Quote:
Originally Posted by classicman
THAT is the title of the article in the link. The bold is mine, but IS what the author wrote. Now where is the misunderstanding? There seems to be some confusion in what appears crystal clear.
|
I said before, the author of the
article is trying to make a red/blue, rep/dem, case with a broad brush. But in writing this article Talbot based it on the work of researchers that make no political connection.
They are working with religion, values, attitudes and goals of the teens. They make no connection with the politics of the teens or their parents. That's why I said although the overall article is obviously bias, the conclusions and reasoning of the actual researchers, look sound.
This is another case of someone with an agenda taking valid research results and trying to twist or embellish it to prove their agenda. That's partisan and dishonest, but doesn't negate the validity of the researcher's results, which is what Pie quoted. For example, if you just read the quote in the post without going to the link, it's not political.