American Sociological Association Files Brief in Bostic v. Rainey

4th Circuit Court of Appeals

One of the constant mantras one hears from the extreme Christofascists at The Family Foundation - an affiliate of the hate group Family Research Council("TFF")  - is that "ever child deserves a mother and father" and the claim that children raised by same sex parents do not thrive and succeed as fell as those with heterosexual parents.  These claims are backed by nothing other than TFF's virulent anti-gay animus and its desire to force all Virginians to live in accordance with TFF's extreme religious beliefs.  TFF is in short the Christian version of the Taliban.  The legitimate research shows that children do just as well in same sex parent headed homes.  This is the point that the American Sociological Association ("ASA") drives home in its amicus brief filed in Bostic v. Rainey now pending before the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.  LGBT Weekly has details on the ASA brief:

The American Sociological Association (ASA) filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit today supporting the fight to overturn Virginia’s gay marriage ban and continuing its now 14-month effort to highlight the overwhelming body of social science research that confirms “children fare just as well” when raised by same-sex or heterosexual parents. The Fourth Circuit is scheduled to consider the lawsuit challenging the ban in the near future.

“The amicus brief reflects the ASA’s ongoing commitment to ensuring that U.S. courts considering lawsuits to legalize gay marriage know that social science research shows parents’ sexual orientation has no bearing on their children’s well-being,” said ASA Executive Officer Sally T. Hillsman. “The claim that same-sex parents produce less positive child outcomes than heterosexual parents is contrary to the scientific data, and the ASA will continue to publicize the facts”

This is the fourth time in the past 14 months that the ASA has backed challenges to same-sex marriage bans through amicus briefs. In March 2014, the ASA filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit that addressed gay marriage bans in Utah and Oklahoma. In October 2013, the ASA submitted a brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit regarding same-sex marriage bans in Nevada and Hawaii. Similarly, in February 2013, the ASA weighed in with the U.S. Supreme Court on Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in California, and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which banned among other things federal recognition of valid same-sex marriages.

“For as long as is necessary, we will continue to provide the courts with the clear social science research consensus that children raised by same-sex parents fare just as well as children raised by heterosexual parents,” Hillsman said. “We will also continue to correct the record when gay marriage opponents misinterpret or misrepresent social science research to support their position, which unfortunately happens all too frequently.”

“The Regnerus papers, among other sources gay marriage opponents continue to invoke, provide no basis for their arguments because that research does not directly examine the well-being of children raised by same-sex parents,” Hillsman said. “These analyses, therefore, do not undermine the social science research consensus and do not establish a scientific basis for gay marriage bans.”

Rather, social science research suggests same-sex marriage may be beneficial for children. “I have said this before, but it bears repeating: The research supports the conclusion that the extension of marriage rights to same-sex couples has the potential to improve child well-being insofar as the institution of marriage may provide social and legal support to families and enhance family stability — all of which are key drivers of positive child outcomes,” Hillsman said.

Note how the ASA again slams the dishonest and fraudulent Regnerus study that was funded by right wing organizations and which increasing appears to have had a predetermined outcome.   No one is more dishonest than the "godly folk."

American Sociological Association Condems Renerus in 10th Circuit Brief

I have written a lot lately on the same sex marriage case pending in Michigan because it is the first time since the Proposition 8 trial at the District Court level that Christofascist witnesses have testified under oath and been subjected to cross examination.  And what we have seen is sadly the norm for the opponents of marriage equality: experts motivated by religious belief rather than the truth, "studies" structure to achieve preordained conclusions, and blatant lies by the supposed experts on the side of bigotry and discrimination.  To date, the rulings striking down same sex marriage bans have rejected the arguments put forth by these sleazy witnesses.  In my view, what really needs to happen is that is that witnesses like Mark Regnerus be hit with perjury charges and attorneys putting forth discredited evidence be hit with sanctions.  But I digress.  In a stunning filing, the  American Sociological Association submitted an amicus brief in the appeal of the Utah ruling that struck down Utah's marriage ban which more or less openly condemned Mark Regnerus and stopped just short of calling his "study" fraudulent.  The Bilerico Project has highlights:

[I]n a brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, the American Sociological Association urged the court to strike down marriage discrimination amendments in Utah and Oklahoma and rebuked the discredited research of ASA member Mark Regnerus, whose anti-LGBT New Family Structures Study falsely claimed to show that children do worse with same-sex parents than opposite-sex parents.

