Comments on: Christian Post runs article lauding Paul Cameron’s fraudulent claims

By: esurience

esurience — Wed, 05 Sep 2012 17:06:30 +0000

All the Hooker study was supposed to show was that there were indeed well-adjusted gay people capable of functioning normally in society.

Is that something the Christian Post is really disputing? I mean… we have gay celebrities now. It should be rather obvious that there are well-adjusted gay people functioning normally in society.

By: Michael C

Michael C — Wed, 05 Sep 2012 16:06:35 +0000

Fortunately the Christian Post article contains a disclaimer about Cameron’s lack of association with the ASA and the Nebraska Psychological Association and even includes an ASA statement condemning Cameron’s “consistent misrepresentation of sociological research.”

Why they would even publish this article (which basically says nothing) is beyond me.

By: Tara TASW

Tara TASW — Wed, 05 Sep 2012 13:59:21 +0000

Time for a repost of the Cameron Rules, which I officially identified some years ago:

1. People are more easily suckered by crap with numbers in it than by garden-variety crap.

2. If you hear a “statistic” about GLBT people that sounds unbelievable, it is – and its source probably traces back to Paul Cameron.

3. If a person or publication uses Paul Cameron as a source, that person or publication is a crap source, and nothing they say should be taken at face value.

By: bls

bls — Wed, 05 Sep 2012 12:23:36 +0000

That is really, truly stupid, isn’t it?

But actually it’s a good thing when the anti-gay contingent can only come up with really, truly, stupid arguments. The more they talk, the more people will realize that we’ve been right all along – that it’s all a chimera, and mostly bigotry.

So by all means, folks: keep it up! You’ve been our best allies all along….

By: Richard Rush

Richard Rush — Wed, 05 Sep 2012 00:12:45 +0000

It’s no surprise that religion and anti-gay bigotry go so well together. Both require the wholesale dismissal of facts and evidence as irrelevant trivialities. “Truth” is simply created by fiat, and supported by factiness and evidenciness when required,

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 23:45:49 +0000

Grey said “It’s not that they don’t know.
It’s more that they don’t really care about facts.”.

Exactly. They think if you’re lying for a good cause there’s nothing wrong with it.

By: CPT_Doom

CPT_Doom — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 23:07:29 +0000

You can totally see the lack of scientific education among a sizable number of conservatives. Do they not understand that one study does not equal “science”? Even if they totally disproved Hooker’s research paper (which this doesn’t seem to), there is now a copious library of similar work that demonstrates unequivocally that being homosexual is not, in and of itself, evidence of any psychological or mental disease or defect.

It’s just like with the Regnerus study – even if his methodology hadn’t been laughably messy, his one paper cannot and would not overturn the consensus that at least some LGBT people can be good parents. In fact the presence of many subjects in Regnerus’ paper who did not have bad outcomes, but still had “gay fathers” and “lesbian mothers” as he defined them, means his study does not support a public policy aimed at stopping the formation of LGBT-headed families – as Regnerus himself notes.

Science is about consensus. It’s about enough researchers replicating and expanding on a finding over years, until that finding becomes the consensus. And it only is maintained as the consensus as long as it holds up to repeated experimental assessment.

By: Grey

Grey — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 22:37:31 +0000

It’s not that they don’t know.
It’s more that they don’t really care about facts.