Comments about ‘Gay marriage: California's Prop. 8 lands on doorstep of US Supreme Court’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, July 31 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
red state pride
Cottonwood Heights, UT

First of all, I really don't have a (constitutional) problem if the citizens of a State vote to allow gay marriage. I have a moral problem with it but I can look past that. I wouldn't have a constitutional problem if the citizens of a State voted to allow people to marry their first or second cousins, sisters or brothers or to have multiple wives or husbands. That is their prerogative. What I do have a problem with is when the citizens of a State have a referendum and decide by majority that marriage should be between one man and one woman and then that decision is overturned by the judiciary.
I'm generally not a fan of true democracy except when it pertains to social issues. If you're going to argue under equal protection then why can't a person marry their sister or have multiple wives or husbands? Are they not being discriminated against if that's what would make them happy? Why are people who earn a higher level of income than most taxed at a higher rate? They don't have "equal protection" under the law. Someone has some explaining to do.

Huntsville, UT

@red state pride;

Would you have a problem if the citizens of the states put your marriage up to a vote?

Fortunately, we aren't a true Democracy where majority rules. We're a Constitutional Republic where minorities also have rights.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

we could have a vote and decide that a turnip is made of beef, but that would not make it something it is not.

The Pineview high school girls junior varisty basketball team could declare themselves world basketball champions, but that would not make it so.

Some things just are what they are and others are something different regardless of how unfair some may think it is and how much the latter wants to think it is the same as the former.

metamora, IL

In the 1970's, we were led into a great social experiment called "no-fault divorce." This was a redefinition of marriage, an untested social experiment with the family, though much more subtle than what we’re being asked to consider today in regard to gay marriage. The no-fault divorce experiment said marriage should only last as long as one partner wanted it to last, and implicitly said that it was almost exclusively about adult happiness, not child well-being. That was a dramatic shift in thinking, and society has paid the price.

Glenn Stanton, a sociologist and marriage expert, puts it this way: “NFD advocates told us that it was simply love, and not family structure, that made a family. And even though we didn’t have any experience with widespread divorce, NFD advocates assured us it would all work out fine.”

Thirty years of experience with millions of divorced families indicate it wasn’t such good idea.

Every major study since then—and there have been thousands—shows that the divorce experiment hurt children and adults. Badly. Worse than anyone ever imagined.

metamora, IL

Previous post continued:

What we know now is that children from single-gender homes are more likely to commit crimes, go to jail, have children out of wedlock, drop out of school, abuse drugs, experience emotional trouble, commit suicide, and live in poverty. Name the social problem, and it’s tied to NFD.

Judith Wallerstein, a Cal–Berkeley professor, studied children of divorce for 30 years. She laments:

“In our rush to improve the lives of adults … we made radical changes in the family without realizing how it would change the experience of growing up. We embarked on a gigantic social experiment without any idea of how the next generation would be affected. If the truth be told, the history of divorce in our society is replete with unwarranted assumptions that adults have made about children simply because such assumptions are congenial to adult needs and wishes.”

metamora, IL

Previous post continued:

The same-sex marriage experiment follows this same path. It asks us to redefine marriage based on huge, unproven assumptions driven largely by the wishes of adults rather than the needs of children.

And, like the no-fault divorce advocates of the ’60s and ’70s, same-sex marriage advocates are telling us that parental gender does not matter for the family and for children.

But we don’t have to wonder how a one-gender family will impact children. We know from 40 years of experience with the explosive growth of “intentionally fatherless or motherless families.”

Thousands of conclusive social science, medical, and psychological investigations published in hundreds of professional journals have shown that: children without fathers or without mothers are half as likely to do well in and graduate from school; they are more likely to require professional attention for physical or emotional problems; they are at an elevated risk for physical abuse or death; they are less likely to develop empathy for others; they are less confident; and they are more likely to spend time in jail and have children out of wedlock.

Salt Lake City, UT

metamoracoug: "What we know now is that children from single-gender homes are more likely to commit crimes, [other social pathologies]... Name the social problem, and it’s tied to NFD... [Same-sex marriage] asks us to redefine marriage based on huge, unproven assumptions driven largely by the wishes of adults rather than the needs of children."

To blame single-sex parenting on divorce is a non sequitur. Divorce results in single-parenthood, which is by definition single-sex (extreme multiple personality disorder cases excepted, maybe). The problems you cite are much more likely the result of there only being one parent in charge of the kids, not one sex. Now, if you truly care about the welfare and needs of children, you should favor gay marriage. About 30% of gay households have children. Legalizing gay marriage gives these children the many documented benefits of married parents (familial stability, inheritance, hospital visitation, etc.). Denying gay marriage, on the other hand, condemns these children to the same social pathologies visited upon all children of unmarried parents.

metamora, IL

Lagomorph: the point is that we are being asked to make another great social experiment -- like 40 years ago when when no fault divorce was introduced. NFD didn't work out so well for us and there is little evidence that gay marriage will either.

Paul Nathanson, a professor at McGill University in Canada and a practicing homosexual, says that “advocates of gay marriage have made no serious attempt to consider the possible harms, and object to those who want more time to assess the evidence from other periods or other cultures.”

Scandinavian countries legalized gay marriage in the mid-90s. The impact on marriage has been devastating: out-of-wedlock birthrates and divorce rates have risen sharply; divorce rate among gay men is 50% higher than heterosexual divorce rate; for lesbian women, the divorce rate is 170% higher. High rates of divorce lower cultural esteem for the institution of marriage. Worse, gay marriage separates marriage from parenting. It says that marriage is about adult desires, not the needs of children. Scandinavians are buying that message. Consequently, marriage is in a steep decline, as is child well-being.

salt lake, UT

your point would have more validity if you did not base it on already disproven attempts to liken gay headed households to single parent households. Unlike when NFD laws where passed we do have a substantial and growing body of research that clearly indicates that children are not harmed by being raised in a same sex two parent households. You once again attempt to take research based on single parent households when you claim that these children present with higher crime rates, suicide rates etc..... when the research is clear that the numbers for single parent households do not translate to single gendered two parent households.

Joan Watson

From one who suffered and endured divorced parents. Such know personaly the damaging effects of a divorce. Metamoracoug you are so right and clear eyed - eyes that read correctly the hand writing on the wall.

Salt Lake City, UT

@metanoracoug & Joan W:

Again, your point is a non sequitur. No one disputes that single parenthood as a result of divorce is not as good for children's outcomes as married parenthood. But divorce has nothing to do with gay marriage. Gay marriage will provide MARRIED, two-parent household environments in which to raise the many thousands of children of gay relationships. Can you make a convincing case that these children would be better off if their parents were not married? Can you make a convincing case that these children would be better off if they had a single parent instead of two same-sex parents?

[Sidebar: If gays are 3-5% of the population, and 30% of gay households have children, then a reasonable guesstimate is that about 1% of children are in gay households.]

Mcallen, TX

The voice of the people has spoken!

The pathetic leadership of California has led to its poor economic status.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments