Gay marriage and rights are steadily becoming a growing issue between peoples of every nation. With so much controversy over same sex marriage many people take sides simply because of what they think is right or what others are doing. What supporters and opponents do not consider is how same sex marriage affects society. Granting legal marriage rights to gays and lesbians would threaten the stability of the family, reduce morality and threaten the culture of not only the United States but the world.
“Social scientists have been surprisingly consistent in warning against the fractured family.” As stated in “Gay Marriage: Why Would It Affect Me,” a synopsis of Dr. James Dobson’s book, Marriage Under Fire. Examples of same sex marriage affecting the fractured family are seen in Scandinavian countries and throughout Russia. As a result of broken families, children, are homeless and shuffled from foster home to foster home. An environment of instability and selfishness follows the legalization of same sex marriage. In the Bible the apostle Paul describes an epidemic of homosexuality in Rome. He writes, “Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another…they have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanders, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless…” (Romans 1:26-27, 29-31, NIV). Through this example Paul shows what the children of the future will be. What would the world be with people like this? This is the effect of a fractured family. Children need stability. They need a father and a mother. Without the two, children become lost. On a more immediate scale, the legalization of same sex marriage introduces this perversion to every public school in the nation. Textbooks will have to show man/man or woman/woman relationships as the norm. Children’s stories will be filled with this immorality and children as young as kindergarteners will be exposed to immorality at a very young age. Teachers, leaders in the community, parents and foster care parents will have to be taught to affirm homosexuality in children and teens.
Same sex marriage removes a barrier of decency and morality allowing polygamy and other alternatives to traditional marriage. Marriage has always been a bedrock of tradition in society and has always been overwhelmingly supported by the people. By removing this barrier the people allow judges and justices to finalize decisions simply by opinion, no longer by what is right or legal. “Anything allegedly linked to ‘civil rights’ will be doable. The legal underpinnings for marriage will have been destroyed” (Gay Marriage: Why Would It Affect Me?). What is gained for gay or lesbian couples who wish to become married? The benefits of marriage which at a first glance include tax benefits, estate planning benefits, government benefits, employment benefits, medical benefits etc. Same sex couples point out that society discriminates against them because of these benefits, yet if we discriminate against homosexuality are we not also discriminating against singles and those with multiple unmarried partners. No society simply finds difficulties in the sexual choice of those who choose to be gay. What gain then will same sex couples receive from marriage? Statistics in Norway show that only .68 percent of marriages are same sex compared to heterosexual marriages. Sweden shows an even lower percentage of .55 percent. With such low numbers in such liberal areas of Europe why change a conservative United States when only a small portion of the people will actually take advantage of the law?
From a more political view point, what will the nation do with the increase of new dependants on Social Security? The system is already a growing problem from the baby boomers, how can the government also add the demands of homosexuals when the system cannot support the next generation. On a more widespread note, if the United States legalized same sex marriage, then Canada, Mexico and other countries around the world would also legalize same sex marriage. America is highly monitored by political leaders of different countries. Legalization of homosexuality would destroy families in every nation at an alarming rate. The United States of America is a conservative country; it is based on Christian values. If a law is passed for same sex marriage the spread of and continuation of Jesus Christ would be hindered since the family has always been God’s evangelistic tool. The world would become a vile place; it would be similar to ancient Rome when it fell. President Bush called for a second look at the Defense of Marriage Act in 2004. When congress passed, the Defense of Marriage Act, the House of Representatives passed it by a vote of 342 to 67 and the senate by another clear vote of 85 to 14. The President states that those, “congressional votes and the passage of similar defensive marriage laws in 38 states express an overwhelming consensus in our country for protecting the institution of marriage.”
As countries with same sex marriages show us, homosexuality greatly impacts families. Even though the vast majority of the population is heterosexual, same sex marriages and other alternatives demand a disproportionate amount of our attention. Congress and the President have showed a desire to keep traditional marriage to honor, “the union of a man and a woman” (Bush). Given on the majority of the people who only approve of traditional marriages, the United States should only legalize heterosexual marriages.
Never said to not be gay. I simply said that the nation should not have to bend for a minority. THAT is my point. The Bible is a credible source if not for the faith for the history. Red Sea Scrolls can prove its crediblity, among other things that I would be more than happy to talk about, it does not contradict itself you need to understand the passages around it to understand it does not contradict itself. AND I did use other statistics, modern ones, from sweeden/scandinavia. Where there is leglaized gay marriage and in fact did not care about this issue until I read those statistics. Then I realized what gay marriage can do to society. My point is to keep marriage traditional, cultures from many generations have followed this belief, and homosexuality has always been an issue it is not anything new. I'm talking about the future and what could happen. My point is to one not change our laws for a minority and two to simply think of others before ourselves.
I hope that addresses your comments.
What should it matter to someone who is straight!!!! HOW IS IT AFFECTING YOU AS AN INDIVIDUAL...AS LONG AS HOMOSEXUALS DO NOT COME INTO YOUR HOME AND FORCE YOU TO HAVE HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONS THEN IT SHOULDN'T BE ANY CONCERN...
Life is like photography you develop from the negatives!!!
:-h
Please don't write in all caps.
