One of the most effective groups on the pro-life and pro-family scene in Ireland is the Iona Institute run by David Quinn who is one of our side’s most effective spokesman on national television. Of course, David and his colleagues are in the thick of the current battles over legal abortion and on homosexual marriage. Here is their latest video on marriage.
Wednesday, January 16, 2013, 12:56 PM
January 17th, 2013 | 8:54 am
Great video, except of course for that pesky fact that no one is trying to outlaw marriage between a man and a woman. And the fact that gay couples do raise children who do need the protections of marriage for their parents. And the handwaving away of married straight couples who can’t or don’t have kids. And the lack of any argument for why marriage needs to be exclusive to straight couples to confer all the benefits of marriage mentioned. Except for that.
January 17th, 2013 | 9:43 am
Ireland’s divorce rate, though quite low, is skyrocketing. I hope this is one of their causes.
January 17th, 2013 | 9:51 am
Except, Boo, that gay couples cannot be the parents of any children, except in extending that term in a metaphorical way to at least one person not related biologically, who cannot fulfill the role of the missing biological parent (two dads=missing a mom, two moms=missing a dad). Society has no compelling interest to encourage these situations by recognizing them. It does not matter how great a parent a person might be individually–parenting is a joint effort that requires an emotional, intellectual, and social complementarity found most distinctly in the biological sexes.
So far as married straight couples without children go–the benefits are conveyed with the status of marriage to create a welcome environment for children, since people typically have kids after marriage. Couples who do not have children at the time of marriage cannot necessarily predict if they will or won’t have children and should not be compelled to announce that to the state in advance of however long their lives may be. Rather, many couples change their minds over time, but children are a regular enough occurrence of straight couples that we have good reason to give them the benefit of the assumption. (Though, if folks are artificially fighting or actively destroying their offspring to avoid the responsibility, then perhaps they should forfeit such benefits, but good luck enforcing that.)
Marriage is either a pre-existing cultural and social institution–in which case the government cannot redefine it to what it has never been–or it is as defined entirely by every individual’s personal beliefs–in which case the government has no compelling reason to support it.
January 17th, 2013 | 1:14 pm
“Ireland’s divorce rate, though quite low, is skyrocketing. I hope this is one of their causes.”
I wouldn’t wish divorce on anyone, not even someone I disliked.
January 17th, 2013 | 1:24 pm
“Except, Boo, that gay couples cannot be the parents of any children, except in extending that term in a metaphorical way to at least one person not related biologically, who cannot fulfill the role of the missing biological parent (two dads=missing a mom, two moms=missing a dad).”
So any parent who is not biologically related to their child is only a metaphorical parent? What a slap in the face to adoptive and step parents. My oldest brother was adopted, and he is my real brother, not simply my “metaphorical” brother. And yes, a family with two dads is missing a mom. But a family with a mom and a dad is missing another mom. So what? What children need most are two committed parents in a low conflict relationship, and what the research shows is that if they have that, the particular genders of the parents don’t seem to matter. Not to mention that gay people are going to keep having kids whether you like it or not, so keeping them from legal marriage only hurts their kids.
“Society has no compelling interest to encourage these situations by recognizing them. It does not matter how great a parent a person might be individually–parenting is a joint effort that requires an emotional, intellectual, and social complementarity found most distinctly in the biological sexes.”
You’ve just provided a compelling reason to recognize those situations; to bind the second parent. Also are you sure you want to say that society has no compelling reason to recognize the marriage of a man and a woman who can’t have children, because that is in fact what you are saying here. Children are certainly a very big reason for marriage, but they aren’t the only one. (cont)
January 17th, 2013 | 2:13 pm
“What children need most are two committed parents in a low conflict relationship, and what the research shows is that if they have that, the particular genders of the parents don’t seem to matter.”
Citation please…I’ve looked for that research in the past, and the data you claim didn’t exist.
January 17th, 2013 | 6:19 pm
I am sometimes mystified by the idea that the purpose of adults is to produce and raise children, whose purpose is to grow up to produce and raise children, whose purpose is to grow up to produce and raise children . . . . I certainly want to do what is best for children, but certainly there is more to life than that. Why are children important? Because they will grow up and become adults. Why are adults important? Because they must care for children. Something is missing here!
January 17th, 2013 | 11:00 pm
Arbatan- sure, here you go:
http://www.livescience.com/17913-advantages-gay-parents.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting
That took me about 5 seconds with a basic internet search. Five seconds…
And if you think Wikipedia is biased, then by all means ignore the body of the article and go directly to the voluminous citations at the end.
Oh, and you know that Regnerus study? The one that foes of gay marriage claim shows gay people are bad parents? If you actually look at the data you will find that the only 2 kids who were actually raised by gay couples in that study turned out as well as the kids raised by intact biological straight parents.
January 18th, 2013 | 12:01 pm
Thank you for the citation, Boo. As for the Regnerus study–and I think the weakness of your claim until substantially more evidence is acquired–is that the sample size of kids raised by homosexual couples is statistically insignificant.
2 cases do not show a trend or provide enough evidence to draw a conclusion of effect or causality–it is purely anecdotal evidence. That’s one reason drugs have to be tested on hundreds of people before placebo effect can ruled out.
Based on data that has been conclusively documented by literally dozens of studies, we know a few things:
1) Children whose parents divorce are significantly more likely to suffer depression, attempt suicide, do more poorly in school, use drugs and alcohol, and engage in risky sexual behavior.
2) Having a parent of the opposite sex present and active in the life of the child lowers many of those negative behaviors and increases achievement. Ex. Studies find girls without fathers suffer effects similar to those named in #1.
3) Monogamous, lifelong relationships among homosexuals (especially two males) are more rare than among heterosexuals. See the 2003-2004 Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census and many other self-reports.
The speculation that homosexual parenting isn’t as good for children is based on extrapolations of that known data.
January 18th, 2013 | 5:12 pm
“Thank you for the citation, Boo. As for the Regnerus study–and I think the weakness of your claim until substantially more evidence is acquired–is that the sample size of kids raised by homosexual couples is statistically insignificant.
2 cases do not show a trend or provide enough evidence to draw a conclusion of effect or causality–it is purely anecdotal evidence. That’s one reason drugs have to be tested on hundreds of people before placebo effect can ruled out. ”
Yes Artaban, that was precisely my point. The study that the right has been crowing about for the past several months does not actually support the conclusions they claim it does. Ergo- lots of scientific evidence on my side, and none on yours.
I notice you didn’t provide any citations for any of your “dozens of studies” (while conveniently ignoring all the citations I provided you) but yes, single parent homes are worse for kids than two parent homes. What you seem to be missing is that kids raised by gay couples are being raised by two people, not one. Extrapolating the negative effects of single parent homes to gay couples homes is what scientists refer to, in their highly technical jargon, as “nonsense.”
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact