Response to media matters Carlos Maza

Carlos Maza in his media matters column criticisms FOX news for citing a recent study which has claimed homosexuals are not the parents we thought they where. He argued his data shows the opposite to the APA's no difference claim and notes heterosexual parents are indeed superior.

He cites examples of poor methodology, his source? Equality matters. He is titled a researcher, but citing that really disqualifies him. Even the FRC websites cite credible studies making them superior to other think tanks. His main criticism is its failed comparison. But I doubt he has even read the study!  Regnerus actually controls for the marriage gap through regression, and therefore needn't compare them the "right" way. Now, I agree with the assumption this should not be THE evidence, as more studies are needed on the subject. He quotes Regnerus out of context. In reality he said he just is a starting point. He never said his study was false. However, studies looking into his brief note, "Regnerus (2012) provides convincing evidence that various young adult outcomes are associated with having a parent who had a same-sex relationship."[1]

Sure, its not the evidence or holy grail, but it is a start and is the best study on the issue. In reality, his study is supported by basic social science anyway. So really his theory cannot either be treated as gold nor like dirt. It should be, however, considered the best we have for now.

Now, the article then criticises the fox news writer:

1. His first criticism is arguing the man is biased and should not cite pseudoscience. However, his argument is the one using pseudoscience. The Regnerus has gotten much praise and criticism, however all of these criticisms are actually either showing the readers of the study cannot read (I doubt he even read the study). Basically, the study itself refutes most criticism. A great deal of its refuted by Osborne [1]. 

2. He then says the writer ignores this "credible" evidence the gay agenda has. The Fox news author rightly states we need the data that doesn't exist for no differences theory. However, all previous studies have methodological problems such as almost literally no sample size, bias authors (homosexual authors), statistically insignificant results. I will just make bullet points:

• Unclear hypothesis or research design


• Missing or inadequate comparison groups


• Self-constructed, unreliable and invalid measurements


• Non-random sample sizes, much of the time other participants asked other friends to join or advertisements put up


• Samples too small to get any valid results (all studies had this problem except Cameron 1996)


• Missing or inadequate statistical analysis [2]

 In another analysis:

• here is no nationally representative sample. Most of them are non-random, selective, etc.


• They also express concern about small sample sizes as homosexuals are a small group, and although many studies have moderately sized samples they too have the non-random problem.


• And this study has even worse concerns: the outcomes are biased as they only look into psychology and not into the child’s well being like sociologists would look into (many of the unisex parenting advocates arepsychologists).


• And another great concern is that there is no long term studies, they are all short term. All of them are questions saying how are you now… None of them (or at least ones that claim “no difference”) follow them to adult hood.[3]

 Where is the "credible" in evidence?

If you are interested in the truth, either use blogs with accurate citations and credible studies (like this), and stop citing equality matters.....



[1] Cynthia Osborne "Further comments on the papers by Marks and Regnerus," Social Science Research, vol. 41, issue 4, (July 2012)
[2] Robert Lerner, Ph.D., and Althea K. Nagai, Ph.D. “No Basis: What the Studies Don’t tell us about Same-Sex Parenting,” Marriage Law Project, Washington, D.C. (January 2001)
[3] aggie 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)