The ASA announced the brief in a press release:

"Our latest amicus brief is part of the ASA's ongoing effort to ensure that U.S. courts considering lawsuits to legalize gay marriage understand that social science research shows parents' sexual orientation has no bearing on their children's well-being," said ASA Executive Officer Sally T. Hillsman. "The claim that same-sex parents produce less positive child outcomes than heterosexual parents is simply unsupported."
"As the same-sex marriage debate continues in courtrooms across the country, the ASA will continue to emphasize the clear social science research consensus that children raised by same-sex parents fare just as well as children raised by heterosexual parents," Hillsman said. "In addition, we will continue to correct the record when gay marriage opponents misinterpret or misrepresent social science research to support their position."

On Regnerus:

Same-sex marriage opponents, including those defending the gay marriage bans in Utah and Oklahoma, often misinterpret or misrepresent social science research, claiming it indicates children with gay parents have worse outcomes than those with heterosexual parents. In particular, same-sex marriage opponents frequently misportray research by Mark Regnerus, a sociologist at the University of Texas at Austin.
"As I have stated before--and as I will continue to state--the Regnerus papers and other sources gay marriage opponents often rely on provide no basis for their arguments because this research does not directly examine the well-being of children raised by same-sex parents," Hillsman said. "Therefore, these analyses do not undermine the social science research consensus and do not establish a legitimate basis for gay marriage bans."

The ASA took pains to point out that Regnerus's conclusions -- and his subsequent anti-marriage equality advocacy -- quite simply could not be more wrong:

Rather than proving same-sex marriage is a bad thing for children, social science research actually suggests the opposite. "I want to reemphasize that the research supports the conclusion that the extension of marriage rights to same-sex couples has the potential to improve child well-being insofar as the institution of marriage may provide social and legal support to families and enhance family stability--all of which are key drivers of positive child outcomes," Hillsman said.

Read more at http://www.bilerico.com/2014/03/asa_spanks_regnerus_again.php#hYoiyH7Qq22eFxmB.99

[I]n a brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, the American Sociological Association urged the court to strike down marriage discrimination amendments in Utah and Oklahoma and rebuked the discredited research of ASA member Mark Regnerus, whose anti-LGBT New Family Structures Study falsely claimed to show that children do worse with same-sex parents than opposite-sex parents.

The ASA announced the brief in a press release:

"Our latest amicus brief is part of the ASA's ongoing effort to ensure that U.S. courts considering lawsuits to legalize gay marriage understand that social science research shows parents' sexual orientation has no bearing on their children's well-being," said ASA Executive Officer Sally T. Hillsman. "The claim that same-sex parents produce less positive child outcomes than heterosexual parents is simply unsupported."

"As the same-sex marriage debate continues in courtrooms across the country, the ASA will continue to emphasize the clear social science research consensus that children raised by same-sex parents fare just as well as children raised by heterosexual parents," Hillsman said. "In addition, we will continue to correct the record when gay marriage opponents misinterpret or misrepresent social science research to support their position."

On Regnerus:

Same-sex marriage opponents, including those defending the gay marriage bans in Utah and Oklahoma, often misinterpret or misrepresent social science research, claiming it indicates children with gay parents have worse outcomes than those with heterosexual parents. In particular, same-sex marriage opponents frequently misportray research by Mark Regnerus, a sociologist at the University of Texas at Austin.

"As I have stated before--and as I will continue to state--the Regnerus papers and other sources gay marriage opponents often rely on provide no basis for their arguments because this research does not directly examine the well-being of children raised by same-sex parents," Hillsman said. "Therefore, these analyses do not undermine the social science research consensus and do not establish a legitimate basis for gay marriage bans."

The ASA took pains to point out that Regnerus's conclusions -- and his subsequent anti-marriage equality advocacy -- quite simply could not be more wrong:

Rather than proving same-sex marriage is a bad thing for children, social science research actually suggests the opposite. "I want to reemphasize that the research supports the conclusion that the extension of marriage rights to same-sex couples has the potential to improve child well-being insofar as the institution of marriage may provide social and legal support to families and enhance family stability--all of which are key drivers of positive child outcomes," Hillsman said.

In short, what we see is that no one lies more or more deliberately than the "godly folk" and those out to "protect the sanctity of marriage."  If their lips are moving. it's best to assume that they are lying.

