Hate group leader loves NOM's fraudulent study

Peter LaBarbera

Editor's note - It's one of those two post mornings. After reading this post on how the recent fraudulent study on gay parenting has a new fan, pan down (and hold your stomach) to read how the Traditional Values Coalition continues to attack the transgender community).

The recent anti-gay parenting study by University of Texas researcher Mark Regnerus (which was bought and paid for by National Organization for Marriage founder Robert George) has been receiving a lot of deserved condemnation.

And now it has received praise which pretty much should have the same effect as the criticisms.

Our friend, Porno Pete LaBarbera of the hate group Americans for Truth has voiced support for it. However, what he says brings home the simple fact as to how deceptive and dangerous the study is:

LaBarbera says the University of Texas research is accurate and very thorough -- adding that states that encourage homosexual adoption are wrong. The study provides "very tragic data," he says.

"For example, you're more likely basically to get molested in a household led by two lesbians. You're more likely to have sexually transmitted diseases. You're more likely to identify as homosexual. You're more likely to be on public assistance," he lists.

"[And] you're more likely to have been forced to have sex unwillingly," he concludes. "Big difference [there] -- 8 percent in a normal household versus 31 percent in a household led by lesbians." In addition, one raised in a homosexual or lesbian household is more likely to have thoughts of suicide.

One would almost think that LaBarbera was practically drooling when he said these things. But his comments are false.

Again, let us repeat several facts about the study via Media Matters:

 1. The Study Doesn’t Compare Married Gay Parents To Married Heterosexual Parents.

2. The Author Admits The Study Doesn’t Establish Causation Between Same-Sex Parenting And Negative Outcomes. - Now this fact is very important because LaBarbera is accusing lesbian households of all sorts of negative outcomes on children. But Regnerus, the study's author clearly said:

I recognize, with Paul and Cynthia, that organizations may utilize these findings to press a political program. And I concur with them that that is not what data come prepared to do. Paul offers wise words of caution against it, as did I in the body of the text. Implying causation here—to parental sexual orientation or anything else, for that matter—is a bridge too far.

3. The Study Arbitrarily Ignores Overlaps In Its Subpopulations. 

4. The Study Doesn’t Accurately Define Gay And Lesbian Parents.

 5. The Study’s Author And Funders Have An Agenda. 

The sad fact of the matter is that Regnerus's study is bogus, but neither LaBarbera nor others who cite it (and I'm sure that there will be others) don't really care. As long as there is something on record to justify their prejudices against the gay community, that's all that matters to them.