LDS letter on same-sex marriage

[Storm]

I agree, religions such Mormonism are far, far more immoral and dangerous to children than homosexuality could ever be, but like you said they're lucky we have a little thing called freedom in this country. As a man who loves liberty I too respect their right to believe and practice as they wish. It's just a damn shame they're not decent enough to extend the very same to others and respect their rights as well.

Like I said...

Bigotry and hypocrisy go hand in hand.

 

[MoonWater]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,29901,00.html
The report, by sociology professors at the University of Southern California, says that that, contrary to earlier assertions, children of same-sex parents exhibit significant differences when compared to children raised by heterosexual couples.

And lets take a look at some of those differences they found, shall we?

A significantly greater proportion of young adult children raised by lesbian mothers than those raised by heterosexual mothers say they have experienced sexual intimacy with a partner of the same sex. They were not, however, statistically more likely to identify themselves as gay or lesbian.

So?

Young girls raised by lesbians are more likely to be sexually adventurous and active than their counterparts raised by heterosexual parents. However the sons of lesbians exhibit "an opposite pattern" and are likely to be less adventurous and active than boys raised by heterosexual households.

Again, So?

Lesbian mothers reported that their children behave in ways that do not conform to "sex-typed cultural norms." And the sons of lesbians are reportedly less likely to behave in traditionally masculine ways than those raised by heterosexual couples.

And again, so what?

These are the only differences listed in the article and they are realistic differences that one could readily expect to be present in a child raised by homosexuals. But yet again, so What? By the way, did you happen to read the whole article because stacy and biblarz say this near the end.

Any differences found in research on children do not necessarily constitute "deficits," they say, and ought to be acknowledged and studied more thoroughly.

Sorry but this article doesn't help your position at all.

http://www.drtraycehansen.com/Pages/writings_sexpref.html
A Review and Analysis of Research Studies Which Assessed Sexual Preference of Children Raised by Homosexuals
Pro-homosexual researchers frequently claim studies find "no differences" between children raised by homosexuals and heterosexuals. Amazingly, these claims are made in the abstracts of research studies that actually uncovered differences (Williams, 2000). The tendency to deny or downplay differences has been noted by pro-homosexual parenting researchers. After reviewing 21 studies, Stacey and Biblarz (2001) concluded that in regards to gender, sexual behavior and sexual preference, homosexually parented children are different from heterosexually parented children. But despite such findings, many continue to proclaim "no differences" in order to galvanize support for homosexual access to fertility services, adoption, custody, and same-sex marriage. Encouraging support for a cause is fine, as long as the information being disseminated is true. But in this case, it isn't. – Please read entire article

other than the fact that this article is basically the same as the first one you posted... did you happen to read the author's abstract, particularly the last bit.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Authors' Abstract:
"The sexual development of children of gay and lesbian parents is interesting for both scientific and social reasons. The present study is the largest to date to focus on the sexual orientation of adult sons of gay men. From advertisements in gay publications, 55 gay or bisexual men were recruited who reported on 82 sons at least 17 years of age. More than 90% of sons whose sexual orientation could be rated were heterosexual. Furthermore, gay and heterosexual sons did not differ on potentially relevant variables such as length of time they had lived with their fathers. Results suggest that any environmental influence of gay fathers on their sons' sexual orientation is not large."[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]And yet again I have to ask, even if being raised by homosexuals DID increase one's chances of being gay themselves what of it, why does it matter?
[/FONT]

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_mar13.htm
Those who advocate same-sex marriage often point to studies which show that children raised in two-parent families do well, regardless of whether the parents are of the same sex or opposite sex. But most of these studies are deeply flawed because:
1. They involve self-selected subjects, and/or
2. They do not study families over a sufficiently long interval, and/or
3. They demonstrate bias on the part of the researchers.

The same is true of studies that claim the opposite.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/apr/040428c.html
According to the Association, "studies have shown almost no difference in sexual preference or in psychosocial development for children of same-sex parents." On what basis did the Association reach such a conclusion? Certainly, it could not have looked at recent findings in social science journals to reach this conclusion. If the Association had troubled itself to look at the current literature, it would have, in all decency, been disturbed by their conclusions, and, with professional integrity, issued quite a different statement. – Please read entire article…

http://www.acpeds.org/?CONTEXT=art&cat=22&art=50
American College of Pediatricians
Are children reared by two individuals of the same gender as well adjusted as children reared in families with a mother and a father? Until recently the unequivocal answer to this question was "no." Policymakers, social scientists, the media, and even physician organizations1, however, are now asserting that prohibitions on parenting by homosexual couples should be lifted. In making such far-reaching, generation-changing assertions, any responsible advocate would rely upon supporting evidence that is comprehensive and conclusive. Not only is this not the situation, but also there is sound evidence that children exposed to the homosexual lifestyle may be at increased risk for emotional, mental, and even physical harm. (Please see all the refs of studies at end of link)_

Risks of Homosexual Lifestyle to Children

Violence among homosexual partners is two to three times more common than among married heterosexual couples. 10,11,12,13,14

Individuals who practice a homosexual lifestyle are more likely than heterosexuals to experience mental illness,23,24,25 substance abuse,26 suicidal tendencies,27,28 and shortened life spans.29

Although some would claim that these dysfunctions are a result of societal pressures in America, the same dysfunctions exist at inordinately high levels among homosexuals in cultures were the practice is more widely accepted.30
Children reared in homosexual households are more likely to experience sexual confusion, practice homosexual behavior, and engage in sexual experimentation. 31,32,33,34,35

Adolescents and young adults who adopt the homosexual lifestyle, like their adult counterparts, are at increased risk of mental health problems, including major depression, anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, substance dependence, and especially suicidal ideation and suicide attempts.36

#''s refer to refs - papers that show these trends, please scroll down the page to endnotes for studies. - http://www.acpeds.org/?CONTEXT=art&cat=22&art=50

Well I think i would be more likely to be violent, depressed or suicidal too If I had to deal with even half of the b.s. LGBT people have to go through. The point is that when it is discovered that a child is being raised in an abusive and/or violent and/or negligent family attempts are made to remove the child from said environment and put them in a healthier one. It's done with hetero families why not homo?

 

[Autodidact]

A bunch of statements (I see no data on these sites) by activist groups that support homosexual parenting "rights” does nothing to impress me… sorry.

Well, if you consider the American Academy of Pediatrics or the American Medical Association to be an activist group that supports homosexual parenting rights. Here I thought they were the professional organizations of medical practitioners in the U.S. Oh wait, they are.

Can you post honestly, without deception?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,29901,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,29901,00.html
The report, by sociology professors at the University of Southern California, says that that, contrary to earlier assertions, children of same-sex parents exhibit significant differences when compared to children raised by heterosexual couples.

Fox News? And this right after criticizing me for posting the positions of the nation's child welfare and medical organizations? Here's the actual differences that the authors actually found:
A significantly greater proportion of young adult children raised by lesbian mothers than those raised by heterosexual mothers say they have experienced sexual intimacy with a partner of the same sex. They were not, however, statistically more likely to identify themselves as gay or lesbian.
• Young girls raised by lesbians are more likely to be sexually adventurous and active than their counterparts raised by heterosexual parents. However the sons of lesbians exhibit "an opposite pattern" and are likely to be less adventurous and active than boys raised by heterosexual households.
• Lesbian mothers reported that their children behave in ways that do not conform to "sex-typed cultural norms." And the sons of lesbians are reportedly less likely to behave in traditionally masculine ways than those raised by heterosexual couples.




That's it, idea. The kids are more open and less sex-stereotyped. Go lesbians.



http://www.drtraycehansen.com/Pages/writings_sexpref.html
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_mar13.htm

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/apr/040428c.html
According to the Association, "studies have shown almost no difference in sexual preference or in psychosocial development for children of same-sex parents." On what basis did the Association reach such a conclusion? Certainly, it could not have looked at recent findings in social science journals to reach this conclusion. If the Association had troubled itself to look at the current literature, it would have, in all decency, been disturbed by their conclusions, and, with professional integrity, issued quite a different statement. – Please read entire article…

so I guess you don't have any actual research to support your assertion then, just right-wing propaganda? I'll tell you what, let's make a deal. Let's cite only published research from scientific journals. Sound good?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1168934/posts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1168934/posts
ADULT CHILDREN SPEAK OUT ABOUT SAME-SEX PARENTS
It was the TV pictures that first got to Bronagh Cassidy. Same-sex couples marrying in San Francisco: "They were so proud of themselves. And then they had these little children with them." Cassidy, a 27-year-old married mother of two, sighs. "Something inside of me wants to be able to help those kids, because I know they are going to have problems." … read through entire article…

Please stop disseminating these lies. It's disgusting and immoral. Do you have any research, any actual published scientific study whatsoever, that in any way supports anything you're saying?

http://www.acpeds.org/?CONTEXT=art&cat=22&art=50
American College of Pediatricians
Are children reared by two individuals of the same gender as well adjusted as children reared in families with a mother and a father? Until recently the unequivocal answer to this question was "no." Policymakers, social scientists, the media, and even physician organizations1, however, are now asserting that prohibitions on parenting by homosexual couples should be lifted. In making such far-reaching, generation-changing assertions, any responsible advocate would rely upon supporting evidence that is comprehensive and conclusive. Not only is this not the situation, but also there is sound evidence that children exposed to the homosexual lifestyle may be at increased risk for emotional, mental, and even physical harm. (Please see all the refs of studies at end of link)_

Risks of Homosexual Lifestyle to Children

Violence among homosexual partners is two to three times more common than among married heterosexual couples. 10,11,12,13,14

Homosexual partnerships are significantly more prone to dissolution than heterosexual marriages with the average homosexual relationship lasting only two to three years. 15,16,17

Homosexual men and women are reported to be inordinately promiscuous involving serial sex partners, even within what are loosely-termed "committed relationships." 18,19,20,21,22

Individuals who practice a homosexual lifestyle are more likely than heterosexuals to experience mental illness,23,24,25 substance abuse,26 suicidal tendencies,27,28 and shortened life spans.29

Although some would claim that these dysfunctions are a result of societal pressures in America, the same dysfunctions exist at inordinately high levels among homosexuals in cultures were the practice is more widely accepted.30
Children reared in homosexual households are more likely to experience sexual confusion, practice homosexual behavior, and engage in sexual experimentation. 31,32,33,34,35

Adolescents and young adults who adopt the homosexual lifestyle, like their adult counterparts, are at increased risk of mental health problems, including major depression, anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, substance dependence, and especially suicidal ideation and suicide attempts.36

#''s refer to refs - papers that show these trends, please scroll down the page to endnotes for studies. - http://www.acpeds.org/?CONTEXT=art&cat=22&art=50

This is exactly what I warned about. The American Academy of Pediatricians is the professional organization of American Pediatricians. When they came out in favor of gay parenting, a splinter group of anti-gay activists broke off and formed their own tiny little group of nut-pediatricians, then gave it a name as if it were in any way comparable, which it clearly isn't. One is the objective, mainstream, middle, unbiased group, and one was created just to push a political agenda. Their name, their fake everything, is all one big lie. Anyone who would cite their biased propaganda is equally guilty of lying.

Let's take the first one: homosexual "partnerships" vs. straight marriage. Remember, gay people can't get married. So you're comparing every dating arrangment, people who just met, whatever, to married people. Apples and oranges. Bogus. Basically, again, so disingenuous so as to be a lie. A valid comparison would go to Holland and compare apples to apples. But that wouldn't give the skewed results they need, so they deliberately do bad science and then spread it around the internet.

The rest of this crap is equally dishonest garbage. If you like, I'll refute them one by one.

idea: How do you sleep at night?

 

[Riverwolf]

The differences between a child raised by lesbians and a child raised by heterosexual parents are likely to be the same as the differences between a child raised by a single mother and a child raised by a couple. Such as myself.

I was raised mainly by my mother since my parents got divorced when I was seven. Through my childhood, I'd only see my dad every other weekend. Now, though I am a boy, I am very feminine. I also spent my pre-pubescent and early puberty years watching the English Sailor Moon, a show that features young girls as main characters. In fighting video games, I also usually pick the female characters, and in RPG video games, I typically pick "female" as my gender. With these in mind, and with the logic presented here, I should at least exhibit homosexual tendencies, if not be downright bisexual or homosexual.

Guess what? I'm fully heterosexual.

 

[Autodidact]

The differences between a child raised by lesbians and a child raised by heterosexual parents are likely to be the same as the differences between a child raised by a single mother and a child raised by a couple. Such as myself.

I was raised mainly by my mother since my parents got divorced when I was seven. Through my childhood, I'd only see my dad every other weekend. Now, though I am a boy, I am very feminine. I also spent my pre-pubescent and early puberty years watching the English Sailor Moon, a show that features young girls as main characters. In fighting video games, I also usually pick the female characters, and in RPG video games, I typically pick "female" as my gender. With these in mind, and with the logic presented here, I should at least exhibit homosexual tendencies, if not be downright bisexual or homosexual.

Guess what? I'm fully heterosexual.

Actually, River, and not saying anything about your own childhood, on the average, children of divorced and single parents do less well than children of intact families. That's on measures like:
graduate from high school
juvenile arrest
teenage parenthood
adult criminal record
income level as adult
psychiatric problems
etc.

That doesn't mean they all have these problems, but that more of them do. And my point is that this is NOT the case for children of lesbian parents. They score just as well on these, and just about any objective measure you can think of.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The differences between a child raised by lesbians and a child raised by heterosexual parents are likely to be the same as the differences between a child raised by a single mother and a child raised by a couple. Such as myself.

I don't think the differences would be the same. 2 parents <> 1 parent, whatever the genders involved.

I was raised mainly by my mother since my parents got divorced when I was seven. Through my childhood, I'd only see my dad every other weekend. Now, though I am a boy, I am very feminine. I also spent my pre-pubescent and early puberty years watching the English Sailor Moon, a show that features young girls as main characters. In fighting video games, I also usually pick the female characters, and in RPG video games, I typically pick "female" as my gender. With these in mind, and with the logic presented here, I should at least exhibit homosexual tendencies, if not be downright bisexual or homosexual.

Guess what? I'm fully heterosexual.

Without getting into your specifics (since I don't know them, and I don't really want to delve into your personal life), I think it's worth pointing out that a homosexual man is not the same thing as a heterosexual woman, and vice versa. I know this should be obvious, but it seems that this point is often missed by people (not meaning you, Riverwolf, but the people who present the claims that you were responding to) who claim things like a link between being raised by parents of only one gender, traits of the opposite gender (which, IMO, are more often based on stereotypical gender roles in the person's own culture than any real distinction between men and women), and homosexuality.

 

[Riverwolf]

Actually, River, and not saying anything about your own childhood, on the average, children of divorced and single parents do less well than children of intact families. That's on measures like:
graduate from high school
juvenile arrest
teenage parenthood
adult criminal record
income level as adult
psychiatric problems
etc.

That doesn't mean they all have these problems, but that more of them do. And my point is that this is NOT the case for children of lesbian parents. They score just as well on these, and just about any objective measure you can think of.

I didn't know that. I do have my own problems, but nothing so great as those.

I stand corrected.

 

[Riverwolf]

I don't think the differences would be the same. 2 parents <> 1 parent, whatever the genders involved.


Without getting into your specifics (since I don't know them, and I don't really want to delve into your personal life), I think it's worth pointing out that a homosexual man is not the same thing as a heterosexual woman, and vice versa. I know this should be obvious, but it seems that this point is often missed by people (not meaning you, Riverwolf, but the people who present the claims that you were responding to) who claim things like a link between being raised by parents of only one gender, traits of the opposite gender (which, IMO, are more often based on stereotypical gender roles in the person's own culture than any real distinction between men and women), and homosexuality.

Thanks for making that clear. Frubals! (grr... or not)

 

[idea]

And lets take a look at some of those differences they found, shall we?


So?



Again, So?



And again, so what?

You say “so what” to teenage girls being more sexually active, are you serious? If you had a teenage daughter you would not mind if she was a ****? You don’t support monogamy, and yet, you want marriage rights? Do you see your hypocrisy?

You think it is good to try and make boys feminine, and girls masculine? You want everyone to be the same – so much for celebrating diversity! Throw out America’s melting pot - let’s melt them all into identical robots – no males, no females, everyone the same. You crush both sexes by telling males being masculine is bad, and telling females that being feminine is bad. Males and females are different
Link


There is a fact that is undisputed.
Obviously if males and females are different, kids get different things from each of them. Should we support children being raised in a stable environment with both male and female role models to give them a balanced take on life? Or should we encourage bigotry and sexism by encouraging children to be raised by only one sex – Leaving heterosexual girls wanting for appropriate male affection from their lesbian parents, and heterosexual boys wanting for appropriate feminine attention for lack of a mother. Would you encourage this – through benefits? Benefits were meant to support stable balanced families raising children, not to support freedom of lifestyle. Get maried, do what you want, but don't force it onto children who already have a hard enough time growing up in this world, and don't force me to pay for your choices.

I am not a bigot, I have homosexual relatives and friends. I don’t claim to know anyone who agrees with all of my viewpoints, everyone is different, that is what makes conversations interesting. I will not tell people what to do behind closed doors unless it hurts an innocent, like a child. There is no law against being homosexual, and there should not be. There is a difference between giving someone freedom to do what they want and having to support them in what they do. I support the democratic process and don’t think a group of judges should be allowed to overturn what the good people of America have voted for.

 

[Riverwolf]

You say “so what” to teenage girls being more sexually active, are you serious? If you had a teenage daughter you would not mind if she was a ****? You don’t support monogamy, and yet, you want marriage rights? Do you see your hypocrisy?

You think it is good to try and make boys feminine, and girls masculine? You want everyone to be the same – so much for celebrating diversity! Throw out America’s melting pot - let’s melt them all into identical robots – no males, no females, everyone the same. You crush both sexes by telling males being masculine is bad, and telling females that being feminine is bad. Males and females are different
Link

You seem to only be referring to extremes. I'm feminine. I'm also heterosexual. Am I a living contradiction?

I know that if my daughter wanted to be sexually active, that's her choice. If she's what you refer to as a "****," then obviously I've forgotten to tell her about sex when she was young. I guarantee my daughter will know about sex when she's five. Before she hits puberty, she'll know all about sex, it's pleasurable parts, as well as the risks involved. Therefore, if she wanted to be a "****," that's her choice, not mine. I know I wouldn't like it, but should we set up rules for our children based on our comfort?

If two people want to get married, they have a right to have all marriage rights, whether or not they're homosexual. If someone wants to be polygamous, then let them be polygamous, as long as they're smart about it, frequently getting checked for STDs and whatnot. Why can't we support what we don't agree with? Why can't we do away with "sides" and just agree to disagree?

 

[Autodidact]

You say &#8220;so what&#8221; to teenage girls being more sexually active, are you serious? If you had a teenage daughter you would not mind if she was a ****? You don&#8217;t support monogamy, and yet, you want marriage rights? Do you see your hypocrisy?

What is important is sexual responsibility and morality. The FACT is that children of lesbian and gay parents do NOT have a higher teen pregnancy rate than children of straight parents, nor do they have a higher rate of sexual behavior. They are not as rigid in their sex roles, that's all.

You think it is good to try and make boys feminine, and girls masculine?

No, I think it's good to let everyone be whatever they are.

You want everyone to be the same &#8211; so much for celebrating diversity!

No, I want the widest, most natural range of expression, including masculine and less masculine men, and feminine and less feminine women. I want people to feel comfortable being just who they are, and not feel restrained by artificial sex roles imposed by overly rigid families and society.

Throw out America&#8217;s melting pot - let&#8217;s melt them all into identical robots &#8211; no males, no females, everyone the same.

If you tried really hard, could you distort your opponent's arguments more? You're the one arguing for conformity and sameness here, not us.

You crush both sexes by telling males being masculine is bad, and telling females that being feminine is bad.

Please show where anyone has told any males that being masculine is bad, or females that being feminine is bad. Please produce and iota of evidence supporting your claim. Please stop lying and making false accusations against innocent families and posters in this thread.

Males and females are different

thank you Dr. Einstein, and if you hadn't told me that, I might never have noticed.
Link

There is a fact that is undisputed.
Obviously if males and females are different, kids get different things from each of them.

And if each person is different, kids get different things from each person.

Should we support children being raised in a stable environment

Yes, that's why gay marriage is a good thing.

with both male and female role models to give them a balanced take on life?

up to their parents, I'd say. Or do you think the state should make choices for parents?

Or should we encourage bigotry and sexism by encouraging children to be raised by only one sex

Tell me you're joking. You're a parody of a right-wing anti-gay bigot, right? Because this is so opposite of the truth it's actually funny. Do you honestly expect anyone here to think that people who want to allow other people to marry each other are somehow sexist and bigoted? btw, did you know that black is actually white, and up is really down?

&#8211; Leaving heterosexual girls wanting for appropriate male affection from their lesbian parents,

not all girls are heterosexual. Here's the point, idea, you big liar-head, what kids need is affection, not male affetion, not female affection, but affection. Kids who get it do well. Kids who don't, dont.

and heterosexual boys wanting for appropriate feminine attention for lack of a mother.

because after all, who cares about non-heterosexual boys?

Would you encourage this &#8211; through benefits? Benefits were meant to support stable balanced families raising children, not to support freedom of lifestyle. Get maried, do what you want, but don't force it onto children who already have a hard enough time growing up in this world, and don't force me to pay for your choices.

That's why gay marriage is a good thing. It encourages stability among gay families. Stable balanced gay families raising children need the same benefits as stable balanced straight families raising children. Same to you, bubba. Get married if you want. Just don't force me to pay for your choices.

I have homosexual relatives and friends.

No you don't. No gay person in their right mind would be friends with you.

I don&#8217;t claim to know anyone who agrees with all of my viewpoints, everyone is different, that is what makes conversations interesting. I will not tell people what to do behind closed doors unless it hurts an innocent, like a child. There is no law against being homosexual, and there should not be. There is a difference between giving someone freedom to do what they want and having to support them in what they do. I support the democratic process and don&#8217;t think a group of judges should be allowed to overturn what the good people of America have voted for.

It's not your viewpoints I'm taking issue with idea, it's your lies. YOu get to have your own bigoted opinions. You don't get to tell lies about other people; it's wrong. Please stop doing it. No one's asking you to support us, we're asking for the same right that you already enjoy. And the take-home message? Gay parenting is good for kids. Black is actually not white, good parenting is good parenting, and gay marriage does NOT hurt kids. I take strong offense at you suggesting that it does, when nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[Apex]

Bigotry and hypocrisy go hand in hand.

Exactly, see below statement.

I agree, religions such Mormonism are far, far more immoral and dangerous to children than homosexuality could ever be, but like you said they're lucky we have a little thing called freedom in this country. As a man who loves liberty I too respect their right to believe and practice as they wish. It's just a damn shame they're not decent enough to extend the very same to others and respect their rights as well.

 

[McBell]

Exactly, see below statement.

How is Father Heathens statements bigotry or hypocrisy?

More over, how is his argument against Mormons any different, other than you being a Mormon, than your argument against same sex marriage?

 

[idea]

You are not calling me a liar, I was just cutting and pasting, this is who you are calling a liar:

1 American Academy of Pediatrics, &#8220;Co parent or Second-Parent Adoption by Same-Sex Parents,&#8221; Pediatrics. 109(2002): 339-340.

2 Robert Lerner, Ph.D., Althea Nagai, Ph.D. No Basis: What the Studies Don't Tell Us About Same Sex Parenting, Washington DC; Marriage Law Project/Ethics and Public Policy Center, 2001.

3 P. Morgan, Children as Trophies? Examining the Evidence on Same-sex Parenting, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Christian Institute, 2002.

4 J. Paul Guiliani and Dwight G. Duncan, "Brief of Amici Curiae Massachusetts Family Institute and National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality," Appeal to the Supreme Court of Vermont, Docket No. S1009-97CnC.

5 Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandfeur, Growing Up with a Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994), p. 45

6 Sotirios Sarantakos, "Children in Three Contexts: Family, Education, and Social Development," Children Australia, vol. 21 (1996): 23-31.

7 Jeanne M. Hilton and Esther L. Devall, "Comparison of Parenting and Children&#8217;s Behavior in Single-Mother, Single-Father, and Intact Families," Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 29 (1998): 23-54.

8 Elizabeth Thomson et al., "Family Structure and Child Well-Being: Economic Resources vs. Parental Behaviors," Social Forces 73 (1994): 221-42.

9 David Popenoe, Life Without Father (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996), pp. 144, 146.

10 Gwat Yong Lie and Sabrina Gentlewarrier, "Intimate Violence in Lesbian Relationships: Discussion of Survey Findings and Practice Implications," Journal of Social Service Research 15 (1991): 41-59.

11 D. Island and P. Letellier, Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them: Battered Gay Men and Domestic Violence (New York: Haworth Press, 1991), p. 14.

12 Lettie L. Lockhart et al., "Letting out the Secret: Violence in Lesbian Relationships," Journal of Interpersonal Violence 9 (1994): 469-492.

13 "Violence Between Intimates," Bureau of Justice Statistics Selected Findings, November 1994, p. 2.

14 Health Implications Associated With Homosexuality (Austin: The Medical Institute for Sexual Health, 1999), p. 79.

15 David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1984), pp. 252, 253.

16 M. Saghir and E. Robins, Male and Female Homosexuality (Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1973), p. 225; L. A. Peplau and H. Amaro, "Understanding Lesbian Relationships," in Homosexuality: Social, Psychological, and Biological Issues, ed. J. Weinrich and W. Paul (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1982).

17 M. Pollak, "Male Homosexuality," in Western Sexuality: Practice and Precept in Past and Present Times, ed. P. Aries and A. Bejin, translated by Anthony Forster (New York, NY: B. Blackwell, 1985), pp. 40-61, cited by Joseph Nicolosi in Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality (Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson Inc., 1991), pp. 124, 125.

18 A. P. Bell and M. S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), pp. 308, 309; See also A. P. Bell, M. S. Weinberg, and S. K. Hammersmith, Sexual Preference (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981).

19 Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 354.

20 A. A. Deenen, "Intimacy and Sexuality in Gay Male Couples," Archives of Sexual Behavior, 23 (1994): 421-431.

21 "Sex Survey Results," Genre (October 1996), quoted in "Survey Finds 40 percent of Gay Men Have Had More Than 40 Sex Partners," Lambda Report, January 1998, p. 20.

22 Maria Xiridoui, et al., &#8220;The Contribution of Steady and Casual Partnerships to the Incidence of HIV Infection among Homosexual Men in Amsterdam,&#8221; AIDS 17 (2003): 1029-1038. [Note: one of the findings of this recent study is that those classified as being in &#8220;steady relationships&#8221; reported an average of 8 casual partners a year in addition to their partner (p. 1032)]

23 J. Bradford et al., "National Lesbian Health Care Survey: Implications for Mental Health Care," Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 62 (1994): 239, cited in Health Implications Associated with Homosexuality, p. 81.

24 Theo G. M. Sandfort, et al., "Same-sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders," Archives of General Psychiatry 58 (January 2001): 85-91.

25 Bailey, J.M. Commentary: Homosexuality and mental illness. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry. 56 (1999): 876-880. Author states, "These studies contain arguably the best published data on the association between homosexuality and psychopathology, and both converge on the same unhappy conclusion: homosexual people are at substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major depression, and anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, and nicotine dependence...."

26 Joanne Hall, "Lesbians Recovering from Alcoholic Problems: An Ethnographic Study of Health Care Expectations," Nursing Research 43 (1994): 238-244

27 R. Herrell et al., "Sexual Orientation and Suicidality, Co-twin Study in Adult Men," Archives of General Psychiatry 56 (1999): 867-874.

28 Vickie M. Mays, et al., "Risk of Psychiatric Disorders among Individuals Reporting Same-sex Sexual Partners in the National Comorbidity Survey," American Journal of Public Health, vol. 91 (June 2001): 933-939.

29 Robert S. Hogg et al., "Modeling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men," International Journal of Epidemiology 26 (1997): 657.

30 Sandfort, T.G.M.; de Graaf, R.; Bijl, R.V.; Schnabel. Same-sex sexual behavior and psychiatric disorders. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry. 58 (2001): 85-91.

31 F. Tasker and S. Golombok, "Adults Raised as Children in Lesbian Families," American Journal of Orthopsychiatric Association, 65 (1995): 213.

32 J. Michael Bailey et al., "Sexual Orientation of Adult Sons of Gay Fathers," Developmental Psychology 31 (1995): 124-129

33 Ibid., pp. 127, 128.

34 F. Tasker and S. Golombok, "Do Parents Influence the Sexual Orientation of Their Children?" Developmental Psychology 32 (1996): 7.

35 Judith Stacey and Timothy J. Biblarz, "(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matter," American Sociological Review 66 (2001): 174, 179.

36 D. Fergusson et al., "Is Sexual Orientation Related to Mental Health Problems and Suicidality in Young People?" Archives of General Psychiatry 56 (October 1999).

 

[Magic Man]

Exactly, see below statement.

Um...no. For one, even if you get the wacky idea that that is bigotry, it certainly isn't hypocrisy. It's also not bigotry. He respects Mormons right to have their religious beliefs and practice their religion, even though he disagrees with it. I'm sorry your bias is getting in the way here. The idea was to show how others could handle their disagreement with homosexuality, in the same way he handles his disagreement with Mormonism. Apparently that is lost on you, though.

Aside from that, even if you think that is bigotry and hypocrisy (aside from that idea being completely false), then you admit that the Mormon stance against homosexuality is even worse and more bigotted and hypocritical.

 

[Apex]

How is Father Heathens statements bigotry or hypocrisy?

I find the first part of his statement bigoted and disgusting, although I agree it is not very hypocritical.

More over, how is his argument against Mormons any different, other than you being a Mormon, than your argument against same sex marriage?

Do you know what my argument is? I have no problem with same sex marriage. I hope you did not automatically assume I was against it.

 

[Orontes]

I don't understand your post. Are you suggesting the Bill of Rights wasn't ratified by a democratic process, but was simply imposed from above?

Okay... let me be more specific. Have you read and do you understand the meaning of the Ninth Amendment? Here it is:

The highest law of the land of the United States identifies that the people retain rights not necessarily ratified by any democratic process.

Are you claiming a rights claim doesn't require ratification to inform law? If so, your stance is confused on two levels. First, the Ninth Amendment only exists and has any force at all because it passed through a ratification process. Therefore, any appeal to the Ninth Amendment necessarily indicates a primary appeal to, and deference for, ratification. Second, the meaning of the Ninth Amendment vary in interpretation. Originally, it was taken as an essential curb on the Federal government's enumerated powers. Thus, rights by the people, were liberties wherein the state was made mute. For example Madison stated in final clause of the resolution:

"The exceptions here or elsewhere in the Constitution, made in favor of particular rights, shall not be so construed so as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the people, or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the Constitution; but either as actual limitations of such powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution" - Madison, Annals of congress vol. 1

Now, if you wish to argue the meaning of the 9th is there is reference to a larger reservoir of rights (as in duties placed on the state to do a thing): you still have the issue of what those rights are, what is the mechanism these are imposed and perhaps most critically, why should such imposition be accepted by a free people?

Here are two examples from legal minds from opposite ends of the legal spectrum on Modern understandings on 9:

"It is a common error, but an error nonetheless, to talk of 'ninth amendment rights.' The ninth amendment is not a source of rights as such; it is simply a rule about how to read the Constitution." -Lawrence Tribe, American Constitutional Law 776 n.

"The Declaration of Independence...is not a legal prescription conferring powers upon the courts; and the Constitution&#8217;s refusal to 'deny or disparage' other rights is far removed from affirming any one of them, and even farther removed from authorizing judges to identify what they might be, and to enforce the judges&#8217; list against laws duly enacted by the people." -Justice Scalia Troxel v. Granville (2000):

For example, let's say Dave asserts there is a right to his marry his German Shepard. Does the assertion then make it a right? Let's assume Dave gets four State Supreme Court Justices to agree that marrying German Shepards is a right. Does it now become a right? If so, why should it be accepted? If there is a time when claim X becomes a right, then one needs to be clear on when that is and how it comes about. If one claims X has always been a right, then again the question arises, why then has it not be recognized before? Removing rights claims from the democratic process while attempting to play within the political arena points to a bog.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You are not calling me a liar, I was just cutting and pasting, this is who you are calling a liar:

If this is one of the FRC studies, you're now aware (or should be aware) that they misrepresent and mis-state information from the sources they use to create conclusions that don't actually agree with the data.

 

[Sunstone]

Now, folks, the Family Research Council is a very creditable source (of misinformation).

 

[Orontes]

Of course. Law is the product of the people, not unelected judges or a minority. This is what distinguishes democratic states from autocracies.

As I said, why do you hate America?

The above is a non sequitur: the last abode of those with no argument.

If you wish to claim gay marriage is a inalienable right, make the argument. Inalienable rights claims are based on natural law. Natural law exists within a larger metaphysic entailing eternal law and a Divine law giver. Which metaphysic are you appealing to?

If I did, I would.

Very well, then we can dispense with any more statements about inalienable rights.

Gay marriage is not a fundamental right.

Marriage is.

Do you take this as a categorical?

The point would be the quote doesn't support your claim gay marriage is a fundamental right.

I have not claimed that it is.

Good.

There is no fundamental right to marriage.

As I said, I will give more weight to the opinion of the Supreme Court.

I see. So this deference to the Court opinion would indicate you accept as correct all decisions by the Court simply because it is the Court? This would include the lovely list like Dred Scott, Plessy v. Ferguson, Ozawa v. United States, Korematsu v. United States etc. If that is not your view, then your siding with the Court on this issue is simply personal advantage and thus ad hoc.

Thus the divide is clarified: those who believe in democratic process and those who usurp it for private agendas.

Or those who believe in the American system, and those who oppose it.

Quite so! And insofar as the American System is a constitutional democracy you should abandon your autocratic leanings.

Gay marriages cannot produce citizens or future tax payers. The state has no vested interest in gay marriage.

Please don't tell my kids.

?

Marriage doesn't appear in what you quote from the California Constitution. There is no fundamental right to gay marriage. Rather, what one has is four judges who confuse their political penchants for law and adjust the law to mesh with those penchants. It is undemocratic and unjust.

As to what the California Constitution does say: "(O)n the same terms" is a "similarly situated" legal positioning. Heterosexual marriages and gay marriages are not similarly situated. Gay marriages cannot produce citizens or future tax payers. The state has no vested interest in gay marriage.

Of course they can. Mine has. Further, many heterosexual marriages do not.

You and your partner conceived together? Have you contacted Oprah or the National Enquirer?

Oh my God you're so witty! So funny! So clever! Would you make such an insensitive remark to a straight couple who conceived by insemination, or is your crude humor reserved for gay people?

This feigned umbrage is uninteresting. It is also vacuous. I gave a serious reply that was met with tripe. Unless a woman can produce semen or men eggs then gay marriages cannot produce children which indicates a clear distinction between heterosexual and homosexual marriages and a clear reason the state has no vested interest in promoting gay marriage.

Alas, no. Rights claims do not have force simply in the assertion, but must pass democratic muster i.e. popular will.

You're entitled to your opinion, however odd. What I don't understand is your habit of announcing it as though it was fact. You have a very unusual legal position.

[/quote]

If you think my opinion odd or an unusual legal position, then you are unstudied in jurisprudence.