Fascinating findings from a Harris Interactive poll of 1,190 U.S. LGBT adults who are registered to vote and say they are absolutely or very certain to vote in the 2012 presidential election. Including:
12% say they oppose same-sex marriage.
Only 6% say same-sex marriage is the "most important" issue for how they will vote in the presidential election.
Of those who live in a state that has gay marriage, 67% said they have not gotten civilly married nor do they intend to in the near future.
In this latest video from the Minnesota Marriage Minute, Kalley Yanta explains:
"Gay marriage advocates have maintained for a long time that there are no differences in outcomes for children raised by same sex parents as compared with those raised by a married mom and dad but two important new academic studies show that the no differences claim is false."
A cake shop protest organized by local gay groups over the weekend turned out to be a flop, with barely a baker’s dozen worth of individuals showing up to the event. The protest was organized after it was reported that the owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood refused to bake a “rainbow-layered masterpiece” celebrating a gay couple’s upcoming nuptials. The protest was anticipated to have a “massive” turnout.
After the gay couple described the cake that they wanted to order, bakery owner Jack Phillips told them that it was against his personal faith to supply cakes for gay weddings. He cited principles laid out in the Bible as his reasons for refusing their request. Phillips also made it clear that his store would never turn away anyone for being gay or lesbian and that he had no problem baking cakes for other events like birthday parties or graduations.
At the scheduled time of the protest on Saturday, approximately fourteen middle-aged men and women gathered across the street from the bakery with signs and balloons to protest the store. Standing with posters that read “Open Your Heart” and “Gays, Let Them Eat Cake,” the protest lasted for about an hour. Only five people had RSVP’ed to attend the protest on the event’s Facebook page.
... on one of the protest sites, a man named Thom Seehafter called for the use of a modified form of water-boarding to be used against the owners of the bakery.
“These business owners should have their heads held under water in a toilet,” he wrote.
Others resorted to name calling, referring to the owner as “ugly”, “anti-gay and anti-shower”, a “tool”, and claiming that he “looks like a pervert.” Some even called for “his human rights to be taken away.” Harassment techniques were also encouraged, with a plea sent around for everyone to “kick it up a notch” and to call the bakery to yell “shame on you” three times into the phone.
During the protest, a group of nearly fifty individuals, ranging from a two year old to a woman in her nineties, crowded around the store to buy cookies, cakes, and other pastries.
These days in Brazil two women are simultaneously walking down the aisle to marry the same man.
The BBC is reporting that a union between three people, two women and a man, in Sao Paulo is causing major outrage.
The publication says that public notary Claudia do Nascimento Domingues, based in the city of Tupa, feels the couple is entitled to the same family rights that traditional couples have. She added that currently there is no law that averts the union between the threesome.
Still, religious groups are irate over the three-way marriage and Brazilian attorney Regina Beatriz Tavares da Silva told the BBC that the union is “absurd and totally illegal.”
A married woman whose husband donated sperm without her knowledge is calling for clinics to be forced to ask for a wife's consent.
The unnamed mother-of-one from Surrey said she feared that children fathered with the sperm – who would be half-brothers or sisters of her son – may one day 'disrupt' the family by getting in touch.
She has written to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority calling for guidelines on sperm donation to include the spouse's views – and says the sperm should be treated as a joint 'marital asset'.
A controversial ruling in 2005 meant all children born through sperm donation – up to ten families are allowed per donor – have the right to trace their biological father when they reach adulthood.
In her heartfelt letter to the fertility watchdog, she told how her husband had donated sperm against her wishes after suffering Post Traumatic Stress Disorder following the birth of their child.
But if the children he fathers – to help infertile couples or single women – contacted her in the future, she would 'not feel able to push them away'.
The businesswoman said: 'I am personally in this situation with my husband having donated sperm against my wishes when he was suffering from PTSD.
From the 2012 Democratic National Committee website:
Freedom to Marry. We support the right of all families to have equal respect, responsibilities, and protections under the law. We support marriage equality and support the movement to secure equal treatment under law for same-sex couples. We also support the freedom of churches and religious entities to decide how to administer marriage as a religious sacrament without government interference.
We oppose discriminatory federal and state constitutional amendments and other attempts to deny equal protection of the laws to committed same-sex couples who seek the same respect and responsibilities as other married couples. We support the full repeal of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and the passage of the Respect for Marriage Act.
Michael Petrelis accuses Freedom to Marry of engaging in a double-standard when it comes to transparency:
Put aside the respective agendas of Evan Wolfson and his gay marriage group Freedom to Marry, and Brian Brown of the oppositional National Organization for Marriage, because I want to focus on the matter of transparency at both groups.
Almost two-years back, I blogged about FTM not having any 990s posted on their site and it was due to the fact that it lacked its own tax exempt status from the IRS, and that the Astrea Foundation was FTM's fiscal sponsor.
... TM now has 501c3 and 501c4 tax statuses, and each arm of the group now has filed their first and only IRS 990s, however, in a surprising act of opaqueness FTM doesn't post them on-site. At their annual reports page, pictured, FTM states one has to file a written request in order to inspect the 990s. Any suggestion that Wolfson can keep his 990s off-site and still claim transparency is laughable.
Essence News Editor Wendy Wilson was in Tampa last week to "find out exactly why [African Americans in attendance] aren't backing President Obama in 2012. Here is part of her interview with Rev. William Owens:
ESSENCE: Why are you attending the RNC, and what’s the message you want to send here?
REV. WILLIAM OWENS: We are here but we will also be at the Democratic National Convention next week. We want it to be known that the African American community is for marriage between a man and a woman. I’m not dealing with any other issue here because as the Black family deteriorates, none of the other issues will matter. The President has gone down the wrong road. He’s in the White House because of the Blacks who gave their lives during the civil rights movement. If it wasn’t for them he wouldn’t be there, and yet he caters to less than three percent of the population only because they can give him that Hollywood money. He is taking the Black vote for granted.
Reuters as a company is pro-gay marriage. Has AP now joined the club? How could a reporter get the basic facts so wrong -- and yet so exactly what Dan Savage wanted published?
A Washington state official has called an Associated Press report misleading for suggesting that the government was banning the Catholic Church from taking collections to support a traditional marriage initiative.
An AP report Tuesday entitled “Catholic churches can’t collect donations to overturn gay marriage law, Washington state rules” was widely cited on homosexual news blogs and other outlets this week. Catholic Church leaders in the state are preparing to take collections in September supporting a “no” vote on R-74, which will appear on the November ballot to give voters a chance to endorse or reject the state’s same-sex “marriage” law.
The report was followed by a Thursday report spotlighting Protect Marriage Washington for supporting the allegedly illegal gift method, with the headline: “Washington anti-gay marriage law group encourages ‘bundling’ donations.” The second article noted that state officials planned to send a letter to church officials and Protect Marriage on the issue.
But when Lori Anderson, a spokeswoman for the state’s Public Disclosure Commission, was asked whether the agency had ruled against the Catholic Church’s planned collection, she responded, “Oh gosh, no.”
...“The strange part was, we only read this in the press. The press contacted us and we said, ‘What?’” she said.
One source pointed to a blog article in Seattle’s prominent alternative newspaper The Stranger, where LGBT activist Dan Savage is editorial director, that had questioned the legality of the campaign one day before the first AP story was published. -- LifeSiteNews
The Chronicle of Higher Education:
Here are highlights from the new paper [by Mark Regnerus] (which is unfortunately not available free online, though you can find the abstract and some tables here):
Regnerus calls the audit of his study—by Darren E. Sherkat of Southern Illinois University at Carbondale—a “rather uncommon and disturbing experience in social-science research.” He writes that Sherkat “has long harbored negative sentiment about me.”
Regnerus writes that the criticism of his decision to label parents “lesbian mothers” and “gay fathers,” regardless of whether or for how long their children lived with them, is “the most reasonable criticism” made of the paper. He says that, “[i]n hindsight,” he wishes he had given them different labels. “I recognize that the acronyms LM and GF are prone to conflate sexual orientation … with same-sex relationship behavior.”
Regnerus cites a study of same-sex marriages in Norway and Sweden that found that “the divorce risk is higher in same-sex marriages” to bolster his case that same-sex relationships are less stable.
He writes that the “science here remains young” and contends that previous studies that have shown “no difference” between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples ought to have a “stronger burden of proof.”
Regnerus concludes the paper with the following sentence:
"Until much larger random samples can be drawn and evaluated, the probability-based evidence that exists—including additional NFSS [theNew Family Structures Study, Regnerus's project to study same-sex families] analyses herein—suggests that the biologically intact two-parent household remains an optimal setting for the long-term flourishing of children."
From their press release:
A coalition of the nation's most prominent conservative social issue groups (www.lifeandmarriagecoalition.com) today announced that they are coordinating efforts in Ohio, Iowa and North Carolina to talk about the importance of preserving marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and supporting the sanctity of human life. The groups hope to influence voters in key swing states that Barack Obama carried in 2008.
"This is a historic coming together of premiere social conservative groups to coordinate efforts in three swing states most likely to determine the outcome of this fall's presidential election," saidTony Perkins, president of FRC Action, the legislative action arm of the Family Research Council."Many supporters of life and marriage do not realize that their votes could determine the outcome of the election, which in turn could determine the future of marriage and life in this country. We're working together to ensure they understand that President Obama is anti-marriage and anti-life."