It is difficult to read, it alludes to yelling and thus hostility, and a lot of users won't be very happy with yelling.
Your point will be better received if you take the time to write a civil, well thought-out response. :-)
----
What's the worst that could happen, apart from all of us being flattened or fried or whatever bombs do? [Rudy Steiner from The Book Thief]
k-train...you've offered no proof to show me that gay marriage will destroy all families. In fact, studies have shown that a gay couple is every bit as stable as a straight couple. In some cases, they're more stable. And, since they have to adopt kids (mostly. In vitro, good friends, whatever the case may be), they've got to be pretty stable to make the conscious choice to get a kid.
And it doens't directly affect your family. Like the previous commenter tried to say, it's not like they're breaking into your house and homosexually raping you. The gay guys aren't fucking your husband (I'm speaking with the future in mind) and the lesbians are scissoring you.
The bible is neither a reliable source (as it contradicts itself several times) nor a credible one (as we're not all Christians). Therein, it doesn't matter what the bible says. It's like saying that Harry Potter was sleeping with Ginny but Dumbledore was really gay so gay marriage shouldn't be allowed, but it's ok to be gay.
Also, space out your paragraphs to allow for greater readibility.
Nicholas Aden
Self-Promotion
Click to send Hate Mail
Choice Picks
And yet your opinion seems to be sliding down a very slippery slope. Although I do see your point about children being exposed to homosexuality at an early age, and that is worrisome, I think you would be surprised by how much children actually are exposed to today, even before the legalization of gay marriage. In many children's movies, there are frighteningly hidden messages about homosexuality in children's movies... Happy Feet is one good example, The Bratz Movie is another. However, I have issues with your arguement that legalizing gay marraige will encourage people to be gay. That simply doesn't make sense. Gay marraige isn't legal now, and yet we have homosexuals in our country. And, as you pointed out, in more liberal European contries, once they legalized same-sex marriage, it wasn't as if large percentages of the country "turned gay." Your arguement reminds me of the arguement that "Condoms make kids have sex." The logic doesn't exactly follow.
I commend you on how well you write... Your blog was very well pieced together, and your arguement was a smooth one!
-Annie
If your factual evidence comes from the Bible, it's a little outdated. Those statistics are, what? 2,000 years old? I'm sure there are more controlled, reliable studies than the gospel according to Paul. There may even be some that include actual gay people in them. Dig a little into what professionals who have looked into this have to say (and by professionals, I mean not just clergy). You may be surprised, and you may require a paradigm shift.
You know nothing about my life, so don't put that on me.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Just for the record, there is no "Gospel according to Paul" ;-) The world "gospel" means "Good News," and in Christian/biblical terms, "Good News" is the story of Jesus. The only people who wrote the story of Jesus (that was put into the Christian Bible, anyway) were Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John.
Although you could have been trying to be sarcastic...
Anyway, just sayin'. Lol.
----
What's the worst that could happen, apart from all of us being flattened or fried or whatever bombs do? [Rudy Steiner from The Book Thief]
–noun 1. the teachings of Jesus and the apostles; the Christian revelation.
2. the story of Christ's life and teachings, esp. as contained in the first four books of the New Testament, namely Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
3. (usually initial capital letter) any of these four books.
4. something regarded as true and implicitly believed: to take his report for gospel.
5. a doctrine regarded as of prime importance: political gospel.
6. glad tidings, esp. concerning salvation and the kingdom of God as announced to the world by Christ.
7. (often initial capital letter) Ecclesiastical. an extract from one of the four Gospels, forming part of the Eucharistic service in certain churches.
8. gospel music.
–adjective 9. of, pertaining to, or proclaiming the gospel or its teachings: a gospel preacher.
10. in accordance with the gospel; evangelical.
11. of or pertaining to gospel music: a gospel singer.
You are partly correct.
how am i only partly correct?
Those definitions don't define any Gospel of Paul.
----
What's the worst that could happen, apart from all of us being flattened or fried or whatever bombs do? [Rudy Steiner from The Book Thief]
Ummm. I go to school in Massachusetts and I have to say, that I have seen no horrible social consequences. In fact, it's a lot like where I come from except Boston's a slightly smaller city and it's colder. How, apart from your religious beliefs, can you show how allowing people to marry the ones they love will hurt you in any way?
"-bah!! Pardon the "bah!" I feel several "bahs!", but out of courtesy I only say one."
H.P. Lovecraft
By saying this I truly do not mean to be rude to you or progressiveu, But this is the biggest load of bull shit i have ever heard.
"Granting legal marriage rights to gays and lesbians would threaten the stability of the family, reduce morality and threaten the culture of not only the United States but the world."
"As a result of broken families, children, are homeless and shuffled from foster home to foster home."
You brought no evidence to any of these statements. The majority of the kids in forster homes and homeless are those who comes from heterosexual families.
"An environment of instability and selfishness follows the legalization of same sex marriage."
how does the legalization of same sex marriages promotes selfishness and instability.
And to your entire reference to the bible about how "evil" gay people are, all i have to say is that not everyone believes in your religion and the world today has hateless, heartless, ruthless people who are heterosexual.
"Textbooks will have to show man/man or woman/woman relationships as the norm. Children’s stories will be filled with this immorality and children as young as kindergarteners will be exposed to immorality at a very young age. Teachers, leaders in the community, parents and foster care parents will have to be taught to affirm homosexuality in children and teens."
This makes no sense. I see interacial relationships today more then ever, still that does not mean teachers and parnets have to sit down and talk to children about it. You make it seem like legalizaing Gay marriages is going to change history or something.
"What is gained for gay or lesbian couples who wish to become married"
I am not gay so i cannot truly speak for gay people on this subject, but from my understanding I do not think that gay people want to get married for tax, medical, and employment benefits. They want to married for the same reason a man and a women does, because they love eachother.
I think that your whole argument is exaggerated. Gay marriages are not going to push the world into an epidemic. Two men or two women being married is the same as and a man and a women getting married. What is so wrong with children being exposed to gay marriages they are just as much loved from two parents of the same sex as any other child.
Liv Life Your Way
First, I will continue to bite the head off anyone who insists upon biting the head off my life and relationship. Arguments against gay marriage from people who have never been oppressed by society-at-large ring hollow to me.
Second, Um, yeah, look how everything went to hell in a ham basket when we "bent" for the African Americans and Caribbean Islanders. Wouldn't want to make the mistake of treating people like equally valuable humans again, would we?
Third, simply stating "Examples of same sex marriage affecting the fractured family are seen in Scandinavian countries and throughout Russia. As a result of broken families, children, are homeless and shuffled from foster home to foster home. An environment of instability and selfishness follows the legalization of same sex marriage" does not amount to statistical evidence. Back it up with the source, or it has no credentials. What studies show this? Where? And what were the numbers involved? What ere the qualifications of the researchers? What was their method of analyzing the environment of selfishness and instability?
Do you really not see how hurtful and insulting that is?
Fourth, the fall of Rome was not the result of gay marriage.
Fifth, but it's okay to change our laws to discriminate?
And on a side note, The scrolls to which you refer are called the Dead Sea Scrolls. I've seen them and read them. They contain a lot of things that don't back the bible, too. They even contain nasty gossip about villagers and some fairy tale type stories. For some reason that was not embraced as the word of God. Dunno. Nothing about gays in them, though.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
"and what does Boston have to do with anything? I'm talking about the future and what could happen. My point is to one not change our laws for a minority and two to simply think of others before ourselves, the world would be a better place."
Boston has everything to do with this. Massachusetts has legalized gay marriage. And guess what, I was in Boston before this, I'm in it now (actually, right now I'm in NY, but only for the weekend) and guess what? It is exactly the same!
So, you want to think of others? Why not think of all the homosexuals couples who are discriminated against by the law of the land?
"-bah!! Pardon the "bah!" I feel several "bahs!", but out of courtesy I only say one."
H.P. Lovecraft
I like gay people.
They never hurt me or anyone I know. I see no reason to deny them the same rights as heterosexuals beyond personal religious beliefs.
Considering the US was founded on the basis that citizens of this country would have freedom of religion and the government would entail separation of church and state... it would be a bit hypocritical to enjoy the benefits of being an American citizen and then try to keep homosexuals from the right to marriage based on one's personal religious beliefs, now wouldn't it?
End comment.
It is your prerogative to have your beliefs. However, a more appropriate statement would be "I believe homosexuality is wrong based on my religious beliefs." rather than the more abusive and inappropriate, "Homosexuality is flat-out wrong." which implies gays are doing something which ought to be illegal.
The Bible was written by men. I could just as easily argue that homosexuality is God's way of controlling the population, and demonstrate how many "innocent" animals also display homosexuality, thereby significantly degrading your original argument that it is somehow unnatural and against God's desires. I can also argue that I know many gay people, and homosexuality is clearly not a choice, but a biological occurrence that one is born with.
Being gay is not a "preference" and asking people not to be gay is like my telling you to stop being interested in boys. It's rude, inappropriate, and inhumane.
With that said, I am glad you concede that the Bible was written by men merely inspired by their belief in God, and since men are inherently imperfect, the Bible cannot be perfect. I suppose that means I "won" by your own default argument. Go me!
""The Bible was written by men."
yes it was. written by men, men inspired by God."
These men also had their own parishes and following and lived in a completely different context than we are in now.
They wrote to appease not only the Christians, but also their own parishes (which were, of course, Christian). They wrote to relate to everyone (hell, most of the Bible was written for Gentiles, a.k.a. non-Jews, of the time.) and definitely related their writing to the fall of the Roman temples and to wars and conflicts happening at the time.
They may have been "inspired by God," but that doesn't mean that God told them in a dream exactly what to write down so that it may be literally applied for the rest of time.
You have to remember that the Bible was written during a time of great conflict; it was a much different time with much different people, a much different culture, and completely different laws and rulers. And it was written by men... regular old men who happened to hear and believe the Christian faith and write down how they saw it.
Oh, and for the record, I'm a Christian.
----
What's the worst that could happen, apart from all of us being flattened or fried or whatever bombs do? [Rudy Steiner from The Book Thief]
I assume you're talking to me as you refuted my statement. If this is the case, PLEASE use the reply button so that everyone knows who you're trying to say is an idiot. I know you're not trying to call me an idiot, it was a metaphor.
