In response to:

Are Gay Parents Worse Parents?

Kenneth L. Wrote: Jun 15, 2012 4:29 PM
Consider an experiment observing two varieties of frog. One with red spots survives longer than the variety without spots. It doesn't matter what the reason is, and it doesn't matter if the samples are the same size. It could be because of a genetic defect or a disease, or something unknown. But the red spot frogs are going to survive longer, on average. And married mom and dad are going to be better parents, based on the criteria of the study.
Tinsldr2 Wrote: Jun 15, 2012 7:51 PM

Only when there is only one variable, could you say that it was the effect of that variable.

The study says they adjusted for: "controlling for factors such as age, race, gender or the gay-friendliness of the state in which they lived, " as well they should have.

But even Ms Charon says they did not adjust for what is one of the most important factors "Critics protest that the NFSS is comparing the gold standard -- intact married-parent homes -- with families that have experienced many levels of instability. That's true."

By including only the ideal hetero couples they get a different result then if they compared to All Hetero couples, Or only looked at the same sex parents that were in intact families.
Tinsldr2 Wrote: Jun 15, 2012 7:44 PM
Kenneth , My background is in Science (my degree is in Biology) and I am studying it again as I change careers (I am retired Army)

Look at your example about frogs. To correlate a frog with spots living longer then a frog without spots of a similar breed you would have to control for other variables. If you were feeding the frog with spots a healthier diet then the frog without spots for example and the one with lived Longer, you could not conclude the spots made it live longer.... To see if they lived longer in the wild if they lived in two different ponds, you would have to know pollution levels and toxicity of the ponds they were in to judge whether or not the spots had an effect.

Only when there is only one variable, (Continued.)
Kenneth L. Wrote: Jun 15, 2012 4:34 PM
Or not. But it is more than enough to justify skepticism about the conclusions of earlier studies finding "no difference" or "superior."
Kenneth L. Wrote: Jun 15, 2012 4:30 PM
In an analogy to this study, it could be because of "instability" in the population without spots.

As the nation debates whether to institutionalize same-sex marriage, social scientists have been weighing in -- often with a heavy hand. As Mark Regnerus, author of a new study examining outcomes for children in a variety of home environments, notes social science regarding gay and lesbian parenting has swung from "presents challenges," to "no difference" to "superior" in the space of one decade. The American Psychological Association declared flatly in 2005 that, "Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents." That prompted skepticism from...