Thursday, August 30, 2012

Mark Regnerus easily survives Scott Rose.

Scott Rose once admitted to me on this blog that he would speak to children about homosexual matters WITHOUT the consent of that child’s parents.

“…Scott Rose, a journalist from New York City and a pro-gay rights blogger, had made allegations about the study's author, Professor Mark Regnerus, in numerous letters to the university, after which an inquiry was conducted. The study by Regenerus showed that children of gay parents were less likely to succeed.

"Disagreeing with a study's conclusions is not grounds for allegations of scientific misconduct; therefore, we are not surprised that those accusations were found to be baseless," Hacker added. "This comprehensive, peer-reviewed research study consisted of leading scholars and researchers across disciplines and ideological lines in a spirit of civility and reasoned inquiry. We agree with the UT-Austin inquiry's conclusion that the academy is the appropriate place for debate about this study."

…"Professor Regnerus did not commit scientific misconduct when designing, executing, and reporting the research reported in the Social Science Research article. None of the allegations of scientific misconduct put forth by Mr. Rose were substantiated either by the physical data, written materials, or by information provided during the interviews. Several of the allegations were beyond the purview of the inquiry."

Regnerus' study was published in the July issue of Social Science Research. It concludes that the children of parents who had same-sex relationships have more emotional and social problems than children of heterosexual parents with intact marriages. ..."

Original info here.


  1. Stop demonizing me. There is nothing wrong with children knowing that gay people exist. If first graders can hear that George was married to Martha, they can also know about the simple fact that gay couples marry.

  2. But not without their parent's consent. I've noticed your moving from the mere mention of glbt people to normalizing same-sex "marriage" to first graders.

    You have no qualms about trampling the civil rights of parents who don't support the redefinition of marriage. I'm not talking about the mere mention of glbt people in anti-bullying classes, I'm talking about telling children that it's okay to become a PART OF the glbt community behind the backs of their parents.

    You do support that don't you? You do support telling children, WITHOUT or against the expressed consent of their parents, that it's okay to ENTER into the glbt community. I am correct on that point aren't I?

  3. What? Over three months now and no denial of your obvious intent to violate the civil rights of parents who don't support glbt activities and the redefinition of marriage? I thought you fought for civil rights?


Debate and discussion are welcome here, but attitude and ad hominem attacks will get you banned.