Mark Regnerus is completely ignoring the substantive critique of his ridiculous study and just claiming that the judge in the Michigan marriage case and pretty much the entire academic world is biased against. Because Jesus or something. He claims to just not understand why no one is taking him seriously.
Dr. Mark Regnerus, whose conclusions about same-sex “marriage” were dismissed in last week’s ruling on the matter by Judge Bernard Friedman, is fighting back.
“I frankly don’t understand why the judge elected to pass on a discussion of some of the very real concerns our research raised,” Regnerus told LifeSiteNews in an e-mail. Regnerus says Friedman “chose to privilege certain scholars as well as research that leaned on self-selected samples.”
Because at least the self-selected samples are actually comparable to the families they’re being measured against. And there are many longitudinal studies that actually compare the outcomes of families headed by gay and straight people, both individuals and couples. Regnerus’ study does not make such a comparison. It compares intact families headed by straight couples to broken families where one member of the couple was gay and hiding that fact. No credible sociologist would ever think that was a valid comparison.
Regnerus’ study found that children raised in the homes of homosexuals do statistically worse than those children raised in homes with heterosexual parents. According to Regnerus, “it’s as if raising standard methodological issues on this subject is just unwelcome today, unless it’s clear that you are friendly to the political goals of the same-sex marriage movement.”
*headdesk* Talk about projection. At no point does Regnerus even attempt to engage the substantive criticism of his methodology.
Like Dispatches on Facebook: