AL gay couple accused of sexual abuse of child

[Vox]

Attacking methodology is the lazy man's way...lol..

The learned community knows that if your methodology sucks, your study sucks. When you use crap methodology, you are generally being dishonest in your approach. Your little article is cute, but completely beside the point, and nothing but a justification of crap *studies* that present falsehoods as reality...and children are the ones who suffer.

Neg reping me pivotal to your argument, eh? You must not have very much in the tank to stoop to such an asinine tactic! What are you afraid of ... the truth?

This study had inadequate "peer review." Pointing it out deserves negative reputation? LMAO!

I have no need to send it back - you're outing yourself as being ignorant and unwilling to address the fact that this study is flawed.

you did not provide any peer review, just a BS from some media article.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Witherspoon Institute - News - The Austin Chronicle[/url]

oh, this "rebuttal" is just a typical butthurt cry. from the newspaper

children of homosexual parents differ from the children of lesbian parents, and they differ from children from standard heterosexual parents.
they have some similarities with children from the single parents homes.

Regnerus study

In 2012, the Witherspoon Institute drew public attention for having funded a controversial study—called the "New Family Structures Study" (NFSS)—concerning LGBT parenting, conducted by Mark Regnerus, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin. The study was later declared to be flawed in an audit conducted by the publisher of the study, Social Science Research, and was criticized by major professional scientific institutions and associations, as well as other sociologists at the University of Texas. In a brief to the United States Supreme Court, the American Sociological Association formally condemned the NFSS for being invalid. The University of Texas conducted an inquiry into the publication and declined to conduct a personal investigation stating that ordinary errors are not considered personal misconduct.[22] Documents from the University of Texas at Austin show that Regnerus, who was provided with talking points by the Institute, requested payment authorizations, for assistance in data analysis, to William Bradford Wilcox, associate professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, a member of the James Madison Society at Princeton University, the director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, and fellow (at that time) of the Witherspoon Institute. William Bradford Wilcox no longer appears on the official website for the Witherspoon Institute.[citation needed] Although the Witherspoon funding was part of the controversy, these documents show direct involvement in the study by the Witherspoon Institute. The methodology of the study has received criticism and defense.

In 2012, Darren Sherkat, professor of sociology at Southern Illinois University and a member of the editorial board of Social Science Research was asked by the journal's editor to audit the peer-review process that led to publication of the Regnerus study, for which Regnerus received $700,000 from the Witherspoon Institute and $60,000 from another conservative think tank. His conclusions were published in the November 2012 issue[29] of Social Science Research. In an interview with the Southern Poverty Law Center, Sherkat described the study as being "deeply methodologically flawed and a peer-review process that failed to identify significant problems." Sherkat also found that the study was riddled with technical flaws:

The key measure of gay and lesbian parenting is simply a farce. The study includes a retrospective question asking if people knew if their mother or father had a “romantic” relationship with someone of the same sex when the respondent was under age 18. This measure is problematic on many levels. Regnerus admits that just two of his respondents were actually raised by a same-sex couple, though I doubt that he can even know that, given his limited data. Since only two respondents were actually raised in gay or lesbian households, this study has absolutely nothing to say about gay parenting outcomes. Indeed, because it is a non-random sample, this study has nothing to say about anything.

Sherkat concluded that Regnerus, a conservative evangelical Christian, had "disgraced" himself by drawing misleading conclusions from poor research:

When we talk about Regnerus, I completely dismiss the study. It’s over. He has been disgraced. All of the prominent people in the field know what he did and why he did it. And most of them know that he knew better. Some of them think that he’s also stupid and an ideologue. I know better. I know that he’s a smart guy and that he did this on purpose, and that it was bad, and that it was substandard.

Witherspoon Institute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

you did not provide any peer review, just a BS from some media article.

Perhaps you have different information than I do with regards to this issue?

We question the process by which this paper was submitted, reviewed, and accepted for publication. The paper was received by the journal on February 1, 2012. A revision was received on February 29, and the paper was accepted on March 12. This suggests that the peer review process and substantive revisions occurred within a period of just five weeks. According to the peer review policy of the Social Science Research website hosted by Elsevier, the first step of the review process is an initial manuscript evaluation by the editor. Once deemed to meet minimum criteria, at least 2 experts are secured for a peer review. The website states that, “Typically manuscripts are reviewed within 2-3 months of submission but substantially longer review times are not uncommon” and that “Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the initial referees upon receipt.” Clearly, Dr. Regnerus’ paper was returned to him very quickly, because he had time to revise the manuscript and get it back to the journal by February 29th. Further, it appears that a second substantive peer review may not have occurred as the paper was accepted just two weeks after the revision was submitted.


Scientists Rebuke Publication of Study on LGBT Parenting | Psychology Today

 

[Luissa]

Attacking methodology is the lazy man's way...lol..

The learned community knows that if your methodology sucks, your study sucks. When you use crap methodology, you are generally being dishonest in your approach. Your little article is cute, but completely beside the point, and nothing but a justification of crap *studies* that present falsehoods as reality...and children are the ones who suffer.

