Make a purely secular argument for 1 woman & 1 man.

[jmvizanko]

The only arguments I have ever seen for forcing the definition of marriage to be only one woman and one man fall into 2 categories. One is an argument that is derived from somebody's religion, say for example, Christianity suggesting 1 woman and 1 man. The other is an argument from majority/tradition, say for example, most or many cultures throughout history defined marriage this way, so that's what it should be.

In America, we have a bill of rights that clearly states we should not have a state religion. Therefore the first argument does not suffice for a justification for making gay marriage, or polygamy, illegal in the US. The second argument seems to be used when the first argument fails, namely because of the above reason I just gave. But it also fails because we have a bill of rights that clearly states we have a right to practice religion freely. If your religion allows polygamy, the American government in no way has a right to deny your practice of it. And both fail in basic principle that they are based on ethnocentricity and are anti personal freedom, and I have no clue how anyone could put either argument forward and still spout that they love America because it stands for freedom.

The only convincing argument that wouldn't violate the first amendment or the respect of personal freedom would be one based solely on logic. I challenge anyone to present such an argument, that is not derived from their religion, their personal preferences, or the basis that their religion/culture should rule all others.

[Autodidact]

East, maybe we should talk about the difference between a fact and an opinion.

An opinion is like: Sushi is delicious, Aretha Franklin is the best singer who has ever lived, arguing on the internet is a waste of time.

A fact is like: The unemployment rate in the U.S. has gone down over the last two years, children thrive just as well with same-sex parents as opposite sex parents, Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.

An opinion is "A view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." A fact is "A thing that is indisputably the case."Your opinion in this matter, not based on fact or knowledge, is not helpful in determining the truth. In a matter such as this, what is important is fact, not opinion. It is indisputably the case that children do at least as well in same-sex families as they do in opposite sex families.

Unless you want to present some FACTS, not opinion, (as I have) to persuade us that is not the case?

[East of Eden]

East of Eden:

Lesbians and gay men continue to raise children. Do you think it's better for those children if the parents who are raising them are married, or not?

Neither choice, I think it would be better if they had a mother and a father.

So you think they should be taken away from the parents who are raising them and placed in heterosexual families?

Or you think that gay and lesbian couples should be prohibited from having children?

Yes.

btw, what on earth do you base this position on, since it is apparently not based on reality? Might it be just your religious beliefs?

In part. See this article on the serious flaws in the studies you cite, and please read it all:

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=is01j3

This was interesting:

"A study in Adolescence found:
A disproportionate percentage--29 percent--of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents having reported sexual relations with their parent. . . . Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50.[60]"

And this:

"Even those who support the concept of homosexual "families" admit to their unsuitability for children:
· In their study in Family Relations, L. Koepke et al. observed, "Even individuals who believe that same-sex relationships are a legitimate choice for adults may feel that children will suffer from being reared in such families."[66]
· Writing in the Journal of Homosexuality, J. J. Bigner and R. B. Jacobson describe the homosexual father as "socioculturally unique," trying to take on "two apparently opposing roles:that of a father (with all its usual connotations) and that of a homosexual man." They describe the homosexual father as "both structurally and psychologically at social odds with his interest in keeping one foot in both worlds: parenting and homosexuality."[67]
In truth, the two roles are fundamentally incompatible. The instability, susceptibility to disease, and domestic violence that is disproportionate in homosexual and lesbian relationships would normally render such households unfit to be granted custody of children. However, in the current social imperative to rush headlong into granting legitimacy to the practice of homosexuality in every conceivable area of life, such considerations are often ignored.
But children are not guinea pigs to be used in social experiments in redefining the institution of marriage. They are vulnerable individuals with vital emotional and developmental needs. The great harm done by denying them both a mother and a father in a committed marriage will not easily be reversed, and society will pay a grievous price for its ill-advised adventurism."

And this:

"Homosexual Promiscuity. Studies indicate that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime, a lifestyle that--is difficult for even "committed" homosexuals to break free of and which is not conducive to a healthy and wholesome atmosphere for the raising of children.
· A. P. Bell and M. S. Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex with five hundred or more partners, with 28 percent having 1,000 or more sex partners.[29]
· In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101-500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners.[30]
· A survey conducted by the homosexual magazine Genre found that 24 percent of the respondents said they had had more than 100 sexual partners in their lifetime. The magazine noted that several respondents suggested including a category of those who had more than 1,000 sexual partners.[31]
· In his study of male homosexuality in Western Sexuality: Practice and Precept in Past and Present Times, M. Pollak found that "few homosexual relationships last longer than two years, with many men reporting hundreds of lifetime partners."[32]
Promiscuity among Homosexual Couples. Even in those homosexual relationships in which the partners consider themselves to be in a committed relationship, the meaning of "committed" typically means something radically different than in heterosexual marriage.
· In The Male Couple, authors David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison report that in a study of 156 males in homosexual relationships lasting from one to thirty-seven years:
Only seven couples have a totally exclusive sexual relationship, and these men all have been together for less than five years. Stated another way, all couples with a relationship lasting more than five years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships.[33]
Most understood sexual relations outside the relationship to be the norm, and viewed adopting monogamous standards as an act of oppression.
· In Male and Female Homosexuality, M. Saghir and E. Robins found that the average male homosexual live-in relationship lasts between two and three years.[34]
· In their Journal of Sex Research study of the sexual practices of older homosexual men, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that only 2.7 percent of older homosexuals had only one sexual partner in their lifetime.[35]
Comparison of Homosexual 'Couples' and Heterosexual Spouses. Lest anyone suffer the illusion that any equivalency between the sexual practices of homosexual relationships and traditional marriage exists, the statistics regarding sexual fidelity within marriage are revealing:
· In Sex in America, called by the New York Times "the most important study of American sexual behavior since the Kinsey reports," Robert T. Michael et al. report that 90 percent of wives and 75 percent of husbands claim never to have had extramarital sex.[36]
· A nationally representative survey of 884 men and 1,288 women published in Journal of Sex Research found that 77 percent of married men and 88 percent of married women had remained faithful to their marriage vows.[37]
· In The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States, E. O. Laumann et al. conducted a national survey that found that 75 percent of husbands and 85 percent of wives never had sexual relations outside of marriage.[38]
· A telephone survey conducted for Parade magazine of 1,049 adults selected to represent the demographic characteristics of the United States found that 81 percent of married men and 85 percent of married women reported that they had never violated their marriage vows.[39]
While the rate of fidelity within marriage cited by these studies remains far from ideal, there is a magnum order of difference between the negligible lifetime fidelity rate cited for homosexuals and the 75 to 90 percent cited for married couples. This indicates that even "committed" homosexual relationships display a fundamental incapacity for the faithfulness and commitment that is axiomatic to the institution of marriage.
Unhealthy Aspects of 'Monogamous' Homosexual Relationships. Even those homosexual relationships that are loosely termed "monogamous" do not necessarily result in healthier behavior.
· The journal AIDS reported that men involved in relationships engaged in anal intercourse and oral-anal intercourse with greater frequency than did those without a steady partner.[40] Anal intercourse has been linked with a host of bacterial and parasitical sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS.
· The exclusivity of the relationship did not diminish the incidence of unhealthy sexual acts, which are commonplace among homosexuals. An English study published in the same issue of AIDS concurred, finding that most "unsafe" sex acts among homosexuals occur in steady relationships.[41]
Of paramount concern are the effects of such a lifestyle upon children. Brad Hayton writes:
Homosexuals . . . model a poor view of marriage to children. They are taught by example and belief that marital relationships are transitory and mostly sexual in nature. Sexual relationships are primarily for pleasure rather than procreation. And they are taught that monogamy in a marriage is not the norm [and] should be discouraged if one wants a good 'marital' relationship."

[East of Eden]

East, maybe we should talk about the difference between a fact and an opinion.

An opinion is like: Sushi is delicious, Aretha Franklin is the best singer who has ever lived, arguing on the internet is a waste of time.

A fact is like: The unemployment rate in the U.S. has gone down over the last two years, children thrive just as well with same-sex parents as opposite sex parents, Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.

An opinion is "A view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." A fact is "A thing that is indisputably the case."Your opinion in this matter, not based on fact or knowledge, is not helpful in determining the truth. In a matter such as this, what is important is fact, not opinion. It is indisputably the case that children do at least as well in same-sex families as they do in opposite sex families.

Unless you want to present some FACTS, not opinion, (as I have) to persuade us that is not the case?

What you call facts seem to be based on flawed studies, which makes them opinions.

[Wyvern]

East, maybe we should talk about the difference between a fact and an opinion.

An opinion is like: Sushi is delicious, Aretha Franklin is the best singer who has ever lived, arguing on the internet is a waste of time.

A fact is like: The unemployment rate in the U.S. has gone down over the last two years, children thrive just as well with same-sex parents as opposite sex parents, Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.

An opinion is "A view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." A fact is "A thing that is indisputably the case."Your opinion in this matter, not based on fact or knowledge, is not helpful in determining the truth. In a matter such as this, what is important is fact, not opinion. It is indisputably the case that children do at least as well in same-sex families as they do in opposite sex families.

Unless you want to present some FACTS, not opinion, (as I have) to persuade us that is not the case?

What you call facts seem to be based on flawed studies, which makes them opinions.

Unless you want to be accused of employing a double standard you should not complain of the studies used by others when the very studies you bring forth are equally if not even more flawed than the ones you are complaining about.

Since nearly all of the "facts" you bring forth are based on a study by a self described expert on sexual matters in the early 80's of 41 male and 24 female homosexuals your studies are fatally flawed from the start.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi ... ent;col1

In particular it should be noted; The original wrongdoing which led to Cameron's expulsion from the American Psychological Association - distortion and falsification of others' studies and employment of unsound methodologies - continues to be found in Cameron's current research studies. Indeed, Cameron often pads his brochures and articles with citations of his own previous studies, studies which have already been discredited.

[East of Eden]

East, maybe we should talk about the difference between a fact and an opinion.

An opinion is like: Sushi is delicious, Aretha Franklin is the best singer who has ever lived, arguing on the internet is a waste of time.

A fact is like: The unemployment rate in the U.S. has gone down over the last two years, children thrive just as well with same-sex parents as opposite sex parents, Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.

An opinion is "A view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." A fact is "A thing that is indisputably the case."Your opinion in this matter, not based on fact or knowledge, is not helpful in determining the truth. In a matter such as this, what is important is fact, not opinion. It is indisputably the case that children do at least as well in same-sex families as they do in opposite sex families.

Unless you want to present some FACTS, not opinion, (as I have) to persuade us that is not the case?

What you call facts seem to be based on flawed studies, which makes them opinions.

Unless you want to be accused of employing a double standard you should not complain of the studies used by others when the very studies you bring forth are equally if not even more flawed than the ones you are complaining about.

Since nearly all of the "facts" you bring forth are based on a study by a self described expert on sexual matters in the early 80's of 41 male and 24 female homosexuals your studies are fatally flawed from the start.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi ... ent;col1

In particular it should be noted; The original wrongdoing which led to Cameron's expulsion from the American Psychological Association - distortion and falsification of others' studies and employment of unsound methodologies - continues to be found in Cameron's current research studies. Indeed, Cameron often pads his brochures and articles with citations of his own previous studies, studies which have already been discredited.

I'll let Dr. Cameron answer these lies:

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/ ... uary-2009/

[East of Eden]

Does this count as a secular argument against homosexual parenting?

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2012/ ... omosexual/

[Thatguy]

Does this count as a secular argument against homosexual parenting?

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2012/ ... omosexual/

Throwing out page after page of the same disreputable organizations propaganda pieces isn't what we've been asking for, no. The number of criticisms of Cameron cited in the Wikipedia article alone is enough to cast real doubt on his legitimacy. This particular reference you cite now has the problem repeatedly pointed out above- it deliberately confuses pedophiles with homosexuals. It would be nice to be able to defend at least one of these instead of looking elsewhere on the website to toss out more of the same objectionable material.

[East of Eden]

Does this count as a secular argument against homosexual parenting?

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2012/ ... omosexual/

Throwing out page after page of the same disreputable organizations propaganda pieces isn't what we've been asking for, no. The number of criticisms of Cameron cited in the Wikipedia article alone is enough to cast real doubt on his legitimacy.

And this retraction from my link should remove them:

"Dr. Paul Cameron was not expelled from the American Psychological Association or the American Sociological, nor is there any evidence that he ‘willfully misrepresented research.’ Toby Canning and his dissertation committee (Malcolm Gray, Bob Jacobs, Cyd Strickland, and Thomas Vail) sincerely regret these inaccuracies. We acknowledge that Dr. Cameron’s extensive research on homosexuality and homosexual parents (e.g., 38 articles listed on PubMed) appears in peer-reviewed journals.�

Dr. Cameron is the target of a vicious smear campaign on the part of the 'brownshorts'.

This particular reference you cite now has the problem repeatedly pointed out above- it deliberately confuses pedophiles with homosexuals.

Much of what is called a pedophila problem IS really a homosexual one. In the case of the Roman Catholic abuse cases, for instance, nearly all the perpetrators and victims are male.

[Autodidact]

East of Eden:

Lesbians and gay men continue to raise children. Do you think it's better for those children if the parents who are raising them are married, or not?

Neither choice, I think it would be better if they had a mother and a father.

So you think they should be taken away from the parents who are raising them and placed in heterosexual families?

Or you think that gay and lesbian couples should be prohibited from having children?

Yes.

thank you. I appreciate your honesty, as I do all your posts. So the government should be able to decide who is and is not permitted to reproduce, in your view? And lesbians should not be allowed to reproduce while, of course, you are?

btw, what on earth do you base this position on, since it is apparently not based on reality? Might it be just your religious beliefs?

In part. See this article on the serious flaws in the studies you cite, and please read it all:

Here's what you have yet to give us: a single study, anecdote, article or piece of data that shows your position to be based on fact. You have yet to cite anything to support your assertion that heterosexual families provide better parenting than same-sex families. Absolutely nothing. Meanwhile, I have presented literally dozens of studies that show exactly the opposite. Not that I expect reality to affect your beliefs in any way.

http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=is01j3

Yes, I'm sure
Dr. Daily, with his degrees in theology, is much more qualified to critique social science researchers than actual social scientists. I'm sure this contributor to a known hate group, who churns out lies and propaganda by the tankful, has more expertise than every child welfare organization in the country. No doubt.

I see he is still stuck in criticism of articles written over 25 years ago. I wonder why he lacks any curiosity about work done in this century? For example, he cites Patterson as pointing out that longitudinal studies are needed. He neglects to mention that the most recent research cited is exactly that--a longitudinal study. I wonder why, if he is honest, he would fail to mention that? It turns out that, sadly for him, the longitudinal study he called for is the one that, surprisingly, revealed that children in same-sex families actually flourish better than those in heterosexual families.

I wonder why all of his criticisms of the research date back to the decades before the really good research was done? In other words, after all the criticism was addressed by subsequent research? Why, if he is