Connect with us

Gay Parenting: After The Regnerus Debacle, Where Are The Apologies?

Published

on

Now that an internal audit at Social Science Research has confirmed that the Mark Regnerus (image, left,) “gay parenting” study was indeed so badly flawed it never should have survived peer review, it’s safe to say that we can move past examining the specifics of how it went wrong, and start looking at the deeper question of why so many in the media and the right wing readily accepted its conclusions with little critical scrutiny while dismissing the valid concerns raised by others. Given that their hailing of the study as a revelation about the supposed inferiority of same-sex parents was actually based on a paper that should have been immediately disqualified from publication, are they prepared to correct the record?

What many of them described as a paper about “gay parenting” covered barely a handful of respondents who had lived with same-sex couples as parents for an appreciable fraction of their childhood, far too few to be representative of the true proficiency of same-sex parents. This is not merely a matter of partisan political opinion – Regnerus himself acknowledged these shortcomings. Are these reporters and activists willing to admit they were wrong?

Where is the apology from Maggie Gallagher, who wrote that the Regnerus study is “the best gay-parenting study we have to date“ and shows that “the ideal for a child is a married mom and dad,” when the study’s “gay fathers” and “lesbian mothers” groups were actually packed with as many unstable families as possible?

Where is the apology from William Saletan of Slate, who decried legitimate criticism of the study’s faulty conclusions as part of a “liberal war on science”?

Where is the apology from Ed Whelan of the National Review, who described all other studies on same-sex parenting as “schlock social science“ compared to the Regnerus study, and claimed that the new study discredits “the junk social science that so many proponents of same-sex marriage propagate,” even as he admitted that he doesn’t “regard Regnerus’s study as authoritatively and definitively settling much of anything”?

Where is the apology from Mona Charen, who claimed the study showed that “same-sex households provide children with the least stability”, when the study actually included hardly any actual households with same-sex parents?

Where is the apology from the Deseret News, which also erroneously claimed that the study’s results reflect “children growing up in lesbian households” – and then, ironically, called for “healthy skepticism for so-called consensus findings, especially with regard to hot-button social issues where the biases of researchers might influence design and interpretation”?

Where is the apology from Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council, who uncritically repeated the study’s methodological sleight-of-hand of defining a child of “homosexual parents” as having at least one parent who ever had a same-sex relationship?

Where is the apology from Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association, who cited the study’s clearly insufficient data to demand that gay parents should be denied custody of their children?

Where is the apology from the American College of Pediatricians, a non-authoritative anti-gay group which cited the Regnerus study in an amicus brief in a federal case against the Defense of Marriage Act and again falsely claimed that it was about “children raised by same-sex couples”?

Where is the apology from political strategist Frank Schubert, who claimed that the study’s results warrant banning same-sex marriage?

Where is the apology from Christian Smith, who glossed over the study’s flaws and instead dismissed criticism of its shortcomings as “an academic auto-da-fé” against Regnerus?

Where is the apology from the 18 social scientists who claimed that “much of the public criticism Regnerus has received is unwarranted” and misleadingly described it as a “study on same-sex parenting”? (And if you’re impressed by that number, note that 200 researchers signed a letter which raised concerns about “the academic integrity of the peer review process for this paper as well as its intellectual merit”.)

We can keep going all day. I realize not everyone has an education in social science – I certainly don’t. But the mistakes of the Regnerus study are easily understandable by the layperson, and those in the media whose job it is to report on this have an obligation to do so accurately in the course of informing the public. Here, many of them have failed, and because of their lack of diligence, they’ve unjustly impugned parents like me and my partner in the minds of millions. They are responsible for that. Does this not warrant an apology? Can they admit that they were wrong, that these criticisms of the study’s structure and conclusions were indeed valid, and that they failed to recognize this? Or do they just not do this anymore?

 

Zinnia Jones is an atheist activist, writer, and video blogger focusing on LGBTQ rights and religious belief. Originally from Chicago, she’s currently living in Florida with her partner Heather and their two children.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Musk Complying With Federal Laws White House Says — Will Not Release Disclosure

Published

on

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt insists President Donald Trump’s Director of the Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk, is complying with all federal laws. The Trump administration is under growing pressure to release Musk’s financial disclosure form and any conflict of interest waiver the President may have signed, if there is one.

