# Franken pwns Focus on the Family. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 20, 2011, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772 "2011-07-20T22:59:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2011, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/61 "2011-07-21T22:00:18Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > With the couples’ sexual orientation left unaddressed, you’ve got nothing about the differences between gay and straight. Precisely. Nobody is saying otherwise. Except for Focus on the Family. ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2011, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/62 "2011-07-21T22:06:51Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > IThe problem is married couples are straight almost exclusively, so when you lump together _all_ married couples when attempting to distinguish between gay and straight, you fail. Hardly. No distinction needs to be made because the issue is marriage not homosexuality. The study shows the benefits of a stable family unit under formal marriage. That’s the whole point. The conclusion is that gay families are hurt by not having access to marriage. This is the exact opposite conclusion that FoF was trying to trick Congress into believing. At least that what I think happened. Maybe I’m the one that is confused. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/63 "2011-07-22T00:13:34Z")
[The study (PDF)](http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_10/sr10_246.pdf) says: > [@Page 10](#): > > 1A nuclear family consists of one or more children living with two parents who are married to one another and are biological or adoptive parents to all children in the family. The data from the study includes 4,246 “nuclear families,” and was drawn from surveys conducted from 2001-2007. (Ibid, page 2) The first legal same-sex marriages were in 2003, in Massachusetts. Subsequent years did bring other states on the list of possible same-sex marriage locations, but considering the years of the study, does anyone here genuinely believe that of those 4,246 nuclear families, even one was a same-sex married household? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/64 "2011-07-22T00:16:10Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > Hardly. No distinction needs to be made because the issue is marriage not homosexuality. The study shows the benefits of a stable family unit under formal marriage. That’s the whole point. The conclusion is that gay families are hurt by not having access to marriage. This is the exact opposite conclusion that FoF was trying to trick Congress into believing. > > At least that what I think happened. Maybe I’m the one that is confused. That’s one possible conclusion. Of course, the FoF could equally well contend that same-sex households are so poisonous to the well-being of children that if they had been included, the numbers would show a marked decline. So no – we don’t know (from this study) that gay families are hurt by not having access to marriage, any more than we know gay families would produce some sort of negative effect in a similar study. The study simply doesn’t address the point. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/65 "2011-07-22T00:51:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > [The study (PDF)](http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_10/sr10_246.pdf) says: > > The data from the study includes 4,246 “nuclear families,” and was drawn from surveys conducted from 2001-2007. (Ibid, page 2) > > The first legal same-sex marriages were in 2003, in Massachusetts. Subsequent years did bring other states on the list of possible same-sex marriage locations, but considering the years of the study, does anyone here genuinely believe that of those 4,246 nuclear families, even one was a same-sex married household? It doesn’t really matter. The claim by FoF is that this study proves that marriage between a man and a woman is the best way to raise a child. Since marriage was not defined in that manner, if there were no gay couples in the study, it doesn’t prove anything at all about gay marriage. If there were gay couples in the study, the variable either wasn’t studied, or wasn’t statistically significant. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/66 "2011-07-22T01:05:46Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s one possible conclusion. > > Of course, the FoF could equally well contend that same-sex households are so poisonous to the well-being of children that if they had been included, the numbers would show a marked decline. > > So no – we don’t know (from this study) that gay families are hurt by not having access to marriage, any more than we know gay families would produce some sort of negative effect in a similar study. The study simply doesn’t address the point. I think in order for your suppositions to have validity, you must first show that homosexual households differ in a dramatic way from heterosexual households. (I mean beyond the same-sex, opposite-sex point.) ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/67 "2011-07-22T01:18:36Z")
> [@Baracus](#): > > I can’t think of a _good_ reason, but the fact still remains that without looking at same sex and opposite sex families separately the study neither proves nor disproves any posited difference between them. You are assuming there is a difference. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/68 "2011-07-22T01:25:56Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > I think in order for your suppositions to have validity, you must first show that homosexual households differ in a dramatic way from heterosexual households. (I mean beyond the same-sex, opposite-sex point.) Statistically, without running a study (a good one, child outcome is a very complicated topic), you can’t say whether they are different populations or not. But here is the thing…the status quo for children in gay households is cohabitating gay households - not hetero households. What you need to measure to prove gay marriage is bad is that kids raised in households where their two dads (or two moms) do worse than kids raised in households where their gay dads (or moms) are single, promiscuous, or cohabitating. Gay parents are not going to go out and marry persons of the opposite gender and have normal hetero marriages just for the kids (that ship sailed twenty years ago for most gay people). Nor do I think its likely that gay people are going to suddenly stop reproducing and adopting. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/69 "2011-07-22T01:32:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Of course, the FoF could equally well contend that same-sex households are so poisonous to the well-being of children that if they had been included, the numbers would show a marked decline. And they probably will. As long as they make clear that is their supposition, and not that of the authors of the study, that’s fine. When they assert the study draws any such conclusion, that is a falsehood. ---
**Author:** ![dhkendall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a9adbd/32.png) [@dhkendall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dhkendall)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/70 "2011-07-22T02:23:47Z")
> [@raventhief](#): > > IPaul stanley, apparently, saw a bully (or liar, since the article below says the study did not define nuclear family). And Yes, its the paul stanley who resigned because of an affair with an intern, not the member of KISS. > [Defense of Marriage Act Attacked in Senate Hearing | Politics](http://www.christianpost.com/news/defense-of-marriage-act-attacked-in-senate-hearing-52616/) Are all bigots stupid too? > [@Christian Post article](#): > > Tom Minnery, a senior vice president of CitizenLink, a division of Focus On The Family, testified before the committee and came under fire from Sen. Al Frank Franken (R-Minn.) as he rudely chided Minnery about a Department of Health and Human Services study from December of 2010. I mean, don’t they know that everyone who is against them has to be a Democrat and that there’s no such thing as a bad Republican? What’s that “R” doing after Franken’s name, then? (And, it would be much, much cooler if it was the Paul Stanley from KISS. I mean Alice Cooper is an evangelical Christian but that still doesn’t detract one iota from his coolness, it’d be kind of cool if Paul Stanley was one and was still the KISS member we all know and love.) > [@tdn](#): > > Yes, and it’s pretty exciting to watch. I think that an end to homophobia is an inevitability, and I’m betting that I’m going to witness it in my lifetime. I’d lay you money, no. Bigotry will always be among us. If you’re in Europe or many other countries where religion is not as important to people as it is in the US, then homophobia will definitely be significantly reduced in your lifetime, but bigotry of all shapes and sizes will always be alive in the US if people refuse to think critically. (Note that this is not a bash on religion, I happen to be deeply religious myself. But I also have a brain and take my religion’s teachings of doing as much good as you can to others, especially if they are different from you, and moreso if they are shunned by society, to heart.) ---
**Author:** ![MeanOldLady](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/meanoldlady/32/10737_2.png) [@MeanOldLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MeanOldLady)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/71 "2011-07-22T02:54:52Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > I think in order for your suppositions to have validity, you must first show that homosexual households differ in a dramatic way from heterosexual households. (I mean beyond the same-sex, opposite-sex point.) They don’t, as far as I can tell, but the argument was that they _do_. That’s the whole kit and caboodle. The FotF folks were trying to prove that straight couples were somehow better for families than gay couples, so in their estimation, homosexual households do “differ in a dramatic way from heterosexual households.” Their evidence sucked dick, which is why we are here, but their point (however flawed) is that same-sex couples are fundamentally different and/or inferior to opposite-sex. > [@gonzomax](#): > > You are assuming there is a difference. Good fuck - no he’s not. The FotFuckers are. Please don’t pretend that just because you don’t agree with someone’s point that you can’t see what it is. FotF was attempting to prove that opposite-sex couples were… you know what? I’m going to bed. Well first I’m taking a night cap, then I’m going to bed. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/72 "2011-07-22T02:59:19Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > They don’t, as far as I can tell, but the argument was that they _do_. That’s the whole kit and caboodle. The FotF folks were trying to prove that straight couples were somehow better for families than gay couples, so in their estimation, homosexual households do “differ in a dramatic way from heterosexual households.” Their evidence sucked dick, which is why we are here, but their point (however flawed) is that same-sex couples are fundamentally different and/or inferior to opposite-sex. Right, so all you can say is that the study offers no evidence that gay parents are better or worse than straight parents. What I am questioning is the assumption that we can’t say gays are as good as straights as parenting. I mean, that seems like the null hypothesis here to me and proof would be needed for the claims of inferiority or superiority. ---
**Author:** ![BetsQ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/fbc32d/32.png) [@BetsQ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BetsQ)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/73 "2011-07-22T04:30:32Z")
From the study: **Nuclear family** - married parents, bio & adopted kids **Single parent family** - one adult + kid(s) **Unmarried bio/adopted family** - two non-married adults; both bio or adoptive parents of all kids in family **Blended family** - married parents, both adults not bio or adoptive parents of all kids **Cohabiting family** - unmarried parents, both adults not bio or adoptive parents of all kids **Extended family** - parents of various types plus adult non-parent family member **"Other" family** - something else Data was collected from 2001 to 2007. During those years, Massachusetts was the only state in which gay marriage was legal. I’m willing to bet that there are gay couples represented in this data, but they’re not in the nuclear category. They’re probably in the “unmarried bio/adoptive family” or “cohabiting family” categories. Both of those groups fare considerably worse in the outcome measures reported. _However_, the results in this report are strictly cross-tabulations. There’s no multivariate analysis. Frankly, I wouldn’t use this report to support the argument that marriage benefits the children of heterosexual couples. It’s not like marriage is a randomly-assigned event; the people who end up in nuclear families look very different from people who end up in other family types on so very many factors that are probably correlated with child health outcomes. So, basically, there’s no way to even hint at causality here. Kids in nuclear families do better, but whether that’s because of marriage is still an open question. ---
**Author:** ![tumbleddown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tumbleddown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tumbleddown)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/74 "2011-07-22T06:25:21Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > Yes, and it’s pretty exciting to watch. I think that an end to homophobia is an inevitability, and I’m betting that I’m going to witness it in my lifetime. An end to a lack of civil rights for LGB people, perhaps. And end to the bigotry that we face? No, I don’t think so. No more so than civil rights legislation of the 60s caused the end of racism. ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/75 "2011-07-22T11:14:33Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > I am certainly not a “Franken groupie.” But unless you’re pointlessly partisan, you gotta give him credit for astutely and rightly eviscerating the witness’s position. Well, I don’t know if he did, or not. When was the study? At the time of said study, the word ‘marriage’ may have generally meant ‘opposite sex,’ since it may have been before same sex marriages were validated in the US. So, from the video, the guy may have been correct, and Franken a tool. Can’t say, tho. Best wishes, hh ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 11:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/76 "2011-07-22T11:22:14Z")
> [@handsomeharry](#): > > So, from the video, the guy may have been correct, and Franken a tool. Can’t say, tho. > > Best wishes, > hh Yes, in fact we can say with complete certainty that the Focus on the Family guy was wrong! Look, if there were no gay couples in the study, how can you conclude that the study says anything about their parenting? ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/77 "2011-07-22T11:50:45Z")
This was mentioned briefly back on page one, by raventhief, but I’ll mention it again for the page two crowd: The lead author of the study has stated that Franken was correct in his take on things: > [@](#): > > “Sen. Franken is right,” the lead author of the study told POLITICO. The survey did not exclude same-sex couples, said Debra L. Blackwell, Ph.D., nor did it exclude them from the “nuclear family” category provided their family met the study’s definition. > > The study’s definition of nuclear family is: “one or more children living with two parents who are married to one another and are each biological or adoptive parents of all the children in the family.” > > Read more: [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59495.html#ixzz1Spi94FIJ](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59495.html#ixzz1Spi94FIJ) Therefore, according to the study’s lead author, it is unreasonable to assume that the study’s claim (that children of married couples fare better than children of non-married couple) refers solely to the outcome for straight married couples and thus, FoF was incorrect to make that assumption and then use their assumption as an argument against gay marriage. And yes, given that the lead author has stated publicly that gay couples were not excluded, I can say that I genuinely believe that at least one of the 4246 “nuclear family” couples was gay and legally married. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/78 "2011-07-22T12:15:47Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > If you’re going to be a comedian, be a comedian. If you’re going to be a politician, just be a politician. Don’t try to also be a comedian. So “career politicians” are not so bad? And those actors and talk show hosts running for office should just pick one or the other? ---
**Author:** ![MeanOldLady](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/meanoldlady/32/10737_2.png) [@MeanOldLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MeanOldLady)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/79 "2011-07-22T13:34:41Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > Hardly. No distinction needs to be made because the issue is marriage not homosexuality. The study shows the benefits of a stable family unit under formal marriage. That’s the whole point. The conclusion is that gay families are hurt by not having access to marriage. This is the exact opposite conclusion that FoF was trying to trick Congress into believing. > > At least that what I think happened. Maybe I’m the one that is confused. Exit dodge immediately. Your claim that the study concludes gay families are hurt by not having access to marriage is hilarious blend of wishful thinking and all-out nonsense. It makes no attempt to even tangentially discuss that topic, let alone draw conclusions about it. You’re getting Thomas Minnery crazy by pretending it says something that it doesn’t. > [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > Right, so all you can say is that the study offers no evidence that gay parents are better or worse than straight parents. Yup. > [@](#): > > What I am questioning is the assumption that we can’t say gays are as good as straights as parenting. I mean, that seems like the null hypothesis here to me and proof would be needed for the claims of inferiority or superiority. Yup. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2011, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772/80 "2011-07-22T13:39:17Z")
> [@dhkendall](#): > > I’d lay you money, no. Bigotry will always be among us. Twenty says I’m right. Bigotry will always be among us, but I predict that by the end of my lifetime – let’s say July 22nd, 2041 – anti-SSM laws will be considered as quaint as anti-miscegenation laws are today. SSM will be legal in at least 48 states by then. Do we have a bet? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/franken-pwns-focus-on-the-family/589772.md?page=5)