Univ. of Texas Prof. Regnerus says Michigan judge showed bias in ruling allowing same-sex marriage

[TexasTowelie]

Last edited Wed Apr 2, 2014, 11:01 AM - Edit history (1)

DETROIT, MI, March 31, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Dr. Mark Regnerus, whose conclusions about same-sex "marriage" were dismissed in last week's ruling on the matter by Judge Bernard Friedman, is fighting back.

"I frankly don't understand why the judge elected to pass on a discussion of some of the very real concerns our research raised," Regnerus told LifeSiteNews in an e-mail. Regnerus says Friedman "chose to privilege certain scholars as well as research that leaned on self-selected samples."

Friedman ruled that same-sex "marriage" should be legal in Michigan, overturning the state's ban on those relationships. Gov. Rick Snyder has said he will not validate about 300 same-sex "marriages" until the state's attorney general has exhausted his legal defense of the state. Friedman's decision was temporarily "stayed" by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, pending the state's appeal.

Nominated by President Ronald Reagan in 1988, Friedman criticized Regnerus' study and testimony in his opinion. He called Regnerus’ testimony “entirely unbelievable and not worthy of serious consideration," and accused Regnerus of being influenced by the goals of the study's funder. The study was given $700,000 by the Witherspoon Institute, and the organization wanted the study to be done prior to the arrival of certain cases before the Supreme Court.

More at http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/prof.-regnerus-says-michigan-judge-showed-bias-in-ruling-allowing-same-sex .

Disclaimer: LifeSiteNews is a project of the Campaign Life Coalition a Canadian conservative Christian pro-life group. I am linking to this particular article since it is the original source that corresponded with Regnerus via email in order to provide the most comprehensive account on this story.

For those that don't want to click on that link there is a summary at http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2014/04/mark-regerus-has-michigan-sadz.html .

"I frankly don't understand why the judge elected to pass on a discussion of some of the very real concerns our research raised. It's as if raising standard methodological issues on this subject is just unwelcome today, unless it's clear that you are friendly to the political goals of the same-sex marriage movement. My study noted numerous suboptimal outcomes experienced by adult children who reported a parental same-sex relationship. Like other studies, it has its limitations. But there is much it can tell us, including about the household instability experienced by such children, and the uncommon frequency of stably-coupled lesbian households with children in the era I was examining. In the end, the judge seemed to focus on what my study could not say rather than what it could. It is frustrating to see him overlook the significant limitations of other studies." - Discredited researcher Mark Regnerus, speaking to LifeSiteNews in an article tweeted out this morning by NOM head Brian Brown. I believe this is the first public statement by Regnerus since his brutal smackdown by that Michigan judge.

Cross-posted in the Texas Group.

[TexasTowelie]

2. Done for both the LGBT and Texas groups.

I copied the title from that source and didn't notice the quotation marks in the title. It was an inadvertent error on my part and please accept my apology for not noting that it is considered offensive. Please give me a little credit for the disclaimer and providing an alternative link that is friendlier to the LGBT community.

[nomorenomore08]

4. Lifesitenews isn't the most prominent hate site out there by any means.

I certainly think you can be forgiven for not being aware of that.

[TexasTowelie]

5. I did search for LSN before I posted the OP which is why I put the disclaimer and an alternative

link when I posted the OP initially. Since the email exchange was between Regnerus and LSN, I went to the original report source rather than post from a blog that used LSN as their source. That is something I try to do on all OPs if they aren't coming from of the major wire services (AP, UPI, Reuters, etc.). Maven contacted me and I voluntarily removed the quotes around 'gay marriage' as requested. However, we were at a disagreement on the Mozilla CEO topic today which might be why Maven's messages were self-deleted.

I don't consider Fox News, the Blaze, Breitbart and other sites as the most reliable sources either, but sometimes it is best to link to them with a disclaimer or note explaining why I did so. After all, it might be good for comic relief to monitor the stupidity that appears there.

I don't know why some people think that we have to agree with each other 100% of the time and at times people are adamant about their POVs. I don't agree with my closest friends all of the time either, but we respect the fact that we can agree to disagree without getting upset, using profanity and remaining civil. However, people's messages can be twisted around or misinterpreted. If someone wants to put me on delete, then that is his/her prerogative. I try not to do that though because even I disagree on a point, I do value what others post and wouldn't want to miss reading their opinions.

The only thing I can say in my defense is that I've had over 8,000 posts since August 2011 and none of them were hidden.

Thanks for your message and understanding.