Firstly I thought I should correct your mistakes,
“… Children who are raised by their married mother and father become more productive citizens. They do better in school…”
this is false I have been brought up by my mother my whole life and I am often placed in the smarter half of the class as well as being a member of extension learning classes.

“…The Dutch study, found that homosexual men in these relationships had an average of eight “casual” sex partners per year…”
I’m sorry but the Dutch should really reconsider their study, have they bothered to study heterosexual men the out come is probably similar.
I have known homosexual couples to outlast many many heterosexual marriages.

Some people argue that homosexual behavior is unnatural as they can not conceive children.. however there are many women it the world that cant do this either. In fact some gay men even help women conceive by donating sperm.

I personally think you cannot take away somebody’s opportunity to lead a happy life gay men can not posibly be expected to change their romantic feelings, attractions and beliefs just because you don’t understand it I mean how could you you’re not a homosexual.

There are many things that people are expected to accept in society why cant homosexuals be accepted aswell?

I had already read all the replies. None address my core question.

Even if one assumes as correct the statement that every child does best with both a mother and father in the home, how does denying marriage equality further the goal of having more two-parent, opposite gender families?

I’m truly interested in an answer to that question.

Read the replies very carefully. The folks who have spoken out against gay marriage have done so, because there is a standard to rearing children: a good mother and father figure. Those parents who are single parents have a bigger challenge to raise their children with both good male and female examples for their children. It is to the advantage of the child to have both a man and woman parental figure in his or her life. Yes, we are all aware that there are a huge number of single parent homes (quite often a single mother, but not always, and she has a son to raise…disadvantage for the son.) Also, there is the single dad family in which the dad has a daughter, and that can be tough on the girl. Also, the single mom with a daughter can be a bad situation too…what is the daughter learning about a relationship between a man and a woman? The same thing can apply to a single dad family with a son…what is the son learning about women?

Now let’s look at a homosexual couple raising a child: What is that child learning? It’s not something good.

Now for anyone else reading these responses, please don’t bring up things like domestic violence and the like; those things are also real serious issues in relationships which need to be dealt with, but it only serves as a smokescreen on this topic, and yes we all know these things go on in reality!

How will denying marriage equality prevent heterosexual couples (or, for that matter, homosexual couples) from having/adopting and raising children?

In fact, all that will be achieved by denying marriage equality (apart from enshrining discrimination in the California Constitution) is that those children who are being raised by same-sex couples will be denied the stability and benefits that come when couples take on the responsibilities of civil marriage.

As usual, you have hit the nail on the head. I wish some of these people responding would do their own research before sounding off. Personally, I’d like to see those activist judges in the California Supreme Court get an old fashioned Tar & Feathering for their outright arrogance and stupidity. I get sick and tired of the clown school running our state of affairs. Cheers, and I hope you and your husband are doing well!

From your old CBC colleague,

Edward (aka MR. E)

Above all, these stats do not and will not change reality. In California and Massachusetts, gays will marry. Throughout the United States, gay couples will raise children together.

The social climate has changed in the past 50 years, dear. Back then, Homosexuality was considered a “mental disorder” by the APA. Of course these ’studies’ are going to agree with the status quo, it’s people back then hearing what they wanted to hear. Think outside the box.

Seriously, attend a GSA or a PFLAG meeting and get to know us a little better. We are reasonable people just like everyone else. Please, take me up on this offer.

It’s more than a bit dishonest of you to mis-characterize every response to the original article as being merely a matter of “passion”, rather than reason and evidence. Plenty of both have been posted, by others and by myself.

The fact of the matter is, not every fellow human feels romantic / sexual attraction exclusively towards members of the opposite gender. You do no one any good by demonizing these people, or making (IMO fallacious) assertions which imply that “If it’s tradition, it must be right, and if it isn’t, it must be wrong.” Much that was once traditional - slavery, the subjugation of women, etc. - is no longer traditional today, and we are all the better for it. It seems to me that the demonization of and bias against non-heterosexuals is likewise incompatible with today’s views towards justice, fairness, and equality.

You are free to eschew acting on whichever personal desires you feel are inappropriate. You are not free to impose your demand that other consenting adults not live their lives with those they love, other consenting adults, simply because you personally don’t approve of their choices… nor should you be.

Yes, by all means, I heartily agree that “Relationship skills within marriages and families need to be given renewed support… “, including support for marriages and families which happen to include same-sex couples, couples which do all of the things that mixed-sex couples do, including raise children.

Excellent article - you offered good, rational, thought-out points and responses to some of those who commented.

You seem to have a number of angry even forceful supporters of homosexuality and same-sex unions. I suppose discussion of such issues will draw that kind of attention. There seems to be more arguments and nasty rebuttals based on passion than on logic, solid evidence from scientific studies and the historical record of societies that have allowed unrestrained sexual behavior. And that seems to be a sad reality of the level of thinking and debate that now exists in our culture, frankly of many liberals and conservatives alike - we are in this nation far from the intelligent, knowledgeable, history minded bright folks that founded our good nation.

There seems to be an enormous debate taking place in our society, primarily because we’ve abandoned standards, ethics and morals that were sorted out by peoples ancient.

For those who condone or even wish to honor homosexuality, many of us, it appears a majority in American society don’t wish to do the same. Not a few of us know the legacy of homosexuality down through history from its common to cultic and regal forms in many cultures and we don’t wish to see it blessed in American society. http://hometown.aol.com/GraceEACA/chapter2.html We have seen the abandon, the reckless behavior and disrespect displayed in public gay celebrations and parades and wish to distance our families and ourselves as far as possible from such thinking and behavior. Regardless of how much supporters of homosexuality argue the benefits of the behavior and the need for all of us to accept it, most of us will continue to strongly want nothing of it. There seems to remain amongst us a collective memory of what happens to societies that unleash sexual desire. And at our very core we do not appreciate having elite politicians, judges, the media and entertainment industries either attempting slowly to indoctrinate or suddenly force the sexual orientation on our society.

Homosexuality often seems to go hand-in-hand with other sexual practices, dysfunctional behavior as many of us see it. Down through history into the present, homosexuality appears in societies to have a close relationship with pederasty as sadly evidenced by the scandals that have rocked and are bankrupting the Church. What came first in ancient Greece, homosexuality or pederasty - did one lead to the other or are they both part of a broader acceptance and allowance of unrestrained sexual desire? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty Was such behavior preceded or succeeded by other forms of sexual practices in Greek culture? What were the social and sexual norms in the time of Plato, and the reasons the Greek sage eventually gave in condemning pederasty but was unable to disassociate it from homoeroticism? What defines appropriate sexual behavior that benefits society in general? If a society like ours begins to sweep away our standards of acceptable social behavior what will become of us? Some countries in Europe who have gotten beyond the debate of accepting homosexuality have already led the way in overturning other sexual standards and given us a startling glimpse where such license leads. Sweden has legal and it appears socially accepted clubs for random individual and group sex, Denmark allows human-animal brothels. Ask Americans if this is the direction we wish to start sliding?

Once sexual standards that have been established on long thought-out deliberations of what works best for societies are ignored or deliberately discarded, what governs what is permissible or not? One’s passions, desires? Who is then to say what is right or wrong when there are no standards except one’s own rationale, desire, convenience and force if necessary. And not only of sexual desire, but conduct and restraint in all other spheres of social contracts. Cultures have decayed and fallen based on such undisciplined, wanton notions: Greece, Rome, Carthage. Is it wrong for thinking people to want to avoid self-destruction and choose to restrain certain behaviors? Many of us Americans don’t see offering gay unions the honor of the institution of marriage as an enlightened advancement of civilization, rather a sobering regression into the errors of the past.

As much as some people don’t realize or deny the fact, human behavior is a choice. Emotions, inclinations, experience influence behavior, but for thinking people our actions even our thoughts and emotions are disciplined and elevated by choice.

Society at large, liberals and conservatives alike need to work on improving the foundation of our culture: families and interpersonal relationships, not condoning dysfunctional social behaviors. Relationship skills within marriages and families need to be given renewed support to prevent divorce, infidelity and people’s damaged psyches as they attempt to experience satisfying relationships that in turn benefit society in general.

Dr Sotirios Sarantakos, is an Associate Professor of Sociology at Charles Sturt University, New South Wales, Australia. In 1996 (not 1961 as you state) he published a research paper on primary school children in three contexts. married heterosexual couples, cohabiting heterosexual couples and homosexual partners. He studied 174 children - 58 in each family type. The “homosexual” families comprised 11 homosexual (male) couples and 47 lesbian couples.

Sarantakos, S, “Children in three contexts” in Children Australia, 1996, Vol 21, No 3.

He only studied children of homosexual partners who were born in a previous heterosexual relationship. There were no children the homosexual couples jointly adopted or had by surrogacy.

The study was made and supported after the John Howard government in Australia was quoted about their unsubstantiated statements on the “best environment for raising children.” When questioned the government look for, funded and support this study and author.

Some of his finding that I find interesting and you should too:

“More children of homosexual partners were reported to be timid and reserved, unwilling to work in a team or talk about family life and holidays.”

I wonder why?

“There was a small minority of “extreme cases” where the children were ridiculed by other children for some personal habits or beliefs or for the sexual preference of their parents.”

“With homosexual partners, the relationships between parents and school were even weaker – they rarely attended parent teacher meetings or offered volunteer work of any kind.”

These gay couples in Australia were asking for the right to marry at that time and were met with hostility and indifference.

“He is at pains to point out that teachers who assessed the children may have been influenced by cultural beliefs and attitudes.”

HIS PRIMARY FINDING: “However he does note that parental separation and divorce, long known to be associated with academic failure in children, is likely to be a major factor in the lower scores of children in both cohabiting and homosexual partner families.”

Cohabitation, divorce and separation are very detrimental to children no matter who their parents are or what kind of relationship the parents have to their children.

Jane, do not place on emerging gay couples who can now marry and adopt or have children by surrogacy, all the detriment and family failures of traditional marriage, divorce, separation, and cohabitation from the past.

There are a number of studies underway looking at the actual experiences of gay couples who plan, want and raise their own children by choice. Their children will not come from a default divorce from a prior different-sex marriage. These parents will be genuine and sincere in their relationship to another adult and the children they raise.

I think many people are afraid of the truth. Our experience with families will be no different from families headed by a different-sex couple. And our experience of marriage without raising families will be no different from different-sex couples who by choice, nature, or age remain childless.

There are 6.5 billion people on this planet going to 8.5 billion by 2025. California has 38 million going to 50 million in the same period. At less than 10% of the population, gay people and especially couples are most welcomed in this state since we naturally limit population growth and adopt many of the children not wanted by their natural parents.

Face reality. Face the deterioration of social life stemming from traditional problems in traditional marriage: divorce, separation, cohabitation, lack of child support enforcement, child abuse by stepparent fathers and poverty to name a few.

Your arguments remind me of George W. Bush and his WMD/Iraq scare. At least people arguing as you have will never be able to take the nation to war, cultural, or otherwise.

And for that, I thank God.

Your reference to child abuse implies that there is a link between pedophilia and homosexuality, a common misconception. You can learn more about this here: http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/HTML/facts_molestation.html

To be sure, there is controversy with regards to how well children do when it comes to being raised by same-sex couples (which, btw, is very different from speaking of children being raised “without a mother or a father”, which implies a single-parent household). However, there is by no means an academic consensus that same-sex households are any worse an environment for child-rearing than mixed-sex households.

Of course, this is all tangential… we don’t deny marriage to mixed-sex couples who can’t or won’t raise children, or who are less than exemplary parents, so one can hardly deny the institution of marriage to same-sex couples on that basis.