Despite Michigan Case, Regnerus Still Being Cited

When a federal judge struck down Michigan’s ban on same-sex marriage recently, he called out Mark Regnerus and his ridiculous study for being not just for having a faulty ideology, but for having one that was set up specifically to reach the desired result of the anti-gay groups that funded the study. That same study is being cited in similar lawsuits around the country and Chris Wangsgard calls it completely fraudulent:

The Regnerus’ “study” is the worst kind of junk science. Survey participants were asked whether either of their parents had ever been involved in a “romantic relationship” with a person of the same sex. Regnerus labeled the 248 participants who answered “yes” as children of same-sex relationships. Judge Friedman concluded this process had identified only offspring of failed heterosexual unions, thus proving nothing about same-sex parenting.

Only two of the 15,000 survey respondents reported living with a same-sex couple for their entire childhood. Mr. Regnerus admitted he found these two individuals well adjusted.

In short, the Regnerus “study” compared the children of stable families and those of unstable families, but labeled the unstable families as same-sex families.

This study is so absurd in its methodologies that I don’t think it’s going too far to call it academic malpractice.

Paid for by the descendants of the idiots who started it! Sound business solution...

Robert E. Lee Opposed Confederate Statues
They would have had to bring along at least one lefty liberal so someone could read the titles.

White Supremacists Cancel Book Burning in ...
Aaaaand, he's already on it...sort of...

Republicans Refuse to Defend Trump on ...
Follow Us!
POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    ITS NOT “ACADEMIC MALPRACTICE”. AS A FAITH-BASED RELIGIOUS PROGRAM ITS EXEMPT FROM SO-CALLED “STANDARDS” UNDER THE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT SO THE COURTS HAVE TO ADMIT IT AS EVIDENCE AND ITS PROTECTED BY THE FRIST AMENDMENT SO THEY ARENT ALLOWED TO CRITICIZE IT!

  • roggg

    Did they stop citing Behe after Dover? Ideology trumps accuracy.

  • matty1

    Modus, I have to ask is today your birthday?

  • DBP

    Good. I hope anti-gay bigots cite it for decades to come. All their opponents need to do is point to the judge that called it bullshit and their work discrediting the bigots is mostly done for them. It was blatantly fraudulent, now that one judge has called it out as such, citing the study just undermines the cause of bigotry more.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    … Regnerus admitted he found these two individuals well adjusted.

    Considering Regnerus’s standards, those two probably need to be tracked down and offered counseling on an emergency basis before they start blowing things up.

  • steve84

    This shouldn’t be a surprise. These are people who still cite Paul Cameron and Robert Spitzer as credible authorities.

    They are simply hoping that another judge will decide differently. Which can easily happen. That’s why they are still using the same BS arguments about “responsible procreation” and the “channeling” of people which failed during the Prop8 trial

  • tsig

    Anti-vaccine idiots still cite Wakefield. Woo never dies it just gets recycled.

  • howardhershey

    It’s the best they have. So they use it.

  • D. C. Sessions

    “Studies” are like elections: you can only tell if they’re legitimate by whether or not they get the right results.

  • Michael Heath

    steve84 writes:

    These are people who still cite Paul Cameron . . .

    I find Paul Cameron analogous to Francis Schaffer. Both have strongly influenced positions taken by conservative Christians at the grassroots level, without these grassroots people knowing who either are or having directly studied either much.

    Instead the sheeps’ pastors and authority figures expose themselves to these two’s assertions where those leaders then propagate what Schaffer and Cameron espoused/espouse to their flock. Schaffer’s influence has probably waned since the 1970s given his demise, where other contemporary’s stand on his shoulders.

  • cptdoom

    Regnerus labeled the 248 participants who answered “yes” as children of same-sex relationships. Judge Friedman concluded this process had identified only offspring of failed heterosexual unions, thus proving nothing about same-sex parenting.

    Actually, Judge Friedman went even farther than that. He also noted in his decision that, even if the Regnerus study had scientific value, it was still not evidence for limiting marriage to opposite sex couples. The judge pointed out a lot of other factors that impact children’s success – things like income level or urban/suburban lifestyle – and yet are not used to limit marriage rights. IOW, Regnerus’ entire premise is flawed, we don’t parcel out civil rights only to those groups who have been proven to be able to use them well.

  • Morgan

    Ed, should your first sentence refer to faulty methodology?

  • http://www.facebook.com/DocMonkey mickwright

    I’m just gonna leave out comparisons to the Bible…while simultaneously mentioning ’em. Passive-aggressive (but justifiable) cheap shots FTW.