Prof. Mark Regnerus recently noted that ”of the men who view pornographic material ‘every day or almost every day,’ 54 percent ‘strongly agreed’ that gay and lesbian marriage should be legal, compared with around 13 percent of those whose porn-use patterns were either monthly or less often than that.”
Some criticized him for noticing the correlation and speculating on its significance.
Now a new study using longitudinal data published January 13 in Communications Research suggests the strange effect is real:
“This study used nationally representative three-wave longitudinal data gathered from adult U.S. males to examine the over-time interplay between pornography consumption, education, and support for same-sex marriage. Support for same-sex marriage did not prospectively predict pornography consumption, but pornography consumption did prospectively predict support for same-sex marriage.”
Regnerus by misrepresenting his infamous New Family Structures Study in the press is naturally going to find any subsequent future findings scrutinized.
Lopez: So are young adults from step- and single-parent families much different? What is the gold standard?
Regnerus: Yes, adults who lived in step- and single-parent families exhibit a variety of differences, on average, from the gold standard of a married mom and dad (who are still together when the respondent is an adult). It calls into question, in fact, the common “wait till the kids are out of the house to divorce” mentality.
Lopez: What is the reigning academic view of children in same-sex families? How does this study depart from that view? Do you anticipate engagement from academia?
Regnerus: No substantive differences, on things that matter. That’s been the emergent view. This study definitely affirms that there is a gold standard. Yes, I anticipate engagement from scholars, and that is fine and welcome. I think there is plenty we can agree on.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/302455/mom-and-dad-make-difference-kathryn-jean-lopez
Obviously Regnerus could not claim the “Gold Standard” of still married bio mom & dad compared to families by same gender couples because he never found same gendered couples who had raised a child from birth. He claims to have found 2 but now that his data has been released, we see he actually only found one, not two.
So yeah nothing Regnerus says any more is going to be taken at face value. I didn’t read this latest article but I bet it is *not* going to prove that the majority support for same gender Civil Marriage is by porn watchers.
In other words over 50% of the of people who support Civil Marriage for Sexual Minorities also watch porn regularly.
Somebody who has access to the new study can let us know. But I believe just the description of the study agrees with my point.
Oh and BTW in order for Regnerus to make his porn claim he restricted the pool to ages 23-39. His data pool was adults aged 18 – 39 yet in studying the porn question he suspiciously starts his research for people aged 23, not age 18.
RE: radio interview…that is right homosexuals…I just don’t get it.
It is not politically correct to speak out against the homosexuals. But wait…I’m not a lying rhetorician aka politician, so I am not a slave to political correctness. I put my foundation solely into what is right and what is wrong.
Nowadays if you come out and say homosexuality is wrong you take lots of heat from the homosexual loving young people. These are the same crowd that want to legalize drugs, so we may escape our world and be in a continual state of stupor 24/7. Another area of abuse that is not healthy, but that is a different post.
The pet argument the homosexuals like to throw out is by asking the question…”how does gay marriage hurt society”
The legitimization of homosexual marriage hurts society by promoting wrongness and encourages a declining of standards that our societies throughout history and nature itself has built on. It hurts by turning what is wrong into right and turns those that are right into being wrong.
Few of us are saying not to respect the rights homosexuals. Most people against homosexual marriage just don’t want to promote it as normal…cause it is not. Homosexuality goes against nature, it is not healthy and normal behavior.
Here is a poll I ran some time ago asking the question if homosexuality if normal and healthy lifestyle.
http://www.forum4politics.com/political-opinions-beliefs/157683-should-homosexual-behavior-considered-normal-healthy-lifestyle.html
There is a worldwide effort to legitimize homosexually as healthy and normal behavior. The question of right or wrong is never brought up in the homosexual debate. It has become fashionable to be for homosexuality. A while back the news reported a story of a Republican that was against the homosexuals one day. Then when he found his son was a homosexual he was for homosexual marriage the next day. Was it just a ploy to gain votes?
We will never know since politicians will say or do anything to gain and retain power. What ever happened to the question of right and wrong and making choices divorced from our own self interest?
Does having a thief, murderer or child molester as a son or daughter suddenly make those actions right?
The dictionary defines marriage as between two of the opposite sex. If the dictionary defined it as 2 men having anal sex or 2 women using a plastic penis, then the homosexuals could be up in arms with their demands of inequality. But from time immemorial, marriage was defines as between a man and women. Homosexuals just don’t come into the picture when the discussion turns to inequality since they don’t qualify under the current definition of what marriage is.
Being an reformed catholic that evolved into an atheist, this post is not based in religions beliefs of right or wrong. But let me touch on a few things related to religion. We as humans make all our own rules. At least the rules that are not governed by natural law. And the religions make their set of rules that apply to them. Their rules are not god made, they are all man-made rules. These rules can change and evolve with the times. We can see this well when we look at the bible. In the bible, the god of the monotheists (Jews. Christians, Muslims) said to kill homosexuals. Fast forward to modern times and this gets translated by the Episcopals to ‘lets make homosexuals our bishop.’ With the new pope the young crowd was calling for approval of homosexual marriage. Is that how religions are run? The flock makes the rules? You would think gods rules were perfect and non negotiable from the start?
The bottom line with homosexuality is this…
To legitimize homosexuality is to say there is no difference between a heterosexual person and a homosexual person. Homosexuality stems from an aberration to what nature’s law had in mind for us. I have nothing against homosexuals. I believe they have a right to live. But to force homosexuality down societies throat and to brainwash people into believing homosexuality as right living and healthy behavior is plain wrong.
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/vv219/keepitlow456/Misc/1agk_zps9171103b.jpg
Maggie,
I admire your courage.
This is what I know:
Most, if not all, that we do has profound underpinning, only a small fraction of which we are conscious. Becoming more conscious, for reasons I vaguely intuit, seems to reveal beauty, create capacity for empathy and impulse to care for others, — practical reason enough, I think, to collectively strive for.
My concern is that gay marriage may (as opposed to civil union with attendant equal rights and responsibilities), obscure, rather than excite our consciousness to see the essence of this profound dance.
The ceremony is a crucible. The two energies capable of physical creation collide and unite. Primary bonds are torn apart, obliterated. New ones, vital and pregnant are created. It is graceful, violent and inevitable. There is big, palpable promise. Superseding celebration. And, I think this is important, we may glimpse the turning galaxies.
As I understand, to your point: The promise and all that has been given to it implies, practically, commitment. We are dependent upon that commitment. And the child, which I hope is the easiest to understand, composed equally of us both, for the possibility of which we have collectively given so much, wants to see and know its source, itself.
How can we justify a civil rights movement based essentially on a feeling? The great civil rights movements I and everyone else is familiar with are based on objective, observable characteristics of the individual, i.e., color of skin, gender. Homosexuality does not come close to this degree of certainty. I believe that to pull this uncertainty beneath the constitutional umbrella does more to confuse the law than it does to pull up any alleged aggrieved group. The entire concept of homosexual rights is an empty shell.
FOR GAYS ONLY: Jesus predicted that just before His return as Judge, there will be a strange, spontaneous, mind-twisting fad – a global steamroller notable for its speed, boldness, violence, and impudent in-your-face openness. In Luke 17 He called this worldwide craze the repeat of the “days of Lot” (see Genesis 19 for details). By helping to fulfill this worldwide mania quietly coordinated by unseen spirit beings, gays are actually hurrying up Christ’s return to earth and making the Bible even more believable!
They’ve actually invented strange architecture: closets opening not on to bedrooms but on to Main Streets where kids can see naked men having sex in “Madam” Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco Brothel District. We wonder how soon S.F.’s underground saint – San Andreas – will get a 10-point jolt out of what goes on over his head (see the dire prediction about cities in Revelation 16:19)!
What’s really scary is the “reprobate mind” phrase in Romans 1:28. A person can sear his conscience so much God turns him over to S, the universal leader of evil who can turn such a person into Mr. Possessed with a super-human strength that many cops together have trouble restraining.
Remember, gays don’t have to stay bound to their slavery. Their emancipation is found in a 5-letter name starting with J – no, not James or Julia. As soon as they can find out the all-powerful J name, gays will really start living!
Regnerus surveyed people age 18 to I think it was age 40. Yet in his “porn” comments he limits his sample to age 23 and up. Why? it is just data manipulation, don’t be suckered in.