Connect with us

OPINION: Is John Corvino In Cahoots With NOM On Regnerus ‘Study’?



I never did like the smell of gay philosopher John Corvino collaborating with NOM’s Maggie Gallagher on a book, Debating Same-Sex Marriage, and book promotions during a presidential election year.

Because Corvino is beholden to the publisher to help with book promotions, he can go only so far in his criticisms of Gallagher and NOM.

Would the head of the NAACP co-author a book “debating” David Duke the white supremacist?

One does not debate such monsters, because accepting to debate them gives their monstrous bigotry an unwarranted imprimatur of respectability.

Certain attitudes, statements and actions just do cross over a line; Gallagher has said she is not “willing” to live in a country that gives anti-discrimination protections to gay people, she has knowingly sought to perpetuate conditions that increase youth suicide levels, her organization sponsors rallies where its speakers yell through megaphones that homosexuals are “worthy to death,” and one of its leaders, William Duncan, held a Liberty University symposium sessions titled “Homosexuals or Homo Sapiens; Who Deserves Protected Class Status?”

A recent hoax perpetrated thanks to NOM-connected funding by the University of Texas’s religious right-wing sociologist Mark Regnerus “found” that homosexual parents are dangerous to children.

NOM has been running with sadistic joy, spreading the “findings” of the Regnerus hoax its co-founder helped finance, exacerbating what the Southern Poverty Law Center long has noted as NOM’s propensity to tell known negative falsehoods about gay people.

Because Corvino and Gallagher were already in a business collaboration through their co-authored book with their publisher, and have long been seen engaging in inane banter with each other, as though knowingly perpetuating conditions that exacerbate youth suicide qualified somebody as a delightful tea party guest, when the Regnerus excrement hit the fan, Corvino and Gallagher brought their act to the pages of the right-wing National Review.

Corvino had stated that for the purposes of Regnerus’s study, Ted Haggard would have been classified as a gay father. Gallagher told him he was wrong about that. He responded by doubling down to insist that she was in error about his being wrong about the Haggard family vis-a-vis Regnerus’s study. It was all more fun than a barrel of anti-gay bigots.

The trouble is that Corvino is totally wrong. The Regnerus Survey Instrument first asked respondents their ages, to make sure that they were in the right age range, and then asked them if they lived together with their biological mother and father until they were 18. If they answered “Yes,” they got skipped ahead in the survey, and never asked whether one of their parents had ever had a “same sex romantic relationship.” A young adult child of the Haggard union would truthfully answer that their biological mother and father had them under a same roof until they were 18. That Haggard family survivor would then not be asked whether Ted, the gay-bashing, meth-abusing, gay hustler-hiring hypocrite, had ever had a “same-sex romantic relationship.” Their parent Ted Haggard would not get classified as “gay.”

Yet there is John Corvino, gay rights champion and NOM/Gallagher collaborator, insisting that a Ted Haggard would have been classified as a gay father in Regnerus’s study, even though that is verifiably false.

With Gallagher leading the promotions of the study, and Corvino playing dumb-guy sidekick to her,  he helps to cast her promotions of Regnerus is a “smart” light; Corvino is making Gallagher look good; pathetic for him as that might be.

Regnerus’s University of Texas is investing a lot of time and money into promoting the NOM-related-funded Regnerus hoax. NOM leaders evidently handpicked, and certainly approved of the religious right-wing Regnerus of the University of Texas carrying out their study on same-sex parenting, even though Regnerus has no credentials in that field.  And what an extraordinary coincidence it is, that John Corvino earned his Ph.D. from that very same University of Texas, Austin.

Is it really just coincidence, that 1) the University of Texas, Austin is using its economic resources to promote the NOM-Witherspoon-funded Regnerus-study; that 2) NOM’s Maggie Gallagher has a business collaboration with John Corvino, from which they both harvest advantages; that; 3) both Regnerus and Corvino have a connection with the University of Texas, Austin, and that; 4) all of those varied NOM-related connections to UT — from which UT is profiting — are occurring simultaneously in an election year?

Is the appearance that 1) NOM; 2) Maggie Gallagher; 3) the UT-and-NOM-connected John Corvino, and; 4) the UT-and-NOM-connected Mark Regnerus all got in on action centering on 5) the University of Texas, Austin in an election year only an appearance, or did some sort of planning go into this?

