Is no differences theory correct?

No differences theory: The no difference theory states ON BALANCE children of gay parents—married or not—have little differences then those raised by married heterosexual couples. "The widely circulated claim that parents engaged in same-sex relationships do just as well as other parents at raising children—a claim widely known today as the "no differences" thesis."[1]

This is not about gay adoption laws, this is merely if homosexuals on balance raise "no difference" kids. 

Now, a mere Google of the subject gives you an onslaught of  gay parenting papers that they are "not" different. However, these papers are usually dated to the nightnties. And these papers have been discredited. Two sociologists note, “We conclude that the methods used in these studies are so flawed that these studies prove nothing. Therefore, they should not be used in legal cases to make any argument about ‘homosexual vs. hetero- sexual’ parenting. Their claims have no basis.”[2]

All of these studies had unclear data sets, hidden data (would not give them out for research), bias, too small of a sample size, non-random samples, etc. All of the studies had at least two or more methodological problems meaning there is  “no basis” for the theory. 

In 2004, another analysis gathered the same results as the report in 2001. They have gathered many experts in their law review who really say no conclusions can be made at the current time. They all agree, however, children are raised best with biological parents. In many court cases they show the judges who ordered the research for a specific case usually argue no decision can be made from the evidence. They conclude:

Studies comparing children of single lesbian mothers with children of single heterosexual mothers cannot credible be used to contradict the weight of social science evidence in general on the benefits of the married, intact biological family over alternative family forms [3].

The review also cites many studies not looking directly into gay parenting, however the evidence does conclude children to best with a mother and a father. Two men might make good fathers, neither can be a mother. 

Now many can argue sure, the evidence is flawed, but I have no evidence myself and, therefore, my argument is invalid. Here is the problem: I have evidence. 

Many have argued lesbians are the best parents (specifically lesbians). However, the social science concludes this, “something unique to fathers that provides children with different opportunities to regulate their emotions”. Mothers, too, have different effects on a child's outcome. She acts an an equal, unlike fathers who act like teachers, which help grow a child's emotional stability. Further, even if the woman is lesbian, her nature is to be more lenient unlike fathers which are, on balance, more strict then women. Nearly all evidence (just looking at father/mother differences) have shown without one a child grows differently. And this is a fact. Two men might be fathers, neither a good mother, two women good mothers, neither a good father [4].

 Further, it has been observed homosexuals (even when married) are less stable. Children like stability. Much of the time these homosexuals are previously married and them coming out of the closet leads to much turmoil. It has also been shown the absence of a mother or father (even if it is temporary) harms the children’s development.  After controlling for marriage laws (he has a weighted system controlling for “possible” marriage “discrimination”). He found even after controlling for marriage those families where much less stable. And as he noted “children like stability”. These homosexuals have more affairs, fights, higher parent molestation rates (sadly), and more of them had gender problems. Most of the population is straight, only 3% is gay, and the study found much higher homosexual rates coming from these homes. This means, likely, these parents can affect these children’s outcomes. Whether this is good or bad is irrelevant—it is still a difference—and I would prefer not get into a debate on whether being gay is ok. Further, he has found based on his interviews a statistically significant difference amongst the groups of their perceived negative impacts. Family of origin negative impacts when comparing heterosexuals and homosexuals had a significance of (P < 0.05) which is significant in this study. Overall academic achievement was also lower in homosexual groups [5].

When I cite this, many argue the APA (a highly credible source) has argued no difference theory is correct. However, the studies the APA claims to be fact are weak. 26 of 59 have no comparison groups. When a group existed, rich homosexuals where compared with poor single parent families (leading to bias), none of their studies had a large enough sample size to be statistically significant (small sample size basically destroys its credibility...), the definitive claim the APA has is not well supported by the studies [6].

Note on sources: all of them are accessible online.

[1] http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/06/5640

[2]  Robert Lerner and Althea K. Nagai, “No Basis: What the Studies Don’t Tell Us About Same Sex Parenting” Washington: Ethics and Public Policy Center, (2001)

[3] Maggie Gallagher and Joshua K. Baker “Do Moms And Dads Matter? Evidence From The Social Sciences On Family structure And The Best Interests Of The Child” Margins Law Journal, (2004)

[4]  A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D. “Gender Complimentary and Child-rearing: Where Tradition and Science agree” QUINNEY COLLEGE OF LAW, Vol. 6, (2005) 

[5] Mark Regnerus, “How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures Study,” Social Science Research Vol 41, Issue 4 (July 2012)

[6] Loren Marks, “Same-sex parenting and children's outcomes: A closer examination of the American Psychological Association's brief on lesbian and gay parenting,” Social Science Research Vol 41, Issue 4 (July 2012)