SO, you made the statement that the bible tells nothing but the 100% truth. Offer me 1 (one) source from the internet (not wikipedia) that proves that the bible is 100% true.
Nicholas Aden
Self-Promotion
Click to send Hate Mail
Choice Picks
Link
Now, would you like to point out specific instances where something gives credibility to the bible that is not an OBVIOUSLY biased source of information? I mean "all about truth?" Type in the words the bible is true and you'll get a ton of crap like that. To call that a credible source is like calling an atheist "Satan."
Nicholas Aden
Self-Promotion
Click to send Hate Mail
Choice Picks
When I ran a search on that in google I found that there a dozens of sites that support the bible being credible and I have as of yet found one to differ in this belief. And from what I have read and the research I have done so far I would have to say their arguments are very good, very well laid out and they are very well backed up by other sources that are not biblical, maybe you should check it out? Heres one website that I have enjoyed researching.
www.allaboutgod.com/
Yes, I actually searched that. How else would I get the link there? Lol.
I think the problem lies in that you're using sites dedicated to proving the bible to be 100% accurate, written by Christians for Christians. I've read the bible. This is one of the reasons I became an atheist. To be perfectly honest, until I was 13, I was rather convinced that God existed, Jesus came to Earth to save me (me, specifically, because I've been an egotist since time began), and that that was that. I then read the bible. Completely. I read the bible, the bible for dummies, and religion for dummies. This is when I came to my final decision: Religion sucks. God probably doesn't exist. No one cares. The universe is all that is. Physics dictates that God has to live within the same constraints as any human and thus cannot create something from absolutely nothing.
So, while your source might be good to use if debating religious issues, it's not good for our current debate. I will, nevertheless, read through the site and come back to you with any problems I see.
Nicholas Aden
Self-Promotion
Click to send Hate Mail
Choice Picks
I want to challenge that and do research on it. Thanks for the idea.
Actually, I think quite a lot of people care.
You forget that I'm an egotistical prick and therefore don't care, meaning anyone that does care doesn't matter and is therefore irrelevant. It's an arbitrary value based on proportions leading to radio nuclear magnetic decay which causes U-238 to be super accurate.
Nicholas Aden
Self-Promotion
Click to send Hate Mail
Choice Picks
...wtf
Well, if X=Nick's ego, then that means that O=a normal person's ego. Then, if you take the difference between the 2, which is C, we have....
"What a man does for pay is of little significance. What he is, as a sensitive instrument responsive to the world's beauty, is everything!"
H. P. Lovecraft
"What the Bible says is the whole truth and nothing but the truth."
Oh yeah? Prove it. If you can't then you go on believing that, but don't force others to.
"Homosexuality is flat-out wrong, now I'm not saying I hate gay people, I do not like their ways."
Sigh.... Based on what legal authority in the United States?
"It pains me to see people decieved into thinking that that it is just their way of living. It's a certain way of thinking as well, which can be learned from a young age, indirectly. The good thing is that behaviors and beliefs learned, can be unlearned."
Yeah, that's why those straight camps turn out fine examples of repressed, psycologically damaged, self-hating gay people....
"Obviously humans were created to create,"
Really, that's not obvious to me.
"which cannot be upheld by a gay couple because they are the same sex."
Good. We suffer from overpopulation anyway.
"Gay marriage goes against God's word"
Who's god?
"and people's moral beliefs."
Yeah, well it goes against my moral beliefs to discriminate against people with a biological preference towards romantic and sexual love with a person of their own sex and, therefore, are not allowed to enter into a contract which doesn't have the slightest affect on anyone who's opposed to it.
"In my opinion, marriage should only be for a man and woman."
In my opinion, the 14th amendment doesn't care what anyone's opinion is.
"-bah!! Pardon the "bah!" I feel several "bahs!", but out of courtesy I only say one."
H.P. Lovecraft
You're (again) talking to someone who believes the bible is a good book, but not proof of anything. Think of your audience before you supply evidence.
Nicholas Aden
Self-Promotion
Click to send Hate Mail
Choice Picks
"You don't show any mercy do you?"
Nope. I'm a total asshole. :dances: I apologize if I come off rude at times.
"-Ok. the world's existence,"
There is a scientific explanation that does not require the existence of god. Even if there wasn't, there are other religions.
"your existence,"
Humanity evolved. My parents got busy. I was born.
"salvation, miracles..."
I don't believe in god. Why would I believe in salvation? I have never seen anything I would consider a miracle. What would I consider a miracle? A suspension of natural laws.
"and I'm not forcing others to believe it, you have a choice whether you want to or not."
No, but legislation based on your beliefs forces people who don't share your beliefs to follow them to that degree.
"Homosexuality is flat-out wrong, now I'm not saying I hate gay people, I do not like their ways."
On what authority do you say homosexuality is wrong? If it's gods, well, we don't live in a theocracy.
"Gay marriage goes against God's word "Who's god?"
- The one and only living God."
Ah. I don't remember Nicholas Aden ever saying that.
"- Genesis 1:28 "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it...""
That still remains un-obvious to me. I don't believe in the historic validity of genesis.
"-bah!! Pardon the "bah!" I feel several "bahs!", but out of courtesy I only say one."
H.P. Lovecraft
I can't believe no one has pointed this out yet...
Canada already has gay marriage. Has for a number of years. Gay couples go there to get married.
And I'd like to see precise statistics about your Scandinavian countries. And include the Netherlands... they seemed pretty stable when I was over there last month.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
I am ashamed of myself.
Thank you, Chelle.
I didn't know that about Canada. Unfortunetatley, as I am a New Yorker, Canada and New Jersey are my worst enemies. X-([
"-bah!! Pardon the "bah!" I feel several "bahs!", but out of courtesy I only say one."
H.P. Lovecraft
Not a Yankees fan, then, huh?
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
I find baseball dull.... [-(
"-bah!! Pardon the "bah!" I feel several "bahs!", but out of courtesy I only say one."
H.P. Lovecraft
I meant to point that out, but decided it would be fruitless to continue to argue with someone so dogmatic.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I am sorry, but I have researched this issue rather thoroughly, and your attribution of the effects of same-sex marriage are not reflected in the data I have seen. In fact, the data that is coming out those countries that DO have full same-sex marriages would seem to completely reject your claims. For example...
According to statistics reported by the Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures...
"Since 1970, there has been a downward long-term trend in the number of marriages...The extra same-sex marriages that are included in the count since 2001 keep the level a little higher, but not enough to prevent the overall decline...In spite of all of this, the number of married people as a share of the total population has only decreased marginally, from 47 percent (1970) to 43 percent (2003)...The fact that the number of marriages is declining and that less value is attached to marriage does not mean that the old ideal of a relationship is also disappearing. On the contrary, within a cultural development which stresses the hyper-individual, the authentic and the real (an emotions culture) there seems to be room for relationships which do not need official recognition. It is the qualitative satisfaction which the relationship provides, which provides is main source of justification. More and more people opt for relationship types other than marriage which are less controlled by governmental or religious prescriptions...The number of divorces has risen sharply, especially in the nineteen seventies. Nowadays, almost three out of ten marriage end in divorce. In 1970, the top year for weddings, there were only 10 thousand divorces in The Netherlands. Five years later that number had doubled to 20 thousand. One of the most significant moments of increase of the number of divorces was the introduction of the Income Support Law, which helped women to choose the state instead of their husband as the main breadwinner." (LINK)
The facts above reveal a rather obvious fallacy in your argument. The trends you describe pre-date the legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the countries in question by several decades. In fact, the CBS has reported that that trend has begun to reverse itself, noting that in 2006 the rate of marriage actually increased. Similarly, the robust system of civil partnership in the Netherlands has (again according to the CBS) also been increasing prevalent since the 2001. One canard used by the opponents of same-sex marriage is to ignore the fact that many couples are choosing registered partnership instead of marriage, implying that families are being harmed when in fact they are simply supporting themselves with through the alternative venue of registered partnerships.
According to Darren R. Spedale (who spent two years on a Fulbright Fellowship in Denmark researching Scandinavian same-sex partnerships) and William N. Eskridge, Jr. (the John A. Garver Professor of Jurisprudence at the Yale Law School.)...
"These are no longer hypothetical questions, because same-sex marriage is no longer just a theoretical possibility. Denmark was the first country to extend the rights and responsibilities of marriage to same-sex couples in 1989; and although the law used the name "registered partnership," straight as well as lesbian and gay Danes have generally equated these partnerships with marriage. Norway followed the Danish example in 1993, Sweden in 1995. While the actual title of "marriage" has been granted to gay couples elsewhere in the world only within the last five years, the Nordic countries have provided us with a rich source of information, and a 17-year history, as to what actually happens in society when gay and lesbian citizens marry.
Social conservatives suggest that legal recognition of same-sex couples has harmed society...However, there is no evidence that allowing same-sex couples to marry weakens the institution. If anything, the numbers indicate the opposite. A decade after Denmark, Norway and Sweden passed their respective partnership laws, heterosexual marriage rates had risen 10.7% in Denmark; 12.7% in Norway; and a whopping 28.8% in Sweden. In Denmark over the last few years, marriage rates are the highest they've been since the early 1970s. Divorce rates among heterosexual couples, on the other hand, have fallen. A decade after each country passed its partnership law, divorce rates had dropped 13.9% in Denmark; 6% in Norway; and 13.7% in Sweden. On average, divorce rates among heterosexuals remain lower now than in the years before same-sex partnerships were legalized.
Is there a correlation, then, between same-sex marriage and a strengthening of the institution of marriage? It would be difficult, and suspect, to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between these trends in heterosexual marriage and marriage rights for gays and lesbians. But the facts demonstrate that there is no proof that same-sex marriage will harm the institution of marriage, or children. An optimistic reading of the facts might even suggest that the energy and enthusiasm that same-sex couples bring to the institution of marriage may cause unmarried heterosexual couples to take a fresh look at marriage as an option.
Our research has also uncovered additional social benefits. In dozens of interviews with partnered couples and through other sources, we found that marriage rights had an important beneficial effect not only on the couples themselves, but on their local and national communities as well. Couples reported that their relationships were stronger and more durable, that relationships with family members had deepened, that co-workers had become more tolerant and supportive, and their children felt greater validation by having married parents. Many couples reported a greater emphasis on monogamy, which may be reflected by the fact that national rates of HIV and STD infections declined in each of the Scandinavian countries in the years after they passed their partnership laws." (LINK)
If you feel so inclined, you can review the a more detailed account of the research conduced by Eskridge, Spedale (and Hans Ytterberg, the Associate Judge of Appeals and Ombudsman, The Office of Ombudsman Against Discrimination on Grounds of Sexual Orientation, Sweden), here.
Your error was in turning to such a highly biased source (I mean, c'mon...James Dobson? Are you serious?) for an opinion. The objective data does not support this man's claims, which are quite obviously religiously, rather than scientifically motivated.
percivale
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
I love you like crazycakes! Are you a reference librarian or something? You find the most amazing sources.
And now, let's all stop giving crazytrain reads.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
You only have one read to give :)
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
...I'm not a reference librarian (though my partner is in school, training to be one). I am a computer programmer, working for a major bank on a software system that facilitates the electronic payment of medical claims...lol...boring stuff. My degree is in English Literature, however, and I do know my way around a library (and around the internet), and I have a passion for research. I have also been an activist in the gay community for about 20 years now, and I've developed quite a "favorites" list over the years of useful, pro- and anti-gay resources.
percivale
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Wow - you've done a lot of research, yet your argument is still terrible.
"Granting legal marriage rights to gays and lesbians would threaten the stability of the family, reduce morality and threaten the culture of not only the United States but the world."
Yeah, because Britney Spears being married once for less than 24 hours, married again and divorced is REALLY helping the sanctity of marriage and morality.
Where does your argument come from? Personal beliefs? The Bible?
Please continue your education - so far you're only studying to advance your supremist opinions.
Liz
"drink from that wishing well but may it never quench your thirst" - Indigo Girls
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/flnerd
Who said I was trying to advance my supremist opinions? Back off everyone. Some of my sources are yes biased. My research is lacking so do not attack me on something that in all honesty I care very little for. The country should do what is best for the country that is what it comes down to. This 'blog' I wrote is just a paper I wrote for English so dont think I am going to start attacking each and every homosexual, if you're nice to me I am nice to you. And really is it nesecarry for anyone to talk so degradingly to others no matter what your beliefs are? You tell those who stand up for our morals to stop discriminating yet you attack us and try to bring us down. I never was violent towards homosexuals in my blog, I have never hated homosexuals and in fact have a friend who is one. So please do not think I hate these people. But these are my beliefs, I posted this blog to see what peoples opinions were. Instead those who opposed my morals attacked me. How fair is that? I never attacked you so please do not attack me. My opinions are based on my Christian beliefs which I am not forcing on anyone and which I am very dedicated to. Just because I think its wrong to be homosexual does not mean that I hate that person, that person could be my best friend but I could still think what they do is wrong. Just as I think its wrong for someone to cheat but that doesnt mean I hate them. I hope all of you who have posted understand and I also understand some of you had VERY good points you make me want to research the subject more and some of you did not attack you addressed. Others made me want to say forget it and make me hate homosexuals just from your comments. Please be rational.
I'm not going to refute any of your claims here. You believe what you believe; I maintain that I am not sinning and that I am not selfish or unstable. We'll have to disagree on those points. What I need you to understand is that when you write a tract against another group's civil rights, it is very hurtful to every member of that group, and to every person who has the capacity to feel empathy for people who are different from them (read: allies).
For example, you said that selfishness and instability follow in the wake of gay marriage, and that gays are immoral. As I am a part of that group you have summarily judged, I take that personally. You may not think you have made a personal attack, because to you these are just facts, but it is the exact same thing as saying that blacks are not as smart as whites. Any black person I know would be deeply offended by such a statement, and would quite understandably be hurt and angry. If I were to say, "Blond chicks are immoral whores who sleep around," you would be personally affronted. And if I were to write 200 words about how whorish blond girls are, and then repeatedly defend my stance with no factual evidence, and even go so far as so send a personal message containing said stance, you would feel downright violated. And if i further said I don't hate blonds, just their whorishness, you wouldn't feel any better about it.
I hope that explains why people are "attacking" you. They are upset because YOU are attacking some very good people. Those people and their friends have a right to defend themselves. Please don't act like it's no big deal. Making hurtful assumptions about any group of people is always a VERY big deal. It's exactly how genocide starts. Look at the statements Hitler disseminated about the Jews sometime. They are almost exactly the kind of argument you are using to deny civil rights to the GLBT community.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I never attacked anyone that is just the mindset you took when you read the blog. And if I did make it sound attacking I never meant it that way. And have you considered that with how you act towards me you become the biggest hypocrite of the thing you most hate? Discrimination. You hate my simply because of what I believe while I do not hate you. Can you understand that?