The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman, who wrote the best-selling book, “Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America,” made a rare appearance inside the White House Press Briefing Room on Wednesday to challenge Musk’s actions.

“You talked about the transparency with DOGE and Elon Musk,” Haberman reminded Leavitt. “There is a conflict of interest law in place that says that people who have personal interests can’t interact with government entities that could touch on those. Has President Trump signed a waiver for Elon Musk, does such a thing and exist, if it does, will you guys release it in the interest of transparency that he’s committed to?”

READ MORE: ‘Demolition Plan’: Dems Warn DOGE Guts Government to Empower Billionaires, Harm Americans

“I have not seen the law that you are referring to,” Leavitt was quick to respond. “What I can tell you is that Elon Musk is, I’ve confirmed before, is a special government employee. He is filing the proper financial disclosure. And he is complying with all applicable federal laws.”

“As you also heard, Elon addressed this directly yesterday in the alleged conflict of interest, and he said everything he’s doing is very public, and if you all perceive a conflict of interest, you’re welcome to bring that up.”

“And as the president said, if he feels like Elon is engaging in something that’s a conflict of interest, he will tell Elon not to do that,” she claimed. “Elon also said yesterday that before he moves forward with anything, he consults with the president of the United States. So, um, we’re very confident with the ethics and the guardrails that have been put in place here.”

On Tuesday during his Oval Office press conference, Elon Musk told reporters that there is no conflict of interest.

Musk’s SpaceX reportedly received a $38.8 million contract from NASA this week.

CNN on Tuesday reported that Musk has not filed and will not file a public financial disclosure form.

“Musk, speaking in the Oval Office, sought to underscore his belief that ‘transparency is what builds trust,’ and insisted that all of his team’s efforts were being made public on DOGE’s social media accounts and website,” CNN reported. “But he also seemed to chafe at some of the scrutiny he was receiving, likening it to a ‘daily proctology exam.'”

READ MORE: ‘Trumpflation’: Blaming Biden, Trump Slammed for Breaking ‘Day One’ Promise as Prices Jump

“Earlier in the day, a White House official said Musk would not need to file a public financial disclosure, allowing the world’s richest man to skirt public scrutiny of his potential conflicts. Musk’s various companies have billions of dollars in government contracts.”

“As an unpaid special government employee who is not a commission officer, he will file a confidential financial disclosure report per the norm,” a White House official told CNN, the news outlet reported.

“We wouldn’t let him” have a conflict of interest or a lack of transparency, President Trump assured reporters Tuesday.

But The New York Times on Tuesday reported that the White House had not responded to its request “for a copy of the waiver, a document that is required under federal law to be released. Ethics waivers are typically drafted based on conflicts identified through a financial disclosure filing, so it is possible that no waiver has been prepared yet.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

RELATED: ‘Not Legal’: Trump May Dissolve Dept. of Education in Days, Democrat Warns

Continue Reading

News

‘Demolition Plan’: Dems Warn DOGE Guts Government to Empower Billionaires, Harm Americans

Published

on

During Wednesday’s DOGE Subcommittee Hearing on Government Waste, House Democrats slammed President Donald Trump’s Director of the Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk, and DOGE, which they accused of being a “demolition plan” for the federal government designed to empower billionaires while harming everyday Americans, and especially those who rely on social safety net programs like Social Security and Medicare.

In a damning display, U.S. Rep. Robert Garcia detailed what he said were Musk’s plans to launch a “power grab” inside the federal government, hurt “the American social safety net” and destroy “our institutions.” The California Democrat also made a few mocking remarks about the billionaire he called “President Musk.”

“I find it ironic, of course, that our chairwoman, Congresswoman Greene, is in charge of running this committee,” Rep. Garcia said of far-right Republican U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. “Now, in the last Congress, Chairwoman Greene literally showed a dick pic in our oversight congressional hearing, so I thought I’d bring one as well.”

“Now, this, of course, we know is President Elon Musk,” Garcia joked, as a staffer put up a huge photo of the billionaire in white tie and tails, to laughter from the gallery. “He’s also the world’s richest man. He was the biggest political donor in the last election. He has billions of dollars in conflicts of interest, and we know that he is leading a power grab, also abided by and encouraged by Donald Trump and of course, the chairwoman, Congresswoman Greene.”

READ MORE: ‘Trumpflation’: Blaming Biden, Trump Slammed for Breaking ‘Day One’ Promise as Prices Jump

Garcia pointed to a large board listing several federal agencies he suggested DOGE is trying to destroy.

He called DOGE “a demolition plan that’s going to run through our government,” and said that “DOGE is trying to abolish the Department of Education. That means opportunities denied to kids. It means you’re ripping away opportunities for children with disabilities, who are dependent on this money.”

“You’re also halting medical research, which is also critical, which we have to also stop. The idea that we are going to eliminate or destroy the National Institutes of Health, the NIH, is crazy.”

“Let’s talk about the Department of Labor. We’re talking about protections for working people across this country, where people can actually complain about abuses their companies are making against them and their coworkers. Workers are now going to be in danger,” he warned.

“And let’s also talk about the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Another huge issue for us. Think about the scammers and fraudsters that’ll be empowered across this country, because Elon Musk,” he alleged, “wants — essentially, these companies [to] have more power over consumers and over people across this country.”

“Look at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services,” Garcia continued. “That is actually what’s being discussed partly today. Healthcare, we’re talking about being denied to millions of poor people, working-class people across this country. And now, of course, they’re onto their largest target: The U.S. Social Security Administration. We’re talking about this the destruction of the actual social safety net in this country. We know that one in five Americans collect Social Security — seniors, disabled people. This entire plan is about hurting the American social safety net and destroying our institutions.”

The California Democrat continued to attack DOGE.

“This committee wants to empower the richest person in the world to hurt people so they can take all of this money that they so-call want to save and then give it to themselves, their companies, and their billionaire friends,” he charged. “That is the attack that is happening in this committee and across this country, and it’s important that we call it out.”

“We also know, of course, that Elon Musk is sending his unqualified DOGE staff to carry out this agenda across all these agencies. And in some cases, actually teenage staffers. No accountability, no experience, and problematic records. They’re trying to rob you and they’re probably a minor.”

U.S. Rep. Greg Casar also attacked Musk and President Trump, for firing numerous Inspectors General while ignoring what he says is the $8 million per day the federal government gives to Musk and his companies.

RELATED: ‘Not Legal’: Trump May Dissolve Dept. of Education in Days, Democrat Warns

“Five Inspector Generals that were looking into Elon Musk’s companies were fired by the Trump-Musk administration,” the Democrat from Texas charged. “TheseInspector Generals who are independent, protected by law, they are the people that find the waste, fraud, and abuse and found many of the cases of waste, fraud, and abuse that have been brought up today — fired because they were looking into Elon Musk at the NLRB, the National Labor Relations Board, which is supposed to protect workers from getting their unions busted by folks like Elon Musk — made functionally broken by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency that really is the Department of Government Efficiency for Elon Musk, not for you.”

“They are trying to shut down the Department of Education, the Department of Labor,” he continued. “You know what he doesn’t seem to be looking into? His own contracts.”

“Just last year, Elon Musk was promised three billion from close to 100 contracts with the federal government,” Casar alleged.

He also said that “the average person in this country who survives on Social Security, one of our seniors who’s worked their entire life,” gets $65 a day from Social Security.

“We’re not looking into Elon Musk’s eight million dollars a day. This subcommittee, chaired by Marjorie Taylor Greene and the House Republicans, is looking into your grandmother’s $65 a day.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Serious Injuries to Public Health’: Judge Scorches Trump Removal of Health Websites

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Trumpflation’: Blaming Biden, Trump Slammed for Breaking ‘Day One’ Promise as Prices Jump

Published

on

President Donald Trump is blaming his predecessor, President Joe Biden, after inflation jumped far more than expected.

“Biden inflation up!” Trump wrote on social media Wednesday, taking no responsibility for breaking his campaign promise to lower prices “on day one.”

On Wednesday the U.S. Department of Labor reported inflation jumped to levels not seen since last June, and Americans are being forced to pay far higher prices at the supermarket, especially for basic staples like eggs.

