The study was heavily criticized by victims of child rape and sexual assault, mental health professionals who work with victims of sexual abuse, social conservatives and religious fundamentalists. In 1999, both the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate passed a resolution condemning specific published scholarship.[6][7] The American Psychological Association did not defend the peer reviewed study or note the need for scientists to be able to publish research findings even if the findings are unpopular. Author Thomas D. Oellerich called the study "politically incorrect" but "scientifically correct".[8] It has been suggested that the Rind et al. controversy demonstrates that employing the naturalistic fallacy leads to situations in which empirical descriptions of nature are seen as dictating moral conclusions.[9]