GAY TRUTH

A new study 2   by Mark Regnerus has selected 3,000 study participants randomly by telephone in order to reduce sampling bias . In addition, the participants are the   children   who report on their respective parents. Although the methods are much better for this study than previous studies, the reporting of the comparisons is what has drawn the ire of many gay groups—and with some justification. One of the arguments made by those who oppose gay marriage is that homosexual parenting produces children with social and other deficits compared with children raised by heterosexual parents. Numerous recent studies, authored by gay scientists, have shown that children of gay parents fare identically to children of straight parents. 1   However, all of these studies have suffered from the fact that the sampled populations were not randomly selected , largely because few gay parents actually exist. So, investigators have used advertising (mostly online and in gay magazines) in order

WASHINGTON, D.C. , April 15 ( C-FAM.org ) - Homosexual advocates seem obsessed by a social science study that goes against them. They say the research is unimportant -- and they can’t stop talking about it. Mark Regnerus A year ago Dr. Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas published a 15,000-person  study  showing that children do best in a household with their married mother and father. He further found that no other family structure works this well and by contrast often did worse. A tsunami of protest and personal attacks engulfed him. His university and the journal where he published his findings investigated the research and cleared him of any suspicion. Even so, the attacks on him and those who use his research continues. Dr. Susan Yoshihara, research director of C-FAM , used the Regnerus study before the legislature in Rhode Island and came under attack by political fact checkers who claim some of her testimony was false. Yoshihara countered the popular wisdom

Symbol of gay sin. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) We know how important truth is to this fight, and how so many of our opponents recoil from the very idea of truth. There is no better example than the news this week  that Washington's Attorney General Bob Ferguson is using taxpayer funding to bring a lawsuit against a small Washington state florist named Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene's Flowers and Gifts. Stutzman's crime? Refusing to sell flowers for a gay wedding . For this 'thought crime' against gay marriage, her whole livelihood is now put at the stake. It was only a few months ago, before the November elections, when gay marriage advocates were sanctimoniously getting on television and reassuring voters that our claims of the religious persecution that comes hand in hand with redefining marriage were unfounded. Made up. Untrue. They knew at the time they were not telling the truth.Because now, just a few months later, the ACLU and a State Attorney Gen

Immoral Homosexual  Marriage (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) The moral effects of pornography are, by now, well attested. The scourge of pornography has brought ruin and harm into the lives of millions of our friends and neighbors, destroying marriages , distorting sexuality, and poisoning minds. Even so, the pornography industrial complex continues to grow, representing one of the most lucrative segments of the Internet economy . For the most part, previous research into the effects of pornography has focused on the psychological and physiological effects of pornography exposure. Among males, exposure to pornography is associated with addictive behaviors traced to the release of chemicals in the brain, stimulating arousal and excitement. In the larger context, pornography is also associated with an exaggerated masculinity, negative attitudes toward women, and relational breakdowns due to unrealistic sexual expectations. Pornography reduces women to objects of sexual attraction a

Gay Couple with child (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) If you want to know how University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus's summer has gone, look no further than The Weekly Standard . On the cover of the conservative magazine's July 30 issue are two hooded henchmen impishly turning the gears on a medieval torture wheel holding Regnerus, sweating beads as he tries to stay in one piece. The cover copy—"Revenge of the Sociologists : The perils of politically incorrect academic research"—hints at the situation sparked by the publication of Regnerus's newest research as well as the broader political discourse over same-sex marriage. The survey, known as the New Family Structures Study (NFSS), is remarkable in its scope. It's a random national sample, considered "the gold standard" of social science surveys. NFSS measures the economic, relational, political, and psychological effects on adults ages 18 to 39 who grew up in families where the father or mot

University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus sparked a firestorm of criticism from pro-homosexual activists when his peer-reviewed scholarly  article  on children raised by homosexual parents was published in the journal  Social Science Research  in June. Using a large, population-based sample, Dr. Regnerus found that children whose parents had a same-sex romantic relationship while the child was growing up suffer deficits compared to children raised by their own married biological mother and father. Dr. Mark Regnerus. Because the study undermined the politically correct claim that such children are “no different” from children with heterosexual parents, and because it reinforced a key point made in defense of the natural definition of marriage as the union of man and woman (namely, that kids need both a mom and a dad), it became urgent for pro-homosexual activists to discredit the study and, if possible, destroy Regnerus. That effort, thus far, has failed. When a libe