After all, Mark Regnerus had no prior experience in the field of same-sex parenting, and any number of appropriately-credentialed sociologists might have been called on to carry out a study on same-sex parenting instead. How very curious that a not-appropriately-credentialed, religious arch-social-regressive scholar at a university system overseen by religious right Regents appointed by the religious right Governor Rick Perry — who has endorsed Mitt Romney, who has signed the anti-gay-rights NOM pledge — should have been NOM-Witherspoon’s choice to carry out a study on same-sex parenting.

Let us not forget that the 2012 Texas Republican Party Platform says that homosexuality tears at the fabric of society. And let us not ignore that Corvino’s public remarks on Regnerus have mainly involved his National Review back-and-forth with Gallagher, consistent with a book promotions plan, and that Corvino did not sign the letter from over 200 Ph.D.s and M.D.s condemning the study.

As a “public intellectual” with a Ph.D. from the University of Texas, Austin, Corvino is in a position to demand that the school do the right thing and promptly denounce the NOM-Regnerus hoax as constituting sociological malpractice, because the “study” makes no valid sociological comparison between heterosexual and homosexual parents.

Corvino should be standing up and demanding that those Rick Perry-appointed Regents of the University of Texas respect academic integrity, distance themselves from the NOM-Regnerus hoax, and apologize to the nation’s gay community.

Corinvo’s reputation, after all, is tied at least somewhat to the university’s. If the school lowers its academic standards, the perceived worth of his doctorate declines.

Yet, as somebody tied to NOM’s Maggie Gallagher in the commercial enterprise that is their co-authored book, Corvino can be expected to remain more devoted to the NOM-linked commercial enterprise than to the well-being of the LGBT community nationwide.

New York City-based novelist and freelance writer Scott Rose’s LGBT-interest by-line has appeared on,, The New York Blade,, Girlfriends and in numerous additional venues. Among his other interests are the arts, boating and yachting, wine and food, travel, poker and dogs. His “Mr. David Cooper’s Happy Suicide” is about a New York City advertising executive assigned to a condom account.

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.


‘Indictment Anytime’: Experts Explain Significance of Trump’s Attorneys Meeting With DOJ – Warn Plea Deal Possible



Legal experts responding to news Donald Trump‘s legal team Monday morning walked into the U.S. Dept. of Justice agree it likely means Special Counsel Jack Smith is nearing a charging decision, but warn it could also mean the ex-president, under criminal investigation for unlawful handling of classified documents, among other possibly unlawful acts, might be offered a plea deal to avoid serving time in prison.

Trump’s attorneys being at DOJ “suggests indictment anytime. This would be the last step, and if neither side offers something worth thinking about, then DOJ would pull the trigger,” says former Dept. of Justice official Harry Litman.

“Plenty of possible angles they might choose to play including guilty plea for noncustodial sentence,” he adds, referring to any possible plea bargain with no sentence behind bars. “But unless Trump side leaks, discussions will stay confidential.”

READ MORE: ‘No Longer the Lord’s Chicken’: ‘Christian Woman’ Says She’s ‘Grieving’ Over ‘Woke’ Chick-fil-A Hiring a Diversity Officer

CBS News’ Robert Costa and Rob Legare broke the news that Trump’s attorneys had gone into DOJ. Responding to that, former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance offers up a few possible scenarios.

“The smart move here for Trump is a guilty plea to a misdemeanor if DOJ will offer one & a felony with no jail time if they won’t,” she says, pointing to her Substack newsletter where she discussed this very subject Sunday night.

“For those who dislike these possible outcomes (I would number myself in that group), it’s nonetheless important to understand the prior precedent that will shape DOJ’s charging decisions & any plea offers in this matter. This is Trump’s best possible outcome, not the country’s,” says Vance.

READ MORE: Classified Pentagon ‘War Plans’ Document Trump Bragged About in Audio Recording Is Missing: Report

She adds, “Trump seems incapable of saying he’s done anything wrong. To plead, he’d have to say under oath in open court that he was guilty. It’ll be interesting to see if he can do that, or would rather run the risk of being convicted of felonies that carry up to 20 years in custody.”

“Good sign,” says former federal prosecutor of 30 years, Glenn Kirschner, observing, “if Jack Smith had decided against charging Trump, there would be no need for this meeting. The last federal prosecutors often do before indicting is meet with the target’s defense team & give them an opportunity to present any evidence or arguments they want to offer.”

Dave Aronberg, Palm Beach County, Florida state’s attorney on MSNBC Monday morning said he believes Trump will be indicted this week.

Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr and a CC license

Continue Reading


Trump’s Attorneys Just Walked Into DOJ – Special Counsel Expected to Reach Charging Decision Soon: Report



Attorneys for Donald Trump Monday morning entered the U.S. Dept. of Justice, as expectations grow the ex-president could soon be charged in his unlawful removal, retention, and refusal to return hundreds of classified and top secret documents.

CBS News chief election and campaign correspondent Robert Costa reports sources say Special Counsel Jack Smith is expected to reach a decision on charging Trump in the case soon.

“Trump’s lawyers just spotted by @CBSNews entering the Justice Department, per @RobLegare who is on site,” Costa tweeted at 10:09 AM ET. He says that “comes as sources tell me the special counsel is moving toward a charging decision in the classified documents case.”

Citing sources, Costa adds, “Trump’s lawyers are expected to raise concerns about how prosecutors have handled atty-client questions during the grand jury but there is no sign the special counsel is going to waver from how he and his team have handled the crime-fraud exception…”

READ MORE: Former DOJ Official Says Audio of Trump Admitting to Keeping ‘War Plans’ Makes it ‘Inconceivable’ He Will Not Be Charged

Trump’s attorneys being at DOJ is a possible sign the Special Counsel could be close to asking a grand jury to bring charges against the one-term, twice impeached ex-president who is currently facing 34 felonies in an unrelated New York case.

“Often defense attorneys are given the opportunity to ‘pitch’ the DOJ before a charging decision is made,” former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti notes. “Trump’s team visiting DOJ likely means that we won’t see charges in the next few days—as their pitch is considered—but could potentially see charges in the next 5 to 15 days.”

The Special Counsel’s grand jury is reportedly reconvening this week.

Legal experts and Trump watchers have been expecting the ex-president to be charged as soon as this week, after CNN reported Special Counsel Jack Smith had an audio recording of Trump admitting to holding on to a classified document, described by some as “war plans” against Iran. In that audio Trump reportedly also said he knew the document was classified, and said he wished he could share it, which destroys multiple claims he has made in his defense of retaining the documents.

That document is still missing, and the Pentagon appears greatly concerned about the document.

On Sunday night Trump lashed out at Smith, calling him, the DOJ, and the FBI all “Marxist,” and described the investigation into his possibly illegal handling of classified documents as the “boxes hoax.”


This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. 

Continue Reading


Right-Wingers’ Latest Chick-fil-A Meltdown Proves They Have ‘Officially Jumped the Shark’: Morning Joe Panel



MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough and Donny Deutsch mocked conservatives for running the “woke” hysteria into the ground.

Ron DeSantis and other Republicans have screeched about the so-called “woke agenda,” which they warn will undermine American values and put children at risk from all manner of threats, but the “Morning Joe” host said most voters simply don’t care about that manufactured issue.

“Joe Biden, 350 pieces of bipartisan legislation signed, and Ron DeSantis and everybody else is talking ‘woke, woke, woke, woke, woke,'” Scarborough said. “Again, something that I said on this show and I heard a lot about from liberals, even, in 2021. You’re not hearing it, again, in part because there have been some corrections. You have the head of Berkley Law School, Yale Law School, Stanford Law School going, ‘Hold on, hold on, we’re not going to let these woke mobs get in the way of free speech.’ They’re saying it at the most elite law schools in America, so common-sense Americans are going, ‘Okay, there may still be a problem, but they’re working on it,’ and yet these Republicans are all acting like it’s 2019, 2020 and they just keep freaking out. Well, Joe Biden is talking about job training and signing bipartisan bills.”

Conservatives have turned against Chick-fil-A for hiring a vice president of diversity, equity and inclusion — which actually happened over a year ago but largely escaped notice until recently — and Deutsche said that was a nadir for “woke” hysteria.

READ MORE: ‘Cowards’: Soledad O’Brien rips former CNN colleagues for silence as Chris Licht wrecks the network

“The ‘woke’ movement officially jumped the shark,” he said. “Joe, you touched on this earlier with the Chick-fil-A move. Right-wing company, I don’t say that negatively, very family values, closed on Sundays, the head of the — [company chairman] Dan Cathy came out against same-sex marriages. They’re very conservative. Now, all of a sudden — you’re right, very conservative, obviously a great company, and they came under fire they have a DEI initiative, diversity, coming under fire from right-wing groups. That’s the official moment that ‘woke’ officially jumped the shark and put Fonzie on skis in Honolulu.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

Image by Hector Alejandro via Flickr and a CC license

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.