Mark Regnerus Admits Parenting Study Doesn’t Prove What He Claims

Mark Regnerus’ study into “family structure” appears to have been heavily riddled with several ethical issues. In fact, Regnerus’ study has been condemned repeatedly in various spots thanks to his conclusions that children are harmed if they are raised by same-sex parents even thought his entire point was never that. In fact, an internal audit by the very academic journal that printed the study concluded that its conclusions were false.

[uh oh]

That KiMare thing is going to have an emotional breakdown over this.

[Chance]

Once again Lezgetreal has a misleading article title. The title of Mark Regnerus' study is “How different are the children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study.” The quote says,"So, Regnerus’ study was not about parents who openly identify as gay or lesbian. It was not about same-sex couples in long-term relationships raising children together. Regnerus even admits “this is not about saying gay or lesbian parents are inherently bad,” because he knows has no foundation on which to make such a claim." Gays made their own conclusions about what he was saying, Regnerus says in effect "This is what I was really saying" and then gays turn that into Regnerus admits he was wrong. This is not a Regnerus admitting he's wrong. What it should be about is gays admitting they were wrong when they put their own spin on his study. This is why Lezgetreal has zero credibility and must be read carefully and with a grain of salt.

[KirkW]

Surely not!

False!

Really!

Well I'm shocked!

OK maybe shocked in the wrong word.

When even the "hired scientists" admit they were wrong it's time to give up the battle.

Time for the AFA and NOM and all the rest of them to admit that, in fact, gay parents can be every bit as good as non-gay parents.

They won't make any such admission, and we all know that, but they should.

[Chance]

KirkW wrote:

Surely not!
False!
Really!
Well I'm shocked!
OK maybe shocked in the wrong word.
When even the "hired scientists" admit they were wrong it's time to give up the battle.
Time for the AFA and NOM and all the rest of them to admit that, in fact, gay parents can be every bit as good as non-gay parents.
They won't make any such admission, and we all know that, but they should.

Read my post above. You still don't understand what is going on here.

[Qwerty26]

Chance wrote:

Once again Lezgetreal has a misleading article title. The title of Mark Regnerus' study is “How different are the children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study.” The quote says,"So, Regnerus’ study was not about parents who openly identify as gay or lesbian. It was not about same-sex couples in long-term relationships raising children together. Regnerus even admits “this is not about saying gay or lesbian parents are inherently bad,” because he knows has no foundation on which to make such a claim." Gays made their own conclusions about what he was saying, Regnerus says in effect "This is what I was really saying" and then gays turn that into Regnerus admits he was wrong. This is not a Regnerus admitting he's wrong. What it should be about is gays admitting they were wrong when they put their own spin on his study. This is why Lezgetreal has zero credibility and must be read carefully and with a grain of salt.

Now wait just a second here. Who exactly is falsely touting Regnerus' conclusions to their benefit? The people who paid him to do the study - namely NOM and their incestuous related organizations - they are the ones who put the incorrect spin on the study. They are the ones holding up this "study" as proof that gays and lesbians are less fit parents. They are the ones who proudly held up their ill-founded misread conclusions as "academic proof." Let's put the credit for misusing his study in the right place.

[hi hi]

Qwerty26 wrote:

<quoted text>
Now wait just a second here. Who exactly is falsely touting Regnerus' conclusions to their benefit? The people who paid him to do the study - namely NOM and their incestuous related organizations - they are the ones who put the incorrect spin on the study. They are the ones holding up this "study" as proof that gays and lesbians are less fit parents. They are the ones who proudly held up their ill-founded misread conclusions as "academic proof." Let's put the credit for misusing his study in the right place.

I would've spoken similarly. Once and for all, let's take this study INTO A COURTROOM, I say, and see what "both sides" have to say because this is dragging on and on; and in a courtroom, where lies *cannot* be told, the study could be ripped limb from limb and left in a broken pile on the floor. For god's sake, the study *blatantly* misrepresents gay parents and just because the pro-gay will not let that go, the antigay keep pretending it is the *pro-gay* who are lying. A courtroom would solve that issue a hell of a lot faster, and quite brutally, in fact. Thank you for your post.

[A Watcher]

Chance wrote:

Once again Lezgetreal has a misleading article title. The title of Mark Regnerus' study is “How different are the children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study.” The quote says,"So, Regnerus’ study was not about parents who openly identify as gay or lesbian. It was not about same-sex couples in long-term relationships raising children together. Regnerus even admits “this is not about saying gay or lesbian parents are inherently bad,” because he knows has no foundation on which to make such a claim." Gays made their own conclusions about what he was saying, Regnerus says in effect "This is what I was really saying" and then gays turn that into Regnerus admits he was wrong. This is not a Regnerus admitting he's wrong. What it should be about is gays admitting they were wrong when they put their own spin on his study. This is why Lezgetreal has zero credibility and must be read carefully and with a grain of salt.

Those attacking Prof. Regnerus and his work are only continuing to dis-credit themselves, due to their self-interested political and financial motivations.

As if most thinking people aren't onto the fact queers lie and need to perpetrate and propagate frauds to advance their agenda.

The queers are only bringing increasing light and scrutiny to their shady pseudo-scientific studies meant only to advance political agendas and secure government funding.

The frauds lying for queers is in the tens-of-billions.

[A Watcher]

The bottom line of the ground-breaking Regnerus study proves that kids are best kept away from queers.
Most people don't need a multi-million dollar study to inform their common sense.

Keep queers away from kids.

Duh.

[Religionthebigli e]

uh oh wrote:

That KiMare thing is going to have an emotional breakdown over this.

Ha ha ha. That's the first thing I thought of when I read this story.

[A Watcher]

hi hi wrote:

<quoted text>
I would've spoken similarly. Once and for all, let's take this study INTO A COURTROOM, I say, and see what "both sides" have to say because this is dragging on and on; and in a courtroom, where lies *cannot* be told, the study could be ripped limb from limb and left in a broken pile on the floor. For god's sake, the study *blatantly* misrepresents gay parents and just because the pro-gay will not let that go, the antigay keep pretending it is the *pro-gay* who are lying. A courtroom would solve that issue a hell of a lot faster, and quite brutally, in fact. Thank you for your post.

All things being equal, it's best to try to keep queers away from children and minors that the adult homosexuals are attracted to.
Parents who allow queers to get sexual access to their kids are demonstrating the depths of parental irresponsibility.
This is just basic common-sense stuff.

[A Watcher]

hi hi wrote:

<quoted text>
I would've spoken similarly. Once and for all, let's take this study INTO A COURTROOM, I say, and see what "both sides" have to say because this is dragging on and on; and in a courtroom, where lies *cannot* be told, the study could be ripped limb from limb and left in a broken pile on the floor. For god's sake, the study *blatantly* misrepresents gay parents and just because the pro-gay will not let that go, the antigay keep pretending it is the *pro-gay* who are lying. A courtroom would solve that issue a hell of a lot faster, and quite brutally, in fact. Thank you for your post.

Lies can't told in the courtrooms?
Ever hear the concept of perjury?

You're dumber than a bag of hammers, and that's an insult to hammers everywhere.

[McMike]

Chance wrote:

Once again Lezgetreal has a misleading article title. The title of Mark Regnerus' study is “How different are the children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study.” The quote says,"So, Regnerus’ study was not about parents who openly identify as gay or lesbian. It was not about same-sex couples in long-term relationships raising children together. Regnerus even admits “this is not about saying gay or lesbian parents are inherently bad,” because he knows has no foundation on which to make such a claim." Gays made their own conclusions about what he was saying, Regnerus says in effect "This is what I was really saying" and then gays turn that into Regnerus admits he was wrong. This is not a Regnerus admitting he's wrong. What it should be about is gays admitting they were wrong when they put their own spin on his study. This is why Lezgetreal has zero credibility and must be read carefully and with a grain of salt.

Just wondering, were you able to write this without twitching?

