A sociologist at the University of Texas at Austin. He had the nerve and the inclination to do a study. Not just any study. A study on children who come out of homes of homosexual relationships. The results were not good. Not just a little not good. The actual results were as bad or worse than the conservative haters might have said off the cuff.
Seems that the kids from lesbian families compared to “normal” heterosexual couples did worse on 24 of 40 possible outcomes, including being sexually victimized, being on welfare, or being currently unemployed. The kids from gay couple families compared to “normal” heterosexual families did significantly worse on 19 of 40 possible outcomes, including being significantly more likely to have contemplated suicide, to have a sexually transmitted infection, or to have been forced to have sex against their will. The study controlled for a large number of independent factors, making the relationship of the parents the main differing variable.
Social Science Review did an extensive methodological review of the 59 studies used by the APA that said there was no difference in family outcome for homosexual couples.
Their research: “[N]ot one of the 59 studies referenced in the 2005 APA Brief compares a large, random, representative sample of lesbian or gay parents and their children with a large, random, representative sample of married parents and their children. The available data, which are drawn primarily from small convenience samples, are insufficient to support a strong generalizable claim either way. Such a statement would not be grounded in science. To make a generalizable claim, representative, large-sample studies are needed—many of them.”
Dr. Regnerus’s peer-reviewed study, the New Families Structures Study, is a large random nationally representative study and the best study to date that accurately tells the likely results of what happens to children as a result of the parent’s gender. He screened 15,000 young adults for 40 different outcomes, making this the largest examination of children demographics outside of the national Census and the largest sample study that has incorporated social outcomes.
Which made for some really bad blogging and vitriolic name calling and a LOT of negative press on major media outlets and the opening of an investigation by the university as to whether there was any scholarly misconduct. They didn’t find any. But Dr. Regnerus is being cast as a very bad person by the lib-progs, because he used real science to come to a conclusion that flies in the face of the agenda that the lib-progs have been pushing. Makes him a very detestable man.
And it seems that the APA was wrong. And careless. And cavalier, coming to erroneous conclusions that justified public statements of being supportive of a homosexual couple’s lifestyle as no different in the impact on children. Because the study showed that the actual outcomes tend to be substantially more negative. A bad impact on a lot of factors for a lot of kids.
So what do we do with that. There are empathic caring homosexual families and there are kids that do well from those. But the odds are against them. The odds of bad results are seriously there. So we can’t justify that it makes no difference. And we can’t justify putting kids there as being just as beneficial. And the factors that make for negative outcomes are way too complicated that we might expect that the govenrment is going to be able to screen out who makes the cut. And maybe we have to question what role the government takes in supporting, financing, enabling children being in those relationships where the odds of a negative outcome are higher when the government financing is the main thing that makes their being there possible?
Nah. If you did that, then you’d have to stop financing fatherless families too. And no way the lib-progs running all of those programs are going to let THAT happen.