I hate the argument, not the arguer.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Hi K-Train,
I really have to thank ediblewoman for her response to you after you responded (probably seemingly) to my post. She (I assume it's a she, based on the name) was able to more mindfully write down what was in my mind - especially the blond argument. You may not have wanted to attack anyone, but you did. And it hurts, just as you say gay marriage does. I have a hard time having a conversation with others who use morals as the backbone for their argument, because it's not based in fact, nor is it possible to have any kind of discussion.
Let me explain to you, quite calmly, a little why I take issue with the fact that others think gay families are destroying the moral fiber of America. I am in a committed, loving relationship where I come home to the same woman every night. She has an 11 year old son from a previous marriage who we both love and care for very much. We spend time as a family reading before bed, watching appropriate movies, making sure we have milk with dinner, not cussing. We spend time with her ex, his father, and get along quite well without any hositility or negativity around each other. I think we get along better than most divorced families. So when someone says that we're destroying the morality in America, I want to scream - and this is why. We're not married yet I've already made a commitment to stay faithful, loyal and loving to this one person, to make sure her needs are taken care of, along with those of her son, where's the sin in that?
For the record I don't hate you, but I disagree with your original entry.
Thank you for listening - I appreciate it.
Liz
"drink from that wishing well but may it never quench your thirst" - Indigo Girls
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/flnerd
And you may enjoy this entry:
http://progressiveu.org/211551-gay-life-our-dastardly-plan-destroy-insti...
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
In the future, when posting about controversial topics I would suggest having an arsenal of legitimate, unbiased sources that do not include websites from organizations that clearly have intent to push one side or the other, or wikipedia. You can check out some of my blogs for example if you'd like; I've posted more than one that more than one person had a strong adverse reaction to. Specifically:
http://www.progressiveu.org/103818-i-do-not-support-the-jena-6
http://www.progressiveu.org/084651-the-truth-about-global-warming
http://www.progressiveu.org/001209-i-am-a-meat-eater-and-im-proud-of-it-...
and the infamous: http://www.progressiveu.org/015719-if-you-do-not-support-the-iraq-war-yo...
You could say I have a habit of standing out against the crowd, so I know where you are coming from. But don't get defensive when people tear down your argument because you are lacking logic or references; just learn from it and built a stronger one or use what you've learned for future blogs.
You did. And I quote..
"My point is to keep marriage traditional, cultures from many generations have followed this belief, and homosexuality has always been an issue it is not anything new. I'm talking about the future and what could happen. My point is to one not change our laws for a minority and two to simply think of others before ourselves."
That sounds to me like you're trying to advance an opinion that is clearly discriminatory against gay and lesbian couples.
Back off, yourself. You certainly have a right to your own opinions, but when you decided to publish those opinions in a blog, you invited the entire ProU membership to read and respond to those opinions. If you don't want to defend your position any further, you don't have to. But, if you think that those of us who feel strongly about equality are going to simply let your comments pass unchallenged, you have another think coming.
And yet, attacking each and every homosexual is exactly what you did. There is nothing "nice" about referring to gay and lesbian couples and their families as "broken" and "unnatural," and accusing us of "immorality" and "perversion." Failing to do the research necessary to write an informed opinion is no excuse, and you would do well to learn the lesson that when you cite biased and inaccurate sources as the basis for an opinion, you open yourself up to be criticized for it.
When your "morals" instruct you to discriminate against your fellow citizens, then yes...I for one will try to bring you down. I have a very low tolerance for bigotry, and no patience whatsoever for those who think that their religion gives them the authority to tell other citizens how they "should" be living their lives.
If you don't think that your "friend" is deserving of the same rights and privileges that are guaranteed to ALL citizens of our great nation, then I think you have a pretty funny idea about what constituutes a "friendship." And, you say you don't "hate" gay people, but when you're on the receiving end of a diatribe that accuses you of "destroy[ing] families," its hard to feel the "love."
I can't speak for everyone here, but I for one felt personally attacked by your blog. When you make sweeping, blanket statements degrading an entire group of people, it only stands to reason that those people are likely to take issue with your comments.
All actions of the government are backed up by the very real threat of force (police power), and all laws are actions of the government. Marriage in this country is a series of civil laws, and when you suggest that gay people be excluded from the institution of marriage, your argument relies inherently under the threat of force.
If you want people to be "rational," then you might want to consider not insulting them and their families.
percivale
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Thank you, Percivale for also being level-headed enough to respond to this essay with aplomb. Normally I consider myself to be very calm and rational, but the argument made by this author had me yelling at my monitor in the middle of work.
I'm also very dedicated to the Christian ideals with which I was brought up, the first one being: Love thy neighbor like you love yourself.
Thank you.
Liz
"drink from that wishing well but may it never quench your thirst" - Indigo Girls
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/flnerd
The internet isnt always a reliable source either. And if we want to talk about the credibility of the Bible I can talk about that in my next blog.
I just want to be the one to NOT attack you here. So. Bring that it may, but... I don't think you're arguement was bad at all. People who simply do not agree with you don't like that you have no conceit. Which is absolutely fine for the purpose of a school paper. I am sure that most (if not all) the people freaking out about this are 'guilty' of the same thing when it comes to written-for-my-English-Class papers. Although I don't agree with all of your points, you made a good fluid arguement, and I understand where you are coming from, especially after reading your latest comment. And I totally get the bit about not condemning the person for homosexuality (or infidelity, or stealing, or lying, or self-destructive behaviors, or making bad choices, etc.) , but not agreeing with it, either. That takes a lot of maturity, especially coming from a Christian background, which I assume you are. I also like the fact that you kept your calm even when people's responses were overwhelming. If this were Myspace, I would give some serious kudos.