Amicus Brief Amer Sociological Assoc Utah And Oklahoma 10th Circuit

American Sociology Association Files Brief Against Marriage Bans In Nevada and Hawaii

As noted many, many times on this blog, EVERY legitimate medical and mental health association in America opposes "ex-gay" therapy and admits that one's sexual orientation is not something that can be "cured" or "fixed."  The natural result of this understanding is that same sex couples ought to have the same civil legal marriage rights as heterosexual couples.  Bans on gay marriage only seek to harm same sex couples and enshrine Christofascist religious belief into the civil laws.  With numerous lawsuits pending that challenge state laws and constitutional amendments aimed at keeping gays inferior, we can expect to see legitimate medical and mental health associations filing briefs against such bans.  The American Sociological Association has filed such briefs in cases pending in Nevada and Hawaii.  Here are highlights from the organization's press release:

The American Sociological Association (ASA) filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today supporting efforts to overturn gay marriage bans in Nevada and Hawaii and highlighting the overwhelming body of social science research that confirms “children fare just as well” when same-sex or heterosexual parents raise them. The Ninth Circuit is scheduled to hear lawsuits challenging the bans in the coming months.

“The supporters of gay marriage bans in these cases offer no facts to support the contention that Nevada and Hawaii possess an important or rational basis for their respective state laws against marriage for same-sex couples,” said ASA Executive Officer Sally T. Hillsman. The amicus brief is part of the ASA’s ongoing effort to ensure that U.S. courts considering lawsuits to legalize gay marriage understand that social science research shows parents’ sexual orientation has no bearing on their children’s well-being.

Obviously, these facts are 100% opposed to the arguments of the Christofascists who use faux experts and manipulated "research" to support their predetermined conclusions.  An example of this is the much slammed "study" done by Mark Regnerus which was funded by far right organizations for use against arguments for same sex marriage.  The ASA singled out the Regnerus "study" for particular condemnation:

“The Regnerus papers and other sources gay marriage opponents often rely on provide no basis for their arguments because this research does not directly examine the well-being of children raised by same-sex parents,” Hillsman said. “These analyses therefore do not undermine the consensus from the social science research and do not establish a legitimate basis for gay marriage bans in Nevada, Hawaii, or anywhere else.”

 When all else is stripped away, the only argument against gay marriage comes down to conservative religious beliefs.  Beliefs that should not be included in the civil laws whatsoever. 

Scalia’s Dishonest Gay Adoption Claim

Prior to the U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments in the Prop 8 and DOMA cases, this blog reviewed a number of the amicus briefs filed in the two cases, including the filings by the American Sociological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, both of which supported gay marriage and stated that there was no legitimate research - i.e., research not funded by and manipulated by Christofacist organizations and their stooges such as the deliberately flaw study by Mark Regnerus - that supported the claims by Prop 8 and DOMA proponents that children suffered if they had same sex parents.  Despite these filings, bigot in chief on the Court, Antonin Scalia made statements that “there’s considerable disagreement among sociologists as to what the consequences of raising a child in a single-sex family, whether that is harmful to the child or not.”  Ezra Klein takes Scalia to task in a piece in the Washington Post for his deliberate effort to distort the real science on the issue.  Here are highlights:

On Wednesday, I wrote about Justice Antonin Scalia’s comment that “there’s considerable disagreement among sociologists as to what the consequences of raising a child in a single-sex family, whether that is harmful to the child or not.”

That’s not what the American Sociological Association thinks. Here’s its official statement on the matter:

The claim that same-sex parents produce less positive child outcomes than opposite-sex parents—either because such families lack both a male and female parent or because both parents are not the biological parents of their children—contradicts abundant social science research. Decades of methodologically sound social science research, especially multiple nationally representative studies and the expert evidence introduced in the district courts below, confirm that positive child wellbeing is the product of stability in the relationship between the two parents, stability in the relationship between the parents and child, and greater parental socioeconomic resources. Whether a child is raised by same-sex or opposite-sex parents has no bearing on a child’s wellbeing.

The clear and consistent consensus in the social science profession is that across a wide range of indicators, children fare just as well when they are raised by same-sex parents when compared to children raised by opposite-sex parents.

Pretty definitive. And here’s the punchline: That paragraph isn’t buried in a press release on its blog or in an editorial from its trade magazine. It’s from the amicus curiae brief that the ASA filed in the very case Scalia was commenting on.