The Life and Marriage Coalition includes FRC Action, Susan B. Anthony List, National Organization for Marriage, American Principles in Action, Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee and Common Sense Issues. Combined efforts will include independent expenditures for radio advertisements, billboards, phone and bus tour events designed to educate and mobilize socially conservative voters in the three targeted states.
Carl L. Bankston III, professor of sociology at Tulane Universty in New Orleans and prolific author writes at the Moral Liberal blog:
Two of the greatest problems in social research are confirmation bias and the attribution of causal relations among concepts. The first refers to the tendency to find results that confirm our preconceived ideas. This may be more or less conscious: since researchers “know” that diversity contributes to educational achievement, they will look for evidence that demonstrates a relationship that is, to their minds, self-evident. It may be unconscious: our values and perspectives may shape how we decide to define issues. I see examples of confirmation bias every day in published and unpublished research, and in the casual statements of researchers.
... A look at the internet discussions generated by the persecution of Regnerus will show hysterical denunciations of this researcher and everyone associated with him as “homophobic bigots” who seek to “demonize” gays. I was heartened to see a defense of Regnerus signed by a number of prominent social scientists and an excellent analysis of the affair by Notre Dame Sociologist Christian Smith. But the attacks on Regnerus don’t just threaten to damage the career of a single researcher. They send a message to all researchers: if you don’t follow the prescribed line on every controversial issue, the activists will get out the tar and feathers.
Karla Dial writes:
The University of Texas at Austin announced Wednesday that a sociologist who has been excoriated by some in the media over a study showing that parents’ homosexual relationships can have negative effects on children is innocent of academic misconduct
Dr. Mark Regnerus made headlines in June, when his study was published in the widely respected journal Social Science Research. According to his findings, children raised by homosexual parents are more likely than those raised by married heterosexual parents to suffer from poor impulse control, depression and suicidal thoughts, require mental health therapy; identify themselves as homosexual; choose cohabitation; be unfaithful to partners; contract sexually transmitted diseases; be sexually molested; have lower income levels; drink to get drunk; and smoke tobacco and marijuana.
As a result, a gay-activist blogger accused Regnerus of academic fraud, demanding in July that the university release all his research material and emails with fellow sociologists.
Administrators conducted an exhaustive pre-investigation to determine whether a more comprehensive one would be necessary — including hiring a consultant who formerly ran the Office of Research Integrity at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to oversee the process.
After sequestering all of Regnerus’s correspondence and conducting both written and oral interviews with him and his accuser, Scott Rosensweig, Research Integrity Officer Robert Peterson wrote in an Aug. 24 memorandum to administrators, “None of the allegations of scientific misconduct put forth … were substantiated either by physical data, written materials, or by information provided during the interviews.
“Since no evidence was provided to indicate that the behavior at issue rose to a level of scientific misconduct, no formal investigation is warranted.”
You can read the full report here (PDF).
A University of Texas faculty member did not commit scientific misconduct in connection with his study that raised doubts about gay parenting, the university has concluded.
As a result, no formal investigation of allegations against Mark Regnerus, an associate professor of sociology, is warranted, UT announced Wednesday.
"I think it's a just and wise decision, and I'm certainly pleased with it," Regnerus told the American-Statesman in an email. "It was a thorough and fair process, and conducted professionally."
Regnerus found that the adult children of gay parents reported significantly different, and often worse, life experiences than the children of married, heterosexual biological parents.
... After consulting with a four-member advisory panel of senior UT faculty members, Peterson found no falsification of data, plagiarism or other serious ethical breaches constituting scientific misconduct.
An official University of Texas at Austin inquiry has found that Professor Mark Regnerus, the author of a research study on the effects of same-sex relationships upon children, “did not commit scientific misconduct” as alleged by a homosexual activist who disagreed with the study’s findings.
“America’s universities should always serve as truth-seeking, free marketplaces of ideas,” said Senior Legal Counsel David Hacker. “Disagreeing with a study’s conclusions is not grounds for allegations of scientific misconduct; therefore, we are not surprised that those accusations were found to be baseless. This comprehensive, peer-reviewed research study consisted of leading scholars and researchers across disciplines and ideological lines in a spirit of civility and reasoned inquiry. We agree with the UT-Austin inquiry’s conclusion that the academy is the appropriate place for debate about this study.”
The New Family Structures Study suggests that differences exist in outcomes for young adults raised in various environments with different family experiences. UT-Austin conducted an official inquiry after activist blogger Scott Rosensweig (who goes by “Scott Rose”) accused Regnerus of scientific misconduct in the study and in how the results were reported in a scientific article about the study’s findings. Because the inquiry found the allegations to be unsubstantiated, UT-Austin says it will not conduct a formal investigation.