“Consumer prices roared higher in January, driving inflation up to 3%,” CNN reported, calling it “the fastest monthly pace since September 2023.” Economists had expected inflation to come in at an annual rate of 2.9%.

“Egg prices shot up 15.2% from December to January, the fastest increase that index has seen since 2015, according to the report,” CNN added. “They’re up 53% year over year.”

READ MORE: ‘Not Legal’: Trump May Dissolve Dept. of Education in Days, Democrat Warns

The jump in inflation makes it far less likely the Federal Reserve will lower interest rates, which remain high as they try to battle inflation. The Associated Press reported on Wednesday, “the cost of groceries, gasoline and rents rose, a disappointment for families and businesses struggling with higher costs and likely underscoring the Federal Reserve’s resolve to delay further interest rate cuts.”

“Grocery prices have skyrocketed,” candidate Trump said back in August on the campaign trail. Trump has bragged that he won the election on his promise to lower the cost of “groceries.”

“When I win, I will immediately bring prices down, starting on day one,” Trump said, as multiple news outlets, including The New York Post and CNN, have reported.

After the election, Trump acknowledged his pledge to reduce the price of groceries.

“I won on groceries,” Trump told NBC News’ Kristen Welker in December.“Very simple word, groceries. Like almost — you know, who uses the word? I started using the word — the groceries. When you buy apples, when you buy bacon, when you buy eggs, they would double and triple the price over a short period of time, and I won an election based on that. We’re going to bring those prices way down.”

But Trump appears to have done little to even try to bring down prices, including the cost of food.

“Now, maybe Americans did send Trump back to the White House to lower prices,” MSNBC‘s Jen Psaki wrote late last month, “but during his first week in office — a period of time when presidents typically use their power to make clear what their priorities are — he focused on anything but.

The one step he did appear to take to lower prices was to sign an executive order telling agencies in the executive branch to “take actions that lower prices.”

READ MORE: ‘Serious Injuries to Public Health’: Judge Scorches Trump Removal of Health Websites

“President Trump, who while campaigning vowed to end the ‘inflation nightmare,'” CBS News reported last month, on Inauguration Day “signaled his focus on the high cost of living in the U.S. by signing an executive order that requires ‘all executive departments and agencies to deliver emergency price relief’ to Americans.”

“It is critical to restore purchasing power to the American family and improve our quality of life,” the executive order stated.

“To accomplish that, Mr. Trump is ordering the departments and agencies that fall under the executive branch, including the departments of Commerce, Health and Human Services, Labor, and Energy, to take actions that lower prices for everything from housing and health costs to food and fuel,” CBS added. It is unclear what steps they were supposed to take, or if any did.

Meanwhile, consumers appear to be growing angry, and Wednesday’s inflation news — coupled with Trump’s imposition of a new tariff on all aluminum and steel coming into the United States — is not making it easier for average Americans.

On social media, critics were quick to blame and blast the President.

“Meat prices up 0.6 percent in January, egg prices up 15.2 percent. Too bad Trump is so busy doing corrupt deals with Musk and planning to take over Greenland and Gaza that he can’t pay attention to food prices,” remarked Dean Baker, senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Former Biden White House Senior Deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates posted video of Trump’s interview with NBC’s Welker.

“The thing is,” Democratic strategist and Kamala Harris alum Mike Nellis wrote, “Trump didn’t just promise to cool inflation—he said prices would go down. And they aren’t. His tariff threats are already driving prices up everywhere, from groceries to housing, cars, and appliances.”

“Trump took office and inflation immediately went UP. But instead of fixing the economy, he spent his time banning DEI, renaming water, going to the Super Bowl and trying to put hotels on the Gaza strip,” observed frequent commentator Alex Cole, who has nearly 275,000 followers on X.

“They’re calling it TRUMPFLATION. Beautiful word, maybe the best word. The most luxurious inflation—nobody does inflation better than me!” Cole also wrote, mocking Trump and his speaking style.

“Wow,” remarked Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett. “Inflation in the US rose 3% in January, higher than experts predicted for Trump’s first month report.”

After noting increases in the cost of groceries, energy, and eggs, he snarked, “Renaming the Gulf of America should help…”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: General Slams Pentagon’s ‘Racist’ Decision to Drop Key Black Engineers Recruitment Event

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.