You can keep shouting, Nova, but all of this ground has been covered in my previous posts. Regnerus admits that his study found very few long term committed gay couples who raised children and were still together. That's what was in the random sample data. You can foam at the mouth about Regnerus because it's easier than examining WHY the independent company (with no axe to grind) did not find these chimerical long-term committed gay couples who raised children from young ages and are still together. It's because there are damned few of them--not enough for any statistical significance. THAT says something.
Sure, if in 20 years, researchers go back and find lots of stable gay families who stayed together and raised children, then there might be enough for statistical significance. But for now, they, like the unicorn, don't exist at any level of significance. Now you can ignore the reality of the random sample and cling to previous studies which used cherry-picked cases and interviews with minor children who, of course, have an incentive to say nice things to strangers about their families. But, the reality is that when someone actually did a true random sample and of adult children (not little kids who wanted to please their parents), the sunshine and flowers disappeared.
You want to smear Regnerus, that's ok. Just admit that it's smearing and nothing scientific. You can't get away from the fact that Regnerus' sample was the FIRST random sample done on this issue and it looked at real world adult children and their issues. It did not limit itself to the cool white friends of the researchers who lived in the well-to-do gay enclave downtown. The adult children in this study included a real cross section of Americans raised in households with same sex relationships. For that alone it deserves respect.
And if you look at the other studies Regnerus mentions, it becomes clear that instability may be inherent in same sex relationships with or without marriage and with or without children. The Scandinavian studies are particularly interesting in that regard.