I mentioned a few minutes ago that Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family admitted in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on DOMA this morning that kids of same-sex couples are put at a disadvantage by laws that discriminate against their parents. This exchange led by Sen. Al Franken is must-see teevee, as Al calmly produces one of the studies that Focus has cited to support their belief that same-sex parents are inferior, explains that it doesn’t remotely say what Focus claims it says, and ends by asserting that based on such misrepresentations, Minnery’s entire testimony is suspect. This is what happens when the Religious Right goes under the microscrope, y’all!
Beautiful!
[h/t JCole]
Love Al Franken! He is just what America needs.
what you said, sarah.
Can we have 534 more of him?
One difference between Minnery and a loose turd in a cesspool is that the loose turd isn’t a vicious bigot.
Al,
In your nice low-key manner, you effectively pinned back Tom Minnery’s ears. He didn’t have a leg to stand on. The FOF people continue to sticky their feet in their mouths and it’s people like you who zip their lips so well. Thanks so much.
I’m proud to be a fellow Minnesotan–formerly of Winona, now living in Cambodia.
Jerry
Franken is wrong. There were zero same-sex married couples in America from 2001-2007.
Minnery said:
“…Children living with their own married, biological, and/or adoptive mothers and fathers were generally healthier and happier; [etc.]…”
Franken said:
“…Isn’t it true, Mr. Minnery, that a married same sex couple that has had or adopted kids would fall under the definition of a nuclear family in the study that you cite?”
No, it is not true.
The years of the study ranged from 2001-2007, when same-sex marriage was not legal in the United States. Therefore, the only married couples in America were couples that included a man and a woman.
The report states:
“… children living in nuclear families consisting of two married adults… were generally healthier [etc.] than children living in non-nuclear families.”
Since same-sex marriage was not legal anywhere in the United States during the time of the study, a same-sex household fell into the non-nuclear category.
Minnery correctly cited the conclusions of the study. Franken is wrong.
See for yourself… “Family Structure and Children’s Health in the United States: Findings from the National Health Survey, 2001-2007″
See page 27 of the document (page 34 of the file)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/60463339/Family-Structure-and-Children%E2%80%99s-Health-in-the-United-States-Findings-From-the-National-Health-Interview-Survey-2001%E2%80%932007
There were zero same-sex married couples in America from 2001-2007
Ralph – you repeatedly state that there were zero same-sex married couples in America from 2001-2007. If I am not mistaken, 2004 falls between the years 2001 and 2007. In 2004 same-sex couples were allowed to legally marry in Massachusetts hence there were married same-sex couples in America within the years the study was done.
Here, Ralph…even the author of the HHS study says that Franken was right.
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/07/21/274975/hhs-study-author-sen-franken-is-right/
Family are those who are existing in the bonds of love on a daily basis and long term commitment to support eachother!
Focus on the Family – from Dobson to Minnery to Stanton to Fryrear to Cushman (and so many more) -has a long record of lying about our families and what the research says about us (some of which is well documented right here on the Truth Wins Out site under “Respect My Research”).
When is the SPLC going to brand them a hate group? It’s long overdue.
Ralph, you got pwnd fast!
Yes, that was sweet Becky.
Ralph is mostly right. There was one state that allowed same sex marriages during the time of the study. The study’s author only said the study “did not exclude same sex parents” but never said that it “included” them. But even if it did, the number would be too low to impact the results Minnery used.
So Franken was mostly wrong and Minnery was mostly right. Unsurprising.
This is another example of the gay agenda getting it wrong and the uncritical media eating it up.
Tom– see #7.
And then educate your self about the hundreds and hundreds of studies which indicate that gay people make parents as good as, if not better than, heterosexuals. you might even want to consult with the major health and phychological and child welfare associations in the country.
Please do not parade ignorance as fact. It only makes you look bad.
I’ve seen #7 but it does not confirm that Franken is right. The person quoted noticeably says same sex parents were not “excluded” but fails to confirm that they were “included”.
In either case, there would be too few of them to matter statistically since same sex marriage was only allowed in 1 state when the research was conducted.
So really Minnery’s usage in that respect was accurate and Franken just pulled a lame stunt that no one in the media figured out.
The gay agenda has a pretty strong hold on the MSM.
Tom made the same comment at Box Turtle Bulletin under the name of Juan. Its hilarious how bigots have no problem with lying and then expect people to take them seriously.
Tom
Either do a study to try to refute this one, or take it up with the author of the original study.
Franken is wrong. The study included few, if any, same sex parents.
Minnery’s interpretation in the context was accurate.
The gay agenda got this wrong. It got the Bachmann denial thing wrong. And it got the barbarian quote wrong.
Priya, how many times do I need to tell you that changing name, email and/or IP address is necessary for me to successfully post? Do you understand that? Does that make sense to you?
The problem, Tom, is that multiple studies have come out since which support Franken’s position, NOT YOURS.
And Tom, if you’re having to change your name and e-mail and IP to post, it means your annoying a*s isn’t welcome here, not because you disagree, but because you’re pathetic, obnoxious and obviously lonely.
And tom, I still want to know…
What exactly is your stake in this debate? Do you work for an anti-gay group? Are you struggling with same sex attractions?
Please just don’t try to convince us that your merely an interested citizen with no agenda.
Juan/kelly/tom/elsa/evil Becky/Omar do you think its ethical to force your way into a home when you’ve been told to leave and not come back?
I, too, have been wondering if Kelly/Est/Dmitri/elsa/omar/evil Becky/Juan/tom’s is employed by an anti-gay outfit. Could it be the Michele Bachmann campaign, or Marcus’ clinic? Could Kelly (and the other aliases) actually be Timothy Wiertzema, the counselor that met with John Becker of TWO?
Whoever it is, that person has seemed obsessively focused on the word “barbarians” and other issues related to Marcus and his sleazy clinic’s agenda.
I wonder where the IP address(es) is/are geographically located.
So, Tom, you’re lying about your identity. Isn’t there one of the 10 Commandments that says you shouldn’t do that. I think it’s the 9th one. And if you have to keep changing your identity and lying about it maybe you should just stop posting. You’re not fooling anyone here and you’re not convincing anyone with your faulty reasoning.
Richard– internal evidence– no, not THAT internal evidence– would indicate that a) this conglomerate is not JeremiahA, but b) like JeremiahA, has enough knowledge/propaganda to make an almost cogent, if fundamentally dishonest, argument.
I’d vote for Exodus or possibly NARTH, FOF, or one o’ dose.
If same-sex couples are not excluded, then how can the study be interpreted as being a comparison of opposite-sex to same-sex families?
Good point, RainbowPhoenix.
OK, I looked at it a bit more and the facts do seem to lean in Franken’s favor. But I don’t think Minnery’s assertions were entirely fallacious. For one, it’s quite possible, even probable, that the “nuclear family” group only included opposite sex parents. It’s telling that Blackwell failed to confirm that it included same sex parents, only that it did not exclude them.
It’s also unclear that Minnery was knowingly mis-leading since “nuclear” does typically refer to mother and father.
But Minnery’s use of the study doesn’t really inform very much. For that, we would need studies that specifically looked at same vs opposite sex parents.
you can only deny reality so long, if you really care anything about reality.
Touche.
Juan/kelly/tom/elsa/evil Becky/Omar from your reluctance to answer my question its clear that even you think its unethical for you to forceably remain when you’ve been told to leave and not come back. Why don’t you listen to what’s left of your conscience and stop forcing your way back in here?
Because then he.she.they would not be getting the paycheck (or the other alternatives, evangelical or exgay brownie points).
So I will ask sgain, badbeKcytom. What is your stake in this and why are you here? Do you work for NARTH, or perhaps the propaganda arm of the holy office
If you cant tell us your stake in this, why would anyone believe you.
C’Mon.
I believe Webster defines a nuclear family still as a mother, a father, and children. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nuclear%20family
Frankin is wrong. If the author did not specify couples as homosexual or heterosexually but used the term nuclear family Minnery is right.
I am sure I will have a lot of hate responses, which seems to make the responder right, which I don’t understand, but I am just listing facts.
Most people here seem to have an agenda. Why is it ok for some to have an agenda and others not?
Tim/Juan/kelly/tom/elsa/evil Becky/Omar Do you think its ethical for you to forceably remain when you’ve been told to leave and not come back? Why don’t you listen to what’s left of your conscience and stop forcing your way back in here?
And Minnery is wrong, he claimed the study proved opposite sex parents were superior to same sex parents when it made no such comparison.
Tim, so what. Webster’s dictionary isn’t what we base laws on. Words and concepts change over time–sometimes it takes the dictionary a while to catch up. The man who authored the study has more authority than you do and he backed Franken up.
Plus Becky, it doesn’t matter how Webster’s defines nuclear family, it matters how the researcher defined it and he defined it as including same sex families.
Hello Priya/Becky,
I am Tim, and the above was my first post. You calling me various names does not make you right; maybe it does in your opinion. Also, No one has asked me to leave, so I have not forced my way back in. So please stop posting that and spamming. I got to read it enough as I read through the post.
Please send me a link to where I can find the author backing up Franken. I would be happy to look at it. I provided a link to back up my claim.
Until I see proof that the author backed Franken I am going to go ahead and believe Webster, over a politician.
Why is it ok for you to make a statement everyone should take as fact and then expect everyone to disregard the fictional book published by Webster, the dictionary?
Thank you
Tim
OK, I found a link for Blackwell’s statement;
“Sen. Franken is right,” the lead author of the study told POLITICO. The survey did not exclude same-sex couples, said Debra L. Blackwell, Ph.D., nor did it exclude them from the “nuclear family” category provided their family met the study’s definition.
The study’s definition of nuclear family is: “one or more children living with two parents who are married to one another and are each biological or adoptive parents of all the children in the family.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59495.html
I would like to see the raw data. I am curious why Blackwell did not state that there were or were not homosexual couples in the study. It does describe a nuclear family as married parents. The first homosexual marriages, in the US, where allowed in Massachusetts in 2004. Hopefully she follows up the study, and the statement, and proves that the study included Homosexuals or not.
Tim, its secondary as to whether the study included gays or not. The fact is that Minnery claimed it proved gays were not good parents when it did not compare heterosexual parents with same sex parents.
And Tim, I don’t know whether to believe you or not when you claim not to be the Tom/kelly/dmitri/omar/evil becky/elsa character.
The bigots on your side regularly show up here pretending to be multiple people, I have no reason to believe this was your first post.
You don’t know where I stand. I was starting to feel bad about my first post because nobody called me names.
I just was stating the facts I could find. Most people blindly believe people when they say what they want to believe. I came upon this post and that is what it looked like to me. The question whether or not the study included homosexuals is still unanswered. Franken has no more proof than Minnery has.
Even if I think homosexuals should not be allowed to marry I would not be a bigot. I would just have a different position than you. You are the one casting judgment, not me.
Thank you
Tim
Dear Tim,
I don’t post on this site often, but you seem to have some difficulty in grasping how scientific studies are carried out- I hope I can help clear things up!
Though in general, a good rule of thumb to follow, is to listen to what the original author of the study says. If the researcher says someone discussing their work has it correct- then chances are the researcher (having authored the original work) is in a position to know.
Let’s say you and I are having an argument about which is a healthier food, apples or oranges. If you tell me, “Dr. Smith composed a study and found that oranges are more nutritious than apples!” Well, then you have made a claim that can be verified.
If upon reading the study I find that Dr. Smith’s study did not compare apples to oranges but instead he only wanted to find out the vitamin content in fruit…well then you would have lied about someone else’s work.
The point I’m making here is that studies are designed with goals in mind. Unless the goal of the study is explicitly comparing two groups of things, it is highly unlikely that one would be able to draw a conclusion about which is better.
So to determine if same-sex parents are worse than opposite sex parents, we should devise a study look at markers of childhood development.
And as luck would have it, please follow this link to a study that explicitly compared children born and raised by lesbian parents to heterosexual counterparts:
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.html
Best of luck,
Kai_Jones
Hello Kai,
“Sen. Franken is right,” the lead author of the study told POLITICO. The survey did not exclude same-sex couples, said Debra L. Blackwell, Ph.D., nor did it exclude them from the “nuclear family” category provided their family met the study’s definition.
The study’s definition of nuclear family is: “one or more children living with two parents who are married to one another and are each biological or adoptive parents of all the children in the family.”
That is the researcher’s statement. What was Franken fight about? Perhaps;
“The study defines a nuclear family as ‘one or more children living with two parents who are married to one another and are each biological or adoptive parents to all the children in the family,’” Franken righteously read.
Or
“And I frankly don’t really know how we can trust the rest of your testimony if you are reading studies these ways,” Franken concluded.
Or a few other possible statements by Franken.
Fact is Blackwell never states that the study includes homosexual families.
Then let’s take your statements;
Let’s say you and I are having an argument about which is a healthier food, apples or oranges. If you tell me, “Dr. Smith composed a study and found that oranges are more nutritious than apples!” Well, then you have made a claim that can be verified.
If upon reading the study I find that Dr. Smith’s study did not compare apples to oranges but instead he only wanted to find out the vitamin content in fruit…well then you would have lied about someone else’s work.
The study you link to, http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.html, does not specify if the control group children were born to heterosexual couples that had a child naturally or by artificial insemination. If the heterosexual couples were artificial inseminated, we would then have a good comparison. It states they were compared to a group of matched controls. Therefore, I am not sure we are comparing apples to oranges. It appears to me that they compared children brought into this world by a lesbian couple that spent the time, effort, and money for artificial insemination to a group of matched controls. It looks to me, according to the Discovery article http://discovermagazine.com/discover/2011/jan-feb/88 , that the lesbian couples new they were in a study, their kids probably did also. It then states they were compared to their peers. Is that a group of matched controls? It finishes up with;
The results have appeared in legal briefs, documentaries, and research papers. “The study is continually brought up to counteract non-science-based allegations against same-sex marriage or adoption,” Gartrell says. She admits that there is more research to be done, however. By including only mothers who sought donor insemination before it was largely accepted, the study does not reflect the diversity of female couples raising children today.
Also a study by U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study sounds like they might be looking for a predetermined outcome. If I cited studies by, lets use Focus on the Family due to the start of this discussion, I am not sure anybody would give it much time and say it was bias. I would believe that this study has bias also. There is a reason consultants and universities do studies, there would be much less bias.
By the way, I haven’t stated once that I thought the study proved heterosexual couples do better raising kids than homosexual couples. I would agree with your statement.
So to determine if same-sex parents are worse than opposite sex parents, we should devise a study look at markers of childhood development.
I just have not seen that study yet.
Thank you,
Tim
Dear Tim,
First, you’re confusing the name of the study with the researchers’ affiliation. It was carried out with researchers from UCSF and University of Amsterdam. Though I would find it quite funny if there was an organization called ‘U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study’ as I think that’s oddly specific.
Also, you’re right I would object to a non-peer reviewed study being touted as evidence. As the journal Pediatrics has the highest impact factor in the field, which means it is the hardest journal in which to publish due to a more rigorous peer-review process. So it’s generally safe to say that something that has made it into the journal of Pediatrics is widely accepted in the pediatric community. And as the study I linked to concluded, “Our findings show that adolescents who have been raised since birth in planned lesbian families demonstrate healthy psychological adjustment and thus provide no justification for restricting access to reproductive technologies or child custody on the basis of the sexual orientation of the parents” it is safe to say that sexual orientation does not affect the quality of parenting. Or in other words, same-sex parents are just as likely to raise healthy children as opposite sex parents.
Secondly, other reports carried out using the same metric have found no difference in the social-psychological health of children conceived through donor insemination to the health of children adopted or conceived naturally. So the controls were matched in the proper way.
http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/8/5/788.short
Thirdly, I would suspect that families that are being studied do in fact know they are being studied. If they have no knowledge that someone is collecting private and personal data about them to be published…it is generally considered illegal. In any case, this is why the peer-review process is so important as it affirms whether the leading experts agree with the controls used, and whether the study is biased.
So in conclusion, for the aforementioned reasons, this study did in fact compare lesbian parenting to heterosexual parenting.
Which would make me feel that Senator Franken was…right. Actually, just to further help clear up any misunderstandings, I’d like to point out that if Senator Franken was correct about any of the statements you’ve posted it would cast serious doubt on the testimony he received.
Best,
Kai_Jones
So, Tim. you still haven’t answered my question. What is your stake in this? Do you have a job for NARTH otr NOM or the Holy Office? Are you ex-gay?
Hi Ben,
This is the first time you have asked me any questions. I have nothing at stake. I am not ex-gay. What do you have at stake here Tom?
Hello Kai,
Please read http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.html paragraph 8.
The data that Gartrell and Bos analyzed came from the U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study
http://www.nllfs.org/
Maybe it was conducted by a university. I would think the website would end in .edu or .gov though. I can’t find anything to prove it was or it wasn’t. I would be very happy to look at a link showing what organization actually did the study if you know where one is. I will look when I have more time.
Control group definitions in the article by Time
the normative sample of age-matched controls
a group of matched controls
their peers
The author of the study
The results have appeared in legal briefs, documentaries, and research papers. “The study is continually brought up to counteract non-science-based allegations against same-sex marriage or adoption,” Gartrell says. She admits that there is more research to be done, however. By including only mothers who sought donor insemination before it was largely accepted, the study does not reflect the diversity of female couples raising children today.
Last paragraph http://discovermagazine.com/discover/2011/jan-feb/88
The author seems to accept that there may be a margin of error.
I would not say you were wrong in your conclusion Kai after reading the article. But I am not sure the first study was comparing apples to apples. I would still like to see a study that compared children of homosexual couples with an actual control group of children of heterosexual couples. I would think one could find some general statistics about children of homosexual couples to compare with general statistics of heterosexual couples. I will see if I can find any when I have time.
I just want people to think, and not believe anything somebody tells them just because they want to believe it.
Thank you,
Tim
Tim said “Even if I think homosexuals should not be allowed to marry I would not be a bigot. I would just have a different position than you. You are the one casting judgment, not me.”.
If you weren’t opposed to marriage equality you’d be quick to say so. You cowardly try to hide the obvious because you are a bigot and you don’t want to admit it. I’m not casting judgement, I’m just stating the facts.
Tim, people here do think. Actually people here think a lot. And no, we don’t accept what people tell us just because we want to believe it, we accept it because we know it’s true first through our own experience and then by actual data. You see, Frenken didn’t accept what Minnery said just because he wanted to believe it–he actually did some research and found out Minnery was wrong. It seems to me that you want to believe something and so you’re finding specious “studies” to back you up. Most of the studies cited by these anti-gay groups are either really sketchy (check out the Box Turtle Bulletin for some great analysis) or the people who conducted the studies say that the way the anti-gay groups are using them are not supported by the data. You need to stop just believeing things because you want to.
Thank you,
Daniel
Tim said “I just want people to think, and not believe anything somebody tells them just because they want to believe it.”.
No you don’t. You just want an excuse to justify your anti-gay feelings. We don’t think gays are just as good parents as heterosexuals because we want to believe it, we believe it because dozens and dozens, perhaps hundreds of studies on same sex parents have all reached the same conclusion:
Children of gay and lesbian parents do just as well, if not better than parents of opposite sex parents. The APA lists a small portion of such research.
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/parenting.aspx
You can nitpick any particular study and whine about how its imperfect and therefore you reject its conclusions, but when every single study reaches the same conclusion and you deny it then you’re just a bigot.