That study has to be wrong because I hate the conclusions!

This is the position taken by Concerned Harpies Women for America president Wendy Wright in response to a long-term study carried out by a team led by Nanette Gartrell of the University of California-San Francisco. The researchers determined that children raised by lesbian parents are at least as well adjusted, by whatever metrics make sense in such a context, as children raised by heterosexual couples. The study appears to have included appropriate controls (e.g., socioeconomic status), but this is not the sort of detail that is going to sway committed homophobes such as Wright. Of course, neither would a 10-megaton thermonuclear bomb. Said Wright, whose surname must be the biggest misnomer in the history of whack-jobs:

“This study was clearly designed to come out with one outcome — to attempt to sway people that children are not detrimentally affected in a homosexual household … In essence, this study claims to purport that children do better when raised by lesbians … You have to be a little suspicious of any study that says children being raised by same-sex couples do better or have superior outcomes to children raised with a mother and father. It just defies common sense and reality.”

It is both titillating and horrifying that someone like Wright would invoke the term “common sense” as if she would recognize it if it were a Godzilla-sized monster that rose up and violently made off with her Bible. Besides, what relevance does common sense have in the realm of scientific inquiry? Often, not a lot. Look at most all of physics, particularly in the subatomic realm. Better still, consider that there are plausible evolution-based reasons for maintaining a certain number of homosexuals in a given population. This is counter-intuitive in the extreme, but human intuition, that progenitor of “common sense,” has proven laughably fallible. Wright is just one more childish boor who rejects something she doesn’t like. If it’s not biased to her liking, it must be biased!

But the kicker is Wright’s hypocrisy (and no whack-job worth her drool bib operates without a modicum of that admirable quality). The CWA has been fond in the past of citing the “work” of universally discredited former psychologist Paul Cameron, a waterhead that the APA and virtually every professional organization in the social sciences has distanced themselves from. The CWA is just as much of a hate group as the American Family Association, the Family Research Council, and every other outfit with “family” in the title.

2 thoughts on “That study has to be wrong because I hate the conclusions!”

  1. I particularly like this quote:

    “Studies have shown that children thrive having both a mother and a father, Wright said. ”

    Which, I guess, means that they can’t thrive under any other conditions, right? But, Wright is, ya know, CONCERNED. I mean, she’s the PRESIDENT of CONCERNED Women for America after all. Heck, that’s a lotta CONCERN. The group supports “biblical values” so I have to assume that she wants to see gay people thrown in a pit and stoned. She’s probably CONCERNED about where they’re going to find a pit big enough. I’ll bet she doesn’t have much CONCERN over where to find the rocks and who’s going to be throwing them.

  2. Said Wright, whose surname must be the biggest misnomer in the history of whack-jobs:

    Huh? It’s short for Whack-job Right. Surely that’s appropriate?

Comments are closed.