A new paper by a NOM-linked economics professor claims to find challenges for children raised by same-sex parents. But the data compares apples to oranges, and relies on its author’s prejudices.
Science is supposed to be a-political. Sadly, it seems that — maybe apart from twerking, which both sides hate — there is nothing in the world that isn’t political anymore. Climate change. Evolution. Drinking water.
It’s important to examine all research with a fresh and objective eye, but it’s also important to remember a few important facts.
In America alone there are millions of LGBT people — some married, some living together, some single — who are raising millions of children. They do, by every reasonable account, an excellent job. If you doubt this, think back to the last time you read a story about a parent who locked their child in a washing machine, for example, or took any other heinous action upon their child, and learned that that parent was gay. With very few exceptions, I’ll bet you cannot.
Now, if a university professor were looking for funding for a research project on the parenting skills of black people versus white people, they would be hard pressed to find it — at least, one would hope.
If a university professor were looking for funding for a research project on the parenting skills of left-handed people versus right-handed people, they would be hard pressed to find it.
If a university professor were looking for funding for a research project on the parenting skills of Asian people versus Italian people, they would be hard pressed to find it.
If a university professor were looking for funding for a research project on the parenting skills of blond people versus brunette people, they would be hard pressed to find it.
So why is it that university professors keep insisting on “studying” the parenting abilities of same-sex parents?
That last question, by the way, presumes that the Mark Regnerus study did that — it did not.
LGBT people, like it or not, regardless of any “research” published, are going to continue to form families, marry, and have and raise children. There is no test, no pre-requisite, no diploma that straight people are forced to have before they are “allowed” to become parents. Often, it just “happens.” And then NOM and other anti-gay organizations use heterosexual carelessness as an actual “reason” to prevent gay people from marrying: we don’t accidentally get pregnant.
The studies that claim LGBT people, and same-sex couples, make “bad” parents will soon enough sit among stories like these.
Now we have news, thanks to Maggie Gallagher — the National Organization For Marriage co-founder, former president, and former chairman of the board — right on the heels of trips made by her successor, Brian Brown, who traveled to France and Russia to agitate against same-sex marriage and adoption.
Gallagher on Friday touted another anti-gay study that has been released, and — surprise! — she claims it finds that gay parents just aren’t as good as straight parents.
Gallagher says that the study is published in a peer-reviewed journal. That would be the Review of Economics in the Household, which is all but non-existant — at least online. We also know that the Regnerus study was “peer-reviewed,” and that didn’t turn out so well, for Regnerus, or the journal that published him.
“Using Canadian census data, a very large and therefore representative database, Canadian professor Douglas Allen of Simon Frazier [sic] University finds that children raised by intact, married biological parents do better than children raised by same-sex couples,” Gallagher writes.
Ah, the sin of omission…
Then there’s this.
“An article written by Professor Douglas W. Allen — who has previously claimed that lesbian relationships are unstable, unhealthy, and promiscuous – repeats a number of classic anti-gay talking points about the legal ramifications of legalizing same-sex marriage,” Equality Matters wrote last year, “including the claim that allowing gay couples to marry will somehow result in more heterosexual divorces.”
Equality Matters quotes Allen:
The negative feedback of same-sex marriage on heterosexual marriage is likely to be enormous. If the institution of marriage is designed to help heterosexual couples remain together and connected to their children in a loving relationship, alterations to this institution to accommodate others necessarily weaken the institution. Heterosexual marriages become less stable and the result is higher divorce rates, as well as the negative social consequences that will follow.
So much for objective science.
Of course, The New Civil Rights Movement has already written in depth about Professor Allen, and, as it turns out, the claims he makes in his “new” study, he had already made earlier!
The New Civil Rights Movement spoke with Allen Friday, via email. He told us, “I don’t take any position on the subject other than the conclusion drawn from earlier studies is premature.”
Sounds remarkably like the Regnerus study already.
In fact, the study, “High school graduation rates among children of same-sex households,” spends a great deal of time making that point entirely, rather than explaining its own methods and results.
We’ll have much more on those results in a future article.
Same-sex marriage has been available in Canada since 2005, and Allen’s study says it uses the 2006 Canadian census, therefore it does not measure children who were raised by intact, married same-sex parents.
So we know already it is comparing apples and oranges.
We also know that the study’s author has weighed in on the Regnerus study, effectively dismissing its shortcomings by suggesting that every study has its flaws, and therefore, sarcastically, why not just toss all studies?
“If the Regnerus study is to be thrown out, then practically everything else in the field has to go with it,” Douglas W. Allen wrote last year in, (no coincidence here,) the National Review — the same publication where Gallagher announced the study today.
In that same NRO op-ed, Allen also wrote, “Regnerus needs to be applauded for what he did and didn’t do,” claiming that Regnerus “simply called into question the claim that there is no difference” in same-sex parents and opposite-sex parents. Sure. He might as well have suggested all Regnerus did was compare dark chocolate to milk chocolate.
What I personally also find appalling and shocking, is that Allen’s unpublished work was submitted in an amicus brief (not by him) to the U.S. Supreme Court in support of Prop 8. We already know the the Regnerus study was created to battle DOMA at SCOTUS — and we’ll leave it at that for now.
Allen‘s CV (PDF), by the way, touts his work, which includes titles as “Nontraditional Families and Childhood Progress through School: A Comment on Rosenfeld,” “Child Support Guidelines and Divorce Incentives,” “An Economic Assessment of Same-Sex Marriage” and my personal “favorite,” “Who Should Be Allowed Into the Marriage Franchise?” — which was quoted above.
Allen’s webpage at Simon Fraser University, where he is an economics professor, includes a page of his favorite links. Included among them, Campus Crusade for Christ, Blue Letter Bible, Bible Gateway, and “creation science” websites.
Finally, one small peek into the study — which we have read but will need to spend much more time with — exists in this casual footnote on the Regnerus “study.” Allen writes that Regnerus, to “increase his sample size … decided to use a broader definition of same-sex parent.”
That “broader definition of same-sex parent” just happened to include any parent who was believed by their adult child to ever have had any type of a sexual relationship with a member of the same-sex.
The New Civil Rights Movement is proud to have successfully led the battle in debunking the fake Regnerus “study,” publishing not only some of the first articles about it, and some of the first articles exposing the financial and social ties behind the “study,” but also more research than any other publication — including dozens upon dozens of original research articles and opinion pieces. The word “Regnerus” appears in over 125 articles here at The New Civil Rights Movement.
We are currently examining this new study, and we will publish our research, regardless of our findings, as soon as it is complete.
We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.