Sections

Weather Forecast

Close
Advertisement

LETTER: Column cited discredited research

Email

BAUDETTE, Minn. — If I were in my classroom today, I would write the vocabulary word of the day on the board as “specious.” Then would present the students with Ronald Fischer’s column (“Focus ‘marriage debates’ on best interests of children,” Page A4, June 19).

Put simply, “specious” is when an argument is presented as the truth but is actually false. The information presented by Fischer in claiming that traditional marriage in North Dakota is “in the best interest” of children is simply specious, in that it presents information that is recognized as false by almost all social, family and legal scholars.

To support his point of view, Fischer cites studies that have been discredited in professional conferences, classrooms and courtrooms across our country. This suggests he is motivated by something more than willful ignorance, when he uses those discredited studies to support the untruth that children of married gay and lesbian parents are somehow deficient.

I would suggest that ignorance and bigotry are more harmful to our children than a family arrangement where parents are gay.

The kind of argument presented by Fischer is the same as the ones supporting the science of eugenics in the early 20th century, arguments that claimed Caucasians were a race superior to all others.

As we now know, the discredited science of eugenics was driven and informed as much by selective use of facts as it was by racism. Here’s hoping that arguments such as Fischer’s also will be consigned to the dustbin of history as being uninformed, unblinking in its personal animus and simply untrue.

David Rolloff

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
randomness