The only time an article, link, or review isn't false if it agrees with your view point. The problem is, you have to post blogs by A Mormon who spent his career trying conversion therapy on homosexuals. Your methodology sucks. Most can see it, sorry you and Vox are ignorant loons, and cannot.
You problem KG, is you became educated on false material. Just imagine what you could have been if you actually opened up your mind to information that wasn't based in lunacy? You are smart, but only to a point. You could go a lot farther if you got over being a bigot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Asclepias]

Attacking methodology is the lazy man's way...lol..

The learned community knows that if your methodology sucks, your study sucks. When you use crap methodology, you are generally being dishonest in your approach. Your little article is cute, but completely beside the point, and nothing but a justification of crap *studies* that present falsehoods as reality...and children are the ones who suffer.

Neg reping me pivotal to your argument, eh? You must not have very much in the tank to stoop to such an asinine tactic! What are you afraid of ... the truth?

This study had inadequate "peer review." Pointing it out deserves negative reputation? LMAO!

I have no need to send it back - you're outing yourself as being ignorant and unwilling to address the fact that this study is flawed.

Most of these punk ass white racists are afraid of the truth. Dont take it personally.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Most of these punk ass white racists are afraid of the truth. Dont take it personally.

I won't comment on either of these two, personally; I'm certain that they are fine people ...

they are just on the wrong side of this issue.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Regnerus admits that just two of his respondents were actually raised by a same-sex couple, though I doubt that he can even know that, given his limited data. Since only two respondents were actually raised in gay or lesbian households, this study has absolutely nothing to say about gay parenting outcomes. Indeed, because it is a non-random sample, this study has nothing to say about anything.

Anyone want to comment on the fact that only two participants out of 3,000 in this study were raised by a gay couple?

 

[tinydancer]

How does a child recuperate and heal from this kind of abuse inflicted on him or her (in this case a son) by their own freaking father?

 

[Noomi]

Was KG owned in this thread and I missed it?

Darn. LOL

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Was KG owned in this thread and I missed it?

Darn. LOL

Mad Cabbie might not have the reputation, but I don't need it; I got game. Anyone who thinks I'm a pushover is first in line to the woodshed.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

How does a child recuperate and heal from this kind of abuse inflicted on him or her (in this case a son) by their own freaking father?

Lost in all this political theatre is this very sad and sobering truth. As a father, this breaks my heart.

 

[koshergrl]

Was KG owned in this thread and I missed it?

Darn. LOL

Obviously you didn't read the thread.

No surprises there.

 

[koshergrl]

Attacking methodology is the lazy man's way...lol..

The learned community knows that if your methodology sucks, your study sucks. When you use crap methodology, you are generally being dishonest in your approach. Your little article is cute, but completely beside the point, and nothing but a justification of crap *studies* that present falsehoods as reality...and children are the ones who suffer.

The only time an article, link, or review isn't false if it agrees with your view point. The problem is, you have to post blogs by A Mormon who spent his career trying conversion therapy on homosexuals. Your methodology sucks. Most can see it, sorry you and Vox are ignorant loons, and cannot.
You problem KG, is you became educated on false material. Just imagine what you could have been if you actually opened up your mind to information that wasn't based in lunacy? You are smart, but only to a point. You could go a lot farther if you got over being a bigot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's an opinion piece, ditz. My studies blew the retards out of the water, and that's all they have left.

 

[Asclepias]

Just saw this. Either this guy is a bisexual or he is heterosexual. I cant tell but the moms let him have sex with their minor children.

British Lostprophets rock star jailed 35 years for child abuse - CNN.com

 

[koshergrl]

Nice.

We live in a sick society, that refuses to draw lines or define morality.

And this is where it lands you.

 

[Noomi]

Just saw this. Either this guy is a bisexual or he is heterosexual. I cant tell but the moms let him have sex with their minor children.

British Lostprophets rock star jailed 35 years for child abuse - CNN.com

I read about that story a few weeks ago. Was wondering what sentence he would get.

 

[tinydancer]

Just saw this. Either this guy is a bisexual or he is heterosexual. I cant tell but the moms let him have sex with their minor children.

British Lostprophets rock star jailed 35 years for child abuse - CNN.com

This story is horrific and has shaken the rock world in Britain to its very core.

This and the Saville case are right up there on my " Dear Lord can I have a little smiting for this guy please?" list.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Was KG owned in this thread and I missed it?

Darn. LOL

Obviously you didn't read the thread.

No surprises there.

You got embarrassed in this thread. If you chose to NOT acknowledge that, it's fine by me.

I don't go around trying to fix stupid.

 

[koshergrl]

I'm not embarassed at all. I posted a lot of good information that completely put the lie to the APA/homo bloc fantasy that homosexual parenting is just as successful as hetero/married parenting.

You were embarassed, but you, like Luser and noomi, are just too stupid to realize it.

 

[tinydancer]

How does a child recuperate and heal from this kind of abuse inflicted on him or her (in this case a son) by their own freaking father?

Lost in all this political theatre is this very sad and sobering truth. As a father, this breaks my heart.

Early on in this thread I posted that this is the type of story with this level of depravity, that I'm wishing and hoping that his dad was drugs or an alcoholic or at least possessed by demons just to try to make sense of how could a father could do this?