The study was simple. It attempted to compare heterosexual parents in a lifelong commitment to broken households were one parent cheated on their spouse with a member of the same sex and then cincluded, somehow, gay parenting was inferior.

Which part are you trying to dispute as factual?

[Lacez]

uh oh wrote:

That KiMare thing is going to have an emotional breakdown over this.

No...it'll just ignore it and say it's a lie like all the other anti-equality people here.

[AzAdam]

Chance wrote:

Once again Lezgetreal has a misleading article title. The title of Mark Regnerus' study is “How different are the children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study.” The quote says,"So, Regnerus’ study was not about parents who openly identify as gay or lesbian. It was not about same-sex couples in long-term relationships raising children together. Regnerus even admits “this is not about saying gay or lesbian parents are inherently bad,” because he knows has no foundation on which to make such a claim." Gays made their own conclusions about what he was saying, Regnerus says in effect "This is what I was really saying" and then gays turn that into Regnerus admits he was wrong. This is not a Regnerus admitting he's wrong. What it should be about is gays admitting they were wrong when they put their own spin on his study. This is why Lezgetreal has zero credibility and must be read carefully and with a grain of salt.

The gay community addressed the spin NOM put on this study. They didn't spin it themselves. Your post is dishonest.

[JrEsq]

hi hi wrote:

<quoted text>
I would've spoken similarly. Once and for all, let's take this study INTO A COURTROOM, I say, and see what "both sides" have to say because this is dragging on and on; and in a courtroom, where lies *cannot* be told, the study could be ripped limb from limb and left in a broken pile on the floor. For god's sake, the study *blatantly* misrepresents gay parents and just because the pro-gay will not let that go, the antigay keep pretending it is the *pro-gay* who are lying. A courtroom would solve that issue a hell of a lot faster, and quite brutally, in fact. Thank you for your post.

"hi hi", welcome back. How did your treatment go?

[snyper]

This story (with supporting links) needs to be sent viral !!!

[uh oh]

Lacez wrote:

<quoted text>
No...it'll just ignore it and say it's a lie like all the other anti-equality people here.

True, but you do notice "it" has been laying low today, hardly posting at all.

[Curriculum Staffers]

Qwerty26 wrote:

<quoted text>
Now wait just a second here. Who exactly is falsely touting Regnerus' conclusions to their benefit? The people who paid him to do the study - namely NOM and their incestuous related organizations - they are the ones who put the incorrect spin on the study. They are the ones holding up this "study" as proof that gays and lesbians are less fit parents. They are the ones who proudly held up their ill-founded misread conclusions as "academic proof." Let's put the credit for misusing his study in the right place.

You missed the part of the story that's really old "news" at this late date.
The queers whined predictably and tried to get the professor fired and sued and jailed but after an exhaustive academic investigation the University stands behind the professor and his work.

It's up to the queers to use politics to hound this guy out of office because the implications of his study is of no benefit to queers.

That's how queers operate.

[snyper]

Curriculum Staffers wrote:

<quoted text>You missed the part of the story that's really old "news" at this late date.
The queers whined predictably and tried to get the professor fired and sued and jailed but after an exhaustive academic investigation the University stands behind the professor and his work.
It's up to the queers to use politics to hound this guy out of office because the implications of his study is of no benefit to queers.
That's how queers operate.

You simply can't define as gay (as Regenrus does in his survey parameters) anyone who has ever had samesex experiences.

That would mean that over 70% of the population is gay.

That is only one of the many problems with the Regnerus survey protocols and methodologies.

Another set of inaccuracies is confusing the noises made by various pundits and activists with any serious efforts against Regnerus and his "work".

The problems with Regnerus are with his methodolgy ... and obvioius bias.

A side problem is calling a badly designed survey and analysis as a "study".

All too common an occurrence.

[Lacez]

uh oh wrote:

<quoted text>
True, but you do notice "it" has been laying low today, hardly posting at all.

Kmart does that, it lays low for a while to try and make others forget about their posts when they prove it wrong. It uses this technique to dodge because it thinks people can't just look back, see their questions, then ask them again.