Thank you.
I just want to make sure because you referred to our beautiful nation as conservative. You must be living on a different world than me beause last time I checked we are the always changing, always evolving, little bit of everything nation. I'm not going to say liberal but we are among the first to have, show, and be proud of our vast diversity. I do agree that our country was based on christian values. The same christians that founded, instilled, even forced thier beliefs on others. But you have to realize that even christians aren't angels. It boils down to this... we are all people. We live on the same planet and we have to respect each other. We need to agree to disagree.
You also stated that same sex marriages produce "broken families, children are homeless and schuffled from foster home to foster home" How naive do you have to be to think that gay marriges cause this. This is already happening. If anything same sex couples could give these parentless children a home.
I do agree that children need stability. You think that without a father and mother a child would be lost? there are millions of single parents that are raising wonderful children. But you are right that two parents, in some cases, are better than one. That should be wether they are homo- or hetero- sexual parents.
One thing i thought was a little amusing was when you said "marriage is the bedrock of tradition in society" yea, before divorce became a fad.
Compared to European countries America is conservative so yes I was refering to the United States. And its the fractured family that causes the homeless children. The fractured family is encouraged (please do not take the wrong way) by gay marriage. Simply because it defies many core values. And you can look at this without a religous perspective and understand if you have an open mind and consider both sides. But you have to consider both sides, before you take a side and argue for it. Which in all honesty I think everyone myself included should do.
X-([ X-([.....OK, I think I can speak rationally now...
"And its the fractured family that causes the homeless children."
I'd say that there are a variety of reasons for homeless children. The "fractured family", meaning, I take it, a family that functions poorly (Dysfunctional to the nth), is a reason.
However...
"The fractured family is encouraged (please do not take the wrong way) by gay marriage."
This I disagree with. Why? Well, I'll go into that shortly.
"Simply because it defies many core values."
Such as what? That's my big problem. And, of course, how does allowing to people of the same sex to marry have any effect on you?
"And you can look at this without a religous perspective and understand if you have an open mind and consider both sides."
:)) I have never seen any argument against gay marriage that doesn't have religious origins.
"But you have to consider both sides, before you take a side and argue for it. Which in all honesty I think everyone myself included should do."
In that, I agree.
"What a man does for pay is of little significance. What he is, as a sensitive instrument responsive to the world's beauty, is everything!"
H. P. Lovecraft
Your dog is adorable.
Why thank you. You have appeased the Mighty Meek Dog. She will now spare your life. :dances:
"What a man does for pay is of little significance. What he is, as a sensitive instrument responsive to the world's beauty, is everything!"
H. P. Lovecraft
Damnit another brought into the Mighty Meek Dog's graces. When will the Invisible Pink Unicorn gather strength again?
*cries quietly in the corner while softly hugging the Mighty Meek Dog*
Face it, anyone over the age of seven will prefer a cute dog to an invisible Unicorn! 8-}
"What a man does for pay is of little significance. What he is, as a sensitive instrument responsive to the world's beauty, is everything!"
H. P. Lovecraft
I just asked him, "If you could have a cute dog or an invisible pink unicorn as a pet, which would you choose?" He looked at me as if I am an idiot (which, of course, is true), and said, "An invisible pink unicorn, of course!"
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I didn't see that you said "over seven." Sorry, pink unicorn. :(
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Exactly! :dances:
"What a man does for pay is of little significance. What he is, as a sensitive instrument responsive to the world's beauty, is everything!"
H. P. Lovecraft
America is really only conservative because of the people who run it.
And by people I mean the president and the Christian community.
absolutely
i believe if you want to have an opinion about something you need to take both sides into perspective. and i have. i am surrounded by people that feel the same way you do. I respect their view BUT i do not believe in it. I think every human being on this planet should be treated with the same dignity and respect and given the same rights including marriage.
I think that we should garuntee the right to mariage to anyone. Christianity is everywhere in the world, and I think enough homosexuals realize what christians believ about them. However, are you going to deny children the right to live in a home that provides all the needs they require just because the couple is of the same sex? We cannot base these things on religion, because there needs to be respect for those that dont fallow the teachings of your god. I consider myself a christian, but I also would like to adopt children with my soon-to-be wife (im a girl, by the way). Why do children need both a mother and a father, when two parents can teach them all they need to know, regardless of their sex? And if this holds true, that children need both parents, what of those single parents out there? All I am saying is that acording to the bible, it is a sin, but you need also to remember that not everyone believes in the bible. Same-sex parents can be good parents just like a conventional couple, and they do not teach homosexuality (i believe that it is something you are born with, because up until recently, i thought myself a heterosexual, until I fell in love with my fiance), but rather teach the children acceptance. What would you say if they took their children to church and read them the bible? Would you still condem them? And what about the athiest parents? Are they unfit to raise children as well?