Minnesota For Marriage today released what can only be classified as a desperate attempt to sway voters in their losing proposition to ban same-sex marriage in their constitution. The Minnesota anti-gay organization, which uses Kally Yanta, a former journalist to spew anti-gay falsehoods, has now decided to pull out all the stops and use the fraudulent, flawed Regnerus anti-gay parenting “study” that The New Civil Rights Movement’s own Scott Rose has meticulous dissected and debunked — finding what many would call corruption behind it.
In this new video titled, ”Children raised by a same-sex parent are significantly worse off compared to those raised by their traditionally married parents” — which can only be characterized as a blatent falsehood — Yanta says “there are very significant highly-negative outcomes” between children raised by a mother and father and by a parent who has had a same-sex relationship.
Of course, as we all know, the Regnerus study, paid for by NOM-linked ultra-conservative groups like the Witherspoon Institute, is a fraud. But that not stopping Yanta from spreading the lies that even its embattled author has said should not be used.
NOM, the National Organization For Marriage, is one of three anti-gay organizations that make up a supposedly “broad coalition of leaders, both inter-faith and people outside the religious community, who support the Minnesota Marriage Amendment and asked the Legislature to place it on the ballot.”
Yanta claims the study’s reviewers “support the quality and integrity of the research.”
Well, 200 sociologists who signed a letter would totally disagree.
Even the person the study’s publisher retained to examine the study called it, and I quote, “bullshit.”
Friends:
We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.
Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!
{ 8 comments }
I have a nice little story about homophobic people like you
the word homophobic doesn't make sense
do you know why? It's because you aren't scared
you're an asshole.
An ignorant, selfish little asshole who thinks people don't have the right to be with someone not based on their genitals.
They are with someone based on just personality, so I bet they're much happier together.
And I bet they're better parents, because from what I know
When gay couples want a kid, it's a hard fucking process.
They have to go through the process of either stressful adoption planning, or finding a good surrogate mother or sperm donor.
When they do this, they WANT a kid, and it's never a teen pregnancy mistake. Saying they're worse parents is absolute bullshit and I think the only reason that's being said is because you're ignorant and hateful of these innocent people. The only thing that might affect their parenting is when they're (ie) walking outside on a normal day with their kids just trying to have a fun time when people start throwing shit at them calling them homos and queers. How would you feel if you were just trying to have a good day, and you got assaulted just for being different? I mean how stupid is that?
People have so much ignorance today it's hard to comprehend.
I tried to post a comment on their Facebook page, but they blocked me out. Apparently, they don't approve of freedom of speech. But they have no problem lying about the gay community. — I was able to send them a friendly Tweet though. Calling someone a liar doesn't take that many characters.
The claim that the peer reviewers approved of the study is invalid because the peer reviewers had documented fiduciary conflicts of interest in accepting assignments as peer reviewers. It is objectively true that the Regnerus study did not receive ethical and appropriate professional peer review. The scientific failings of the study's methodology have been noted by many prominent science world figures, including the President of the American Sociological Association and the editor-in-chief of the world's leading science journal for family studies.
Why wouldn't this group use the sham Regnerus study to support their fraudulent claims? They have a long history of lying and trying to normalize hatred and bigotry with Ms. Yantas soothing proclamations. What a vile group.
Not like this pertains to the article at hand, but did anyone else notice that their abbreviation is MFM? I mean, just saying….
"The claim that the peer reviewers approved of the study is invalid because the peer reviewers had documented fiduciary conflicts of interest in accepting assignments as peer reviewers."
You have no knowledge whatever of the identities of the peer reviewers.
You have crafted this assertion out of thin air.
He found that Wilcox was not only a paid consultant but a peer reviewer in a Freedom of Information Request.
What's a "same-sex parent"?????
Comments on this entry are closed.