The gay parents say so, at least.
Posted on 07/10/2014 7:59:08 PM PDT by markomalley
There’s been no shortage of media coverage of a new study that purportedly shows that children raised by same-sex partners fare better than other children.
“Children of same-sex couples are happier and healthier than peers, research shows,” was the headline of a Washington Post story. “Largest-ever study of same-sex couples’ kids finds they’re better off than other children,” proclaimed Vox, while NBCNews.com announced, “Children of Same-Sex Parents Are Healthier: Study.”
But the actual study is a little more, well, complicated.
In an article published on Public Discourse, University of Texas at Austin professor Mark Regnerus takes issue with the study’s method.
The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Melbourne in Australia, found that “children in same-sex families scored better on a number of key measures of physical health and social well-being than kids from the general population,” according to an article written by one of the researchers on The Conversation.
But the sample surveyed in the study chose to participate. The Melbourne researchers didn’t randomly select the first 500 same-sex couples they found, after checking for sufficient regional/income/educational diversity. Instead, they advertised the study – and couples found the researchers, not vice versa. Furthermore, the couples then reported on how their children were – and no outside party fact-checked those results, or evaluated the children independently.
Talking about the couples who participated in the study, Regnerus sounds this note of caution:
[P]articipants—parents reporting about their children’s lives—are all well aware of the political import of the study topic, and an unknown number of them certainly signed up for that very reason. As a result, it seems unwise to trust their self-reports, given the high risk of “social desirability bias,” or the tendency to portray oneself (or here, one’s children) as better than they actually are.
Ultimately, Regnerus argues, this study’s methodology is so problematic the results aren’t worth taking seriously. He concludes:
Until social scientists decide to do the difficult, expensive work of locating same-sex attracted parents (however defined) through random, population-based sampling strategies—preferably ones that do not “give away” the primary research question(s) up front, as [this study] did—we simply cannot know whether claims like “no differences” or “happier and healthier than” are true, valid, and on target.
It should come as no surprise the news media trumpeted a study with these findings. Unfortunately for readers, flawed reporting on a flawed study does a disservice to everyone.
Wow. Color me shocked!
Are Gay Parents Worse Parents?
A study finds same-sex households provide children with the least stability.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/302873/are-gay-parents-worse-parents-mona-charen
Yet Another New Study: Children with Same-Sex Parents Fare Worse
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/360424/yet-another-new-study-children-same-sex-parents-fare-worse-maggie-gallagher
Likewise!
That kind of stuff tends to happen when the faux parents are preoccupied with f---ing anything with a body orifice.
The bottom line is any study concerning social issues done by a liberal has to be questioned. They’re prone to fixing the data...just like they try to fix elections.
So what if it is a ridiculously flawed “study”. Perverts will cite it ad nauseam, as proof that they are superior to we “breeders”.
“Children of same-sex couples are happier and healthier than peers, research shows,”
With a little research I’ll bet these people could justify a bad rash too.
Pointless to argue.
In a world that is Christian pious, art glorifies God, explains the creation, tells the stories of the apostles, etc. This was the case for many centuries. The sciences in such a world explore Gods realm and creation and try to describe and make sense of it, using it to benefit man, since it was put there for him.
In a secular world, art becomes actually more primitive or primal, dealing with the very animal characteristics of man, i.e. power, sex, status (Think Robert Mapplethorpe). Art becomes about breaking conventions and has a shock and awe appeal. Science in this world becomes a tool to serve man and his sinful nature: greed, sloth, lust, pride, envy, gluttony, wrath. Abortions are needed because we can save people from Parkinson’s (the science of genetics said so several years back), abortion is good because the mother wouldn’t be able to raise the child well anyhow (the social sciences say so), abortion is good because of global warming (the environmental sciences say so)...
Science is a double edged knife, and in the hands of an immoral society, don’t expect good to come of it.
Too late. The original report is already taken for common knowledge and fact.
The gay parents say so, at least.
Excellent! Bump!!
So in short, this was a poll not a study
Ah, social science - tell me what you want to prove, and it’s yours......
A self-selected study like this has all the validity of an Internet poll.
Yeah, the cultural marxists are trying to tell us that two gay women are better at raising a boy to be a man than a male?
Get real.
I knew it had to be a scam. Anything that flies in the face of God’s ways has to fail.
They need to talk to all of these poor kids when they’re young adults - then we’ll see how well adjusted and healthy they really are.
“Yep, children of same-sex partners are better off! See? The same-sex partners say so!” “Wow! Call the papers! Get the journalists on the line!”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.