Gay Parents: 11 x more likely to molest and other "goodies"

[Guest]

to summarize, the "study" which bcspace is highlighting took a sample of grown children who were 100% from intact two prarent homes, and then compared that with a sample of grown children who were less than 1% from intact two parent homes.

if the "11 x more likely to molest" statistic is accurate, it applies to broken homes versus intact two parent homes -- that's the key difference in the samples this study was comparing. and so Regnerus has inadvertently bolstered the case for state sanctioned gay marriage (though he was paid to find fodder for bigots like bcspace).

[_palerobber]

175 reported their mother was in a homosexual relationship, and 73 said the same about their father.

So you are relying on a sample size of 248?

it's even worse than that -- the sample size of people actually raised by "Gay Parents" was only 2 (two).

Regnerus told CBS News earlier this year that "random sampling only found two out of the 175 children who said they lived in a home with both same-sex parents throughout all 18 years." and of course we don't know how those two specific children fared because Regnerus lumped them together with 246 children from broken homes. for all we know the two children raised by actual "gay parents" had the best outcomes of any in the study.

(and lest anyone think my definition of "raised by gay parents" is too restrictive, i'm only using the exact same standard Regnerus used when constructing his "hetero parents" sample)

[_Bob Loblaw]

Thus bcspace demonstrates, among other things, that he doesn't understand statistics or valid scientific research. Is anyone surprised?

[_Chap]

Thus bcspace demonstrates, among other things, that he doesn't understand statistics or valid scientific research. Is anyone surprised?

You never really ever got the hang of being LDS, did you?

[_Equality]

I'd like to hear how bcspace defends this. But as is always the case when he is totally pwned in a debate, he has tucked tail and run whimpering away into the night.

[_Equality]

[_jo1952]

It is easy to point to real or imagined problems. What good does this OP do, exactly? Looking beyond the mob mentality this type of post can create, is BCSpace harboring any source causes? How about source solutions? Does he propose some type of man-made punishment for the perpetrators; he does appear to be judging them...? What type of worldly help is he offering the victims? What about the spiritual welfare of all of those involved (including the on-lookers)?

Blessings,

jo

[_Yahoo Bot]

This is not much different from the other data I've posted spanning the last three or four decades. This also makes sense now; to know that many of the studies for the last decade have been biased towards favoring homosexuality and not actual science.

Thanks for the posts.

I don't think much of these studies, nor do I think much of studies to the contrary which say that there is no statistical difference between kids raised by gay couples versus straight couples. I don't think much of them for several reasons. First, they are always promoted by people with agendas. Second, there isn't much that can be done with the studies, given that it is inevitable that gay couples will marry and/or raise children lawfully. Third, most persons' real world experience can point to successful gay or straight families and unsuccessful gay or straight families.

Somehow I think the success lies in having a stable family relationship, with no turnover of parents (i.e., divorce or separation) plus a religious environment or some equivalent one which installs strong moral values. Many of my Jewish and Islamic friends seem to possess those characteristics in their families. As well as Mormon and Evangelical friends. My atheist friends, I observe, not so much.

[_Themis]

My atheist friends, I observe, not so much.

I'm sure there is no bias or agenda here.

[_Res Ipsa]

This is not much different from the other data I've posted spanning the last three or four decades. This also makes sense now; to know that many of the studies for the last decade have been biased towards favoring homosexuality and not actual science.

Thanks for the posts.

I don't think much of these studies, nor do I think much of studies to the contrary which say that there is no statistical difference between kids raised by gay couples versus straight couples. I don't think much of them for several reasons. First, they are always promoted by people with agendas. Second, there isn't much that can be done with the studies, given that it is inevitable that gay couples will marry and/or raise children lawfully. Third, most persons' real world experience can point to successful gay or straight families and unsuccessful gay or straight families.

Somehow I think the success lies in having a stable family relationship, with no turnover of parents (i.e., divorce or separation) plus a religious environment or some equivalent one which installs strong moral values. Many of my Jewish and Islamic friends seem to possess those characteristics in their families. As well as Mormon and Evangelical friends. My atheist friends, I observe, not so much.

The fact that a study is promoted by an interested group is irrelevant to the validity of the study. That can largely be determined by looking at sample size, subgroup size, the methodology for obtaining the sample, and examination of the potential for bias to affect the result. Advocacy groups will always use what they think is a helpful study to promote their point of view -- but that does not affect the study itself. People's anecdotal experience also doesn't invalidate the studies. There is a reason for the oft-used phrase "the plural of anecdote is not data." People's real world experience is not a reliable indicator of how people behave in general -- a properly done study is very much more reliable.

As for what can be done with the studies: they proved very helpful in the litigation over Prop 8 in California to show that there is no reasonable basis for limiting marriage to persons of the opposite sex.