In other words, the official organization representing American sociologists went out of their way to provide the Supreme Court with their “consensus” opinion on the effect of same-sex parents on children. And yet, when struggling for a “concrete” harm that could come from gay marriage, Scalia went with “considerable disagreement among sociologists.” So we’ve gone from a weak claim — “considerable disagreement” over harm is not the same thing as actual harm — to an explicitly wrong claim. Scalia offered no details or evidence of this considerable disagreement among sociologists, and it’s hard to believe he’s a better judge of the profession than the ASA, whose brief he notably declined to mention.

As this blog has argued before, Scalia is so bigoted and so unable to demonstrate even a shred of objectivity on a host of issues that the has come for him to either resign or be removed from the Court.  His continued presence on the Court undermines its integrity and standing.

American Sociological Association Files Prop 8 Brief Demolishing Arguments Against Gay Parenting

One of the favored arguments of the anti-gay hate merchant crowd is to claim that same sex parenting results in impaired or less well adjusted children.  Like most every thing that comes out of their mouths this effort to denigrate and stigmatize gays isn't true but is used as part of the Christofascist smoke screen to avoid admitting that only one thing lies behind DOMA and Proposition 8: religious based prejudice if not outright hate and animus.  Yesterday, the American Sociological Association ("ASA") filed amicus briefs in the Proposition 8 and DOMA appeals before the U. S. Supreme Court that stopped just short of calling the defenders of Proposition 8 and the falsely named Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives outright liars.  Here is an excerpt from the ASA press release on the brief:

“An issue at the heart of these cases is whether family composition, per se, affects the well-being of children and thus, provides a justification for limiting the right to marry,” said Ridgeway, the Lucie Stern Professor of Social Sciences in the Sociology Department at Stanford University. “This core question is an empirical one and is the subject of a broad range of social science research. As a scientific body, ASA has a duty to provide the court with a systematic and balanced review of the evidence to assess what the consensus of scholarly research has shown.”

In their briefs to the court, the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives, which is defending DOMA, the Hollingsworth Petitioners, which are defending Proposition 8, and their respective supporters assert that children fare better with opposite-sex parents than with same-sex parents.

“When the social science evidence is exhaustively examined—which the ASA has done—the facts demonstrate that children fare just as well when raised by same-sex parents,” states the ASA amicus brief. “Unsubstantiated fears regarding same-sex child rearing do not overcome these facts and do not justify upholding DOMA and Proposition 8.”

Of course the supporters of DOMA and Proposition 8 care nothing about what science and empirical evidence shows because their sole agenda is to force their religious beliefs on all Americans and to subvert the First Amendment guarantee of religious freedom to all Americans, not just the Christofascists.   It's all about them and, truth be told, they don't give a damn about children.  Here are excerpts from the ASA briefs:

However, the claim that same-sex parents produce less positive child outcomes than opposite-sex parents—either because such families lack both a male and female parent or because both parents are not the biological parents of their children—contradicts abundant social science research. Decades of methodologically sound social science research, especially multiple nationally representative studies and the expert evidence introduced in the district courts below, confirm that positive child wellbeing is the product of stability in the relationship between the two parents, stability in the relationship between the parents and child, and greater parental socioeconomic resources. Whether a child is raised by same-sex or opposite-sex parents has no bearing on a child’s wellbeing.

The clear and consistent consensus in the social science profession is that across a wide range of indicators, children fare just as well when they are raised by same-sex parents when compared to children raised by opposite-sex parents. The social science studies cited by BLAG, Proposition 8 Proponents, and their amici to support their arguments fail to address same-sex parents at all. Accordingly, as a matter of science, these studies cannot serve as the basis for conclusions about same-sex parents and related child outcomes and do not undermine the social science consensus that children fare just as well with same-sex parents.

 

To the extent some of the studies cited by BLAG and the Proposition 8 Proponents show that stability improves child outcomes, they confirm that marriage rights for same-sex couples and the federal recognition of such marriages are likely to improve the wellbeing of children of same-sex parents by providing enhanced family stability. The research presented in this brief articulates these points in greater detail, and demonstrates that the government’s interest in promoting the wellbeing of children is neither substantially nor rationally connected to DOMA or Proposition 8, because the overwhelming scientific evidence shows clearly that same-sex couples are equally capable of generating positive child outcomes.

 The sad truth is that nowadays, no one lies more than the self-anointed "godly Christian" crowd and its political whore and sycophants in the GOP.   If their lips are moving, it is a safe bet that they are lying.