnerus' word) in almost every category.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

There are eight outcome variables where differences between the children of homosexual parents and married parents were not only present, and favorable to the married parents, but where these findings were statistically significant for both children of lesbian mothers and "gay" fathers and both with and without controls. While all the findings in the study are important, these are the strongest possible ones--virtually irrefutable. Compared with children raised by their married biological parents (IBF), children of homosexual parents (LM and GF):

•Are much more likely to have received welfare (IBF 17%; LM 69%; GF 57%)
•Have lower educational attainment
•Report less safety and security in their family of origin
•Report more ongoing "negative impact" from their family of origin
•Are more likely to suffer from depression
•Have been arrested more often
•If they are female, have had more sexual partners--both male and female

The high mathematical standard of "statistical significance" was more difficult to reach for the children of "gay fathers" in this study because there were fewer of them. The following, however, are some additional areas in which the children of lesbian mothers (who represented 71% of all the children with homosexual parents in this study) differed from the IBF children, in ways that were statistically significant in both a direct comparison and with controls. Children of lesbian mothers:

•Are more likely to be currently cohabiting
•Are almost 4 times more likely to be currently on public assistance
•Are less likely to be currently employed full-time
•Are more than 3 times more likely to be unemployed
•Are nearly 4 times more likely to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual
•Are 3 times as likely to have had an affair while married or cohabiting
•Are an astonishing 10 times more likely to have been "touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver."
•Are nearly 4 times as likely to have been "physically forced" to have sex against their will
•Are more likely to have "attachment" problems related to the ability to depend on others
•Use marijuana more frequently
•Smoke more frequently
•Watch TV for long periods more frequently
•Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense
​

1: Statistical significance often doesn't mean anything. What matters is the percentage of the variance accounted for plus statistical significance. In most psychological studies, a variable which is significant doesn't account for very much of the variance.

2: Gay people and their children suffer from discrimination and fear of discrimination. Discrimination itself and fear of discrimination itself would explain the above findings of having somewhat more problems than the population which isn't discriminated against, if the results are in fact true.

3. That gay people tend to hide probably biases the selection of subjects being studied. It would be easiest to discover gay parents who have had problems with law enforcement, have been on welfare, etc. Then the gays hiding who have never had a problem wouldn't have been found, so wouldn't have been in the study. For example, it will look like children of gay parents receive welfare more often if children from the welfare roles are the main ones studied, while children of gay parents who remain hidden because they have never been on welfare are not included in the study.

4. Not all researchers are interested in what is true. A percentage of researchers are only doing research to help their careers, and if something untrue will advance their careers, they will slant their research accordingly. For example, remember that the tobacco companies found scientists willing to say that smoking doesn't harm health. The tobacco companies either paid those scientists directly, or make research grants available to them, and those scientists were more interested in their careers than in what is true. An anti-gay researcher is likely to have a lot of money and opportunities available to him or her. The above researcher might or might not be in that category of researchers. He might be sincere. However, the fact that there is such a financial and career incentive should cause one to evaluate the research results with more than average caution.

Jim

 

[theDoctorisIn]

This "study" is more than a year old, and has been thoroughly debunked by now.

Since he only had 2 pairs of actual "same sex parents" in his survey...

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

I can't wait to see what kind of logical inanities come up with to explain this away:

Family Research Council

In a historic study of children raised by homosexual parents, sociologist Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin has overturned the conventional academic wisdom that such children suffer no disadvantages when compared to children raised by their married mother and father. Just published in the journal Social Science Research,[1] the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted on this issue found numerous and significant differences between these groups--with the outcomes for children of homosexuals rated "suboptimal" (Regnerus' word) in almost every category.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

There are eight outcome variables where differences between the children of homosexual parents and married parents were not only present, and favorable to the married parents, but where these findings were statistically significant for both children of lesbian mothers and "gay" fathers and both with and without controls. While all the findings in the study are important, these are the strongest possible ones--virtually irrefutable. Compared with children raised by their married biological parents (IBF), children of homosexual parents (LM and GF):

•Are much more likely to have received welfare (IBF 17%; LM 69%; GF 57%)
•Have lower educational attainment
•Report less safety and security in their family of origin
•Report more ongoing "negative impact" from their family of origin
•Are more likely to suffer from depression
•Have been arrested more often
•If they are female, have had more sexual partners--both male and female

The high mathematical standard of "statistical significance" was more difficult to reach for the children of "gay fathers" in this study because there were fewer of them. The following, however, are some additional areas in which the children of lesbian mothers (who represented 71% of all the children with homosexual parents in this study) differed from the IBF children, in ways that were statistically significant in both a direct comparison and with controls. Children of lesbian mothers:

•Are more likely to be currently cohabiting
•Are almost 4 times more likely to be currently on public assistance
•Are less likely to be currently employed full-time
•Are more than 3 times more likely to be unemployed
•Are nearly 4 times more likely to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual
•Are 3 times as likely to have had an affair while married or cohabiting
•Are an astonishing 10 times more likely to have been "touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver."
•Are nearly 4 times as likely to have been "physically forced" to have sex against their will
•Are more likely to have "attachment" problems related to the ability to depend on others
•Use marijuana more frequently
•Smoke more frequently
•Watch TV for long periods more frequently
•Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense
​

Ooh the FRC? Well, they're certainly non-partisan, unbiased, and fair. I'm convinced.

Science, I'm ashamed to say, is the 2nd most political area of inquiry these days after politics itself. Googling the author of the study, he's hardly an impartial researcher:

Mark Regnerus, Sociologist and Author - Home

"Mark Regnerus is associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin, a research associate of the university's Population Research Center, and a senior fellow at the Austin Institute for the Study of Family and Culture. His areas of research are sexual behavior and family formation. He's the author of two books (2007 and 2011) on the sexual behavior of teenagers and young adults."

Austin Institute for The Study of Family and Culture

Looking around here it's obviously a propaganda site using questionable science to push an anti-gay agenda.

And response from the academic world is therefore easily predictable, and by his own admission the 'study' wasn't even about gya parents:

Mark Regnerus’s “family structure” study has been a hot topic since it was released in June, namely because every single anti-gay conservative organization has cited it as evidence that same-sex couples are inferior parents. An internal audit by the academic journal that originally published it found the conclusions to be “bullshit” because Regnerus’s criteria was whether a kid’s parent ever had a same-sex relationship, regardless of how long it lasted or what role in played in parenting. In a new interview with Focus on the Family — a group invested in continuing to cite the study to oppose LGBT equality — Regnerus admits that the foundation of his study is too weak to draw the conclusions that many have made:

more at,
Mark Regnerus Admits His 'Family Structures' Study Wasn't About Gay Parenting | ThinkProgress

I love how you state he uses propaganda and then use thinkprogress as your source. Thinkprogress (along with moveon) is the most slanderouse source on the net. They don't care about the truth, they only care about slandering conservatives!

Forget about the source for a minute - are you saying that the information in his post is untrue? That the study was NOT flawed? Your methodology of attacking the source is week - multiple publications have made the claim that the study was horseshit. Use your own eyes if you trust them ... only two same-sex couples were used out of the three thousand participants - sound like it was on the up and up to you?

 

[koshergrl]

I can't wait to see what kind of logical inanities come up with to explain this away:

Family Research Council

In a historic study of children raised by homosexual parents, sociologist Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin has overturned the conventional academic wisdom that such children suffer no disadvantages when compared to children raised by their married mother and father. Just published in the journal Social Science Research,[1] the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted on this issue found numerous and significant differences between these groups--with the outcomes for children of homosexuals rated "suboptimal" (Regnerus' word) in almost every category.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

There are eight outcome variables where differences between the children of homosexual parents and married parents were not only present, and favorable to the married parents, but where these findings were statistically significant for both children of lesbian mothers and "gay" fathers and both with and without controls. While all the findings in the study are important, these are the strongest possible ones--virtually irrefutable. Compared with children raised by their married biological parents (IBF), children of homosexual parents (LM and GF):

•Are much more likely to have received welfare (IBF 17%; LM 69%; GF 57%)
•Have lower educational attainment
•Report less safety and security in their family of origin
•Report more ongoing "negative impact" from their family of origin
•Are more likely to suffer from depression
•Have been arrested more often
•If they are female, have had more sexual partners--both male and female

The high mathematical standard of "statistical significance" was more difficult to reach for the children of "gay fathers" in this study because there were fewer of them. The following, however, are some additional areas in which the children of lesbian mothers (who represented 71% of all the children with homosexual parents in this study) differed from the IBF children, in ways that were statistically significant in both a direct comparison and with controls. Children of lesbian mothers:

•Are more likely to be currently cohabiting
•Are almost 4 times more likely to be currently on public assistance
•Are less likely to be currently employed full-time
•Are more than 3 times more likely to be unemployed
•Are nearly 4 times more likely to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual
•Are 3 times as likely to have had an affair while married or cohabiting
•Are an astonishing 10 times more likely to have been "touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver."
•Are nearly 4 times as likely to have been "physically forced" to have sex against their will
•Are more likely to have "attachment" problems related to the ability to depend on others
•Use marijuana more frequently
•Smoke more frequently
•Watch TV for long periods more frequently
•Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense
​

Ooh the FRC? Well, they're certainly non-partisan, unbiased, and fair. I'm convinced.

Science, I'm ashamed to say, is the 2nd most political area of inquiry these days after politics itself. Googling the author of the study, he's hardly an impartial researcher:

Mark Regnerus, Sociologist and Author - Home

"Mark Regnerus is associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin, a research associate of the university's Population Research Center, and a senior fellow at the Austin Institute for the Study of Family and Culture. His areas of research are sexual behavior and family formation. He's the author of two books (2007 and 2011) on the sexual behavior of teenagers and young adults."

Austin Institute for The Study of Family and Culture

Looking around here it's obviously a propaganda site using questionable science to push an anti-gay agenda.

And response from the academic world is therefore easily predictable, and by his own admission the 'study' wasn't even about gya parents:

Mark Regnerus’s “family structure” study has been a hot topic since it was released in June, namely because every single anti-gay conservative organization has cited it as evidence that same-sex couples are inferior parents. An internal audit by the academic journal that originally published it found the conclusions to be “bullshit” because Regnerus’s criteria was whether a kid’s parent ever had a same-sex relationship, regardless of how long it lasted or what role in played in parenting. In a new interview with Focus on the Family — a group invested in continuing to cite the study to oppose LGBT equality — Regnerus admits that the foundation of his study is too weak to draw the conclusions that many have made:

more at,
Mark Regnerus Admits His 'Family Structures' Study Wasn't About Gay Parenting | ThinkProgress

Think Progress...

The left is highly motivated to trash any real studies, to bury them and to proclaim them suspect.

Any science that does not fully support a depraved lifestyle is suspect, and ANY organization with any connotations to positive, traditional values is completely rejected.

 

[koshergrl]

This "study" is more than a year old, and has been thoroughly debunked by now.

Since he only had 2 pairs of actual "same sex parents" in his survey...

Oh look, the lie, already exposed earlier in the thread, makes the rounds again.