I'm not going to pull out quotes or anything, just post the link. But, not the number of links to scientific peer reviewed studies that dispute the argument of some that same sex parents are just fine and dandy.
https://winteryknight.com/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
From an academic perspective, there are a number of flaws in the design of Sullins's research. To his credit, he used a large sample of data compiled by the CDC to test his hypothesis, looking at kids who were living with same-sex parents at the time of various surveys taken between 1997 and 2013. But "what Sullins's paper does not show is that these children were actually raised by the same-sex couple," wrote Rosenfeld in an email.
Reading the paper, it's impossible to say whether the kids in question spent most of their lives with heterosexual parents who then got divorced, for example, or a single parent who had multiple partners over time. This family history matters: "We have decades of research showing that family instability and divorce takes a toll on children," Rosenfeld wrote. Because of this constraint, he said, the paper cannot speak to the way being raised by same-sex parents affects the well-being of children. In an email, Sullins disputed this criticism, pointing to other widely accepted studies on emotional well-being and family structure that rely on the same data.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/using-pseudoscience-to-undermine-same-sex-parents/385604/
"But looking at the evidence so far I think it’s fair to call these journals bogus." The company that publishes these journals is also listed on the leading index of "potential, possible, or probably predatory scholarly open-access publishers," a sign of those journals' lack of credibility...
as he himself acknowledges, this conclusion directly contradicts a large body of research on this topic, which suggests that there are no differences between kids raised in stable households by gay or straight parents. In an email, Sullins argued that this "entire body of small-sample research is mistaken and highly misleading," pointing to biased methodology. But a number of nationally representative, large-sample surveys have consistently found that kids from stable gay households fare the same as kids from stable heterosexual households."
Of course, that "large body of research on this topic, which suggests that there are no differences between kids raised in stable households by gay or straight parents" has been shown to be extremely flawed, biased and unreliable to the extent that were it any other subject, that "large body" would be ignored completely. Indeed, a major problem is that there is no large-sample, nationally representative surveys due to the fact that this tragedy is still a rather new phenomenon in this country. But like all proponents of sexual immorality, any shred of a hint that suggests the least thing positive is gospel truth. Ironic given how Dan has so little regard for actual Gospel truth.
So now peer reviewed papers are not intrinsic to science. It's confusing, but I understand how it works now. It's more about agreement than peer review.
Post a Comment