The Supreme Court can already hear the legal drumbeat on same-sex marriage.
The right's favorite anti-gay study is back.
It’s a real relief to see the takedowns pile up in response to Mark Regnerus’s ill-conceived new study, “How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study,” which purports to challenge the claim that there are few differences between children raised in same-sex and heterosexual households.
Yesterday on The Plank, I argued that Mark Regnerus’s NFSS study is not a scientific study of same-sex parenting at all, as it claims to be, because it counts a bizarrely wide range of people as “Lesbian Mothers” and “Gay Fathers.” Over at the National Review, Maggie Gallagher responded incredulously. “Professor Corvino is just plain wrong,” she wrote. “Not a single one of these examples would be included in the lesbian mother or father category in Professor Regnerus’s new study.” Not a single one? Really? Let’s look at my examples.
During the Bush years, when abstinence-only education got an unprecedented boost in federal money, many liberal critics pointed to studies showing such programs failed to delay sexual activity among teenagers and had a negative impact on condom use. But a new study released this week seemed to turn this consensus on its head, as Hanna Rosin explains on the XX Factor: The study reported yesterday that shows a certain abstinence curriculum to be effective was, in fact, an excellent study. Unlike previous studies, it looked at the most updated curriculum.