The bloom is off of Scott Rose.

I believe that Mr. Scott Rose would welcome a child INTO the glbt community WITHOUT the consent of that child’s parents, and I challenge Scott Rose to deny my accusation.

I can and will and hereby denounce speaking to a child about heterosexuality or Christianity without the consent of that child’s parents, so how come Scott Rose can’t renounce speaking to a child about ENTERING the glbt community without the consent of that child's parents?

The Regnerus study thwarts the efforts of people like Scott Rose who want to normalize the gay lifestyle to children WITHOUT the consent of that child’s parents.
“Anti-bullying” classes in grade schools are used by some gay activists to encourage children to join the glbt community behind the backs of their parents. The mere mention of homosexuals in anti-bullying classes is NOT what I’m referring to. I’m talking about telling a child that it is okay for them to personally embrace homosexuality EVEN IF their parents tell them that the glbt lifestyle is wrong or sinful.

“…blogger Scott Rose accused Regnerus of scientific misconduct in two letters to the school, first charging Regnerus with deviating from “ethical standards” for research and later accusing him of “possible falsification” of research. Rose, who is gay, claimed the study was compromised…”

“…Regnerus’ New Family Structures Study sampled 3,000 people ages 18-39, of whom 248 said their mothers or fathers had a same-sex relationship while they were growing up. Regnerus, an associate professor of and a faculty associate at the university’s Population Research Center, said his study is unique because prior probes of same-sex parenting have been based on smaller samples and anecdotal cases that seemed designed to conclude there are no differences between children of the two groups. …”

Story here.

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.

The Regnerus study.

This is why I blog about homofascism whenever my, roll-of-the-dice work schedule permits.

I didn't know that the man who gathered the data for this info was under attack, but I'm not one bit surprised that homofascists are trying to destroy him.

Does it not stand to reason/common-sense that a child is better off being raised by their father and mother? Or an acting mother and father? Two, same-sex "parents," cannot provide the ideal environment for raising a child since a man cannot fully imitate the mind of a woman, and a woman cannot fully imitate the mind of a man.

Yet, those who need a "study" to believe what they hear, have flipped out because the Regnerus study confirms common-sense observations about the benefits that a true family provide to a child.

“…Mark Regnerus’ recent study on children who are raised by gay parents. Regnerus’ work has since proven to be very controversial because it does not paint a positive picture of children of gay parents. Even though it’s based on scientific methodology, it suggests conclusions that cut against the prevailing gay rights narrative. As a result, folks on the left have been calling for Regnerus’ head on a platter.

…the witch hunt is officially on. A gay blogger lodged a complaint with the President of the University of Texas, alleging that Regnerus had engaged in “scientific misconduct.”

…This whole thing is outrageous on many levels. There is nothing untoward about this study.

...just released a statement today defending Regnerus’ work as scientifically credible. The push-back is coming simply because some people don’t like where the data led.

…Normally studies like this one are vetted by the scholarly community in subsequent publications. But that is not good enough for the gay activists. The thought-police are out in full force not to counter Regnerus in print, but to destroy his career and reputation.

…the social pressure will transform into governmental pressure, and Christians will suffer. We will look back on moments like this one as one more step down the path of intolerance of Christian views. Mark Regnerus is in the crosshairs now, but it will be all of us before too long. …”

My supporting info is here and here.

Scott Rose vs. parental rights.

Just about two days ago, I stumbled across this web page and found a fellow heteroactivist under attack. I decided to wade into this fray and test one of my Achilles questions against his most eloquent attacker.

I asked Mr. Scott Rose...

Do you support how some sex education classes for grades K thru 6 welcome schoolchildren INTO the glbt community WITHOUT the consent or knowledge of that child’s parents?

His response was...

"Enlightened human beings of whatever sexual orientation constantly interrelate with one another, as sexual relations are far from being the only thing of importance in life. For example, a heterosexual man with an interest in sailing could very well go out on a lake one day in a sailboat with a lesbian couple and the lesbian couple's children. The way you have phrased your question, Carl Rowan Morris, conspicuously implies that LGBT adults around children in the ages of K through 6th grade would commit child rape on those children. The direct evidence suggests that Catholic priests are far more likely that non-priest LGBT adults to rape children. Anti-gay bigot adults, on the other hand, absolutely should not be permitted to endanger their children's welfare by teaching them irrational anti-gay hate. The children taught that hate by their parents are the ones who become anti-gay bullies in school. That bullying besides damaging the gay victims also hinders the bully from receiving the best possible education. So to answer your question, yes, it is terrible for anti-gay bigot parents to hinder their offsprings' enlightened integration into the contemporary world by teaching them homophobia, the irrational fear of gay human beings, which you have expressed with your stupid question."

Mr Rose's is so fancy and so eloquent as he accuses me of implying child rape, WHILE he admits his support of violating the civil rights of parents that won't support the sexual actions of the glbt community. He calls speaking to a child about ENTERING the gay community, behind the backs of that child's parents, an "enlightened integration into the contemporary world."

Wow. That was some of the smoothest poison I've ever heard.

Isn't Mr. Scott Rose himself guilty of bigotry when he openly advocates the violation of another person's civil rights after he labels that person an "anti-gay bigot"? Isn't it possible to teach kids not to bully each other without glorifying homosexuality? Does Mr. Rose hate those who don't support the concept of a man having sex with another man (anti-gay bigotry according to him) so much that he advocates taking their children away from them? Look at the paragraph marked May 27th at 3:17pm. How will he respond to my question..."How are you better than "anti-gay bigots" when you openly admit your support of violating a parent's right to supervise their child's education?

Again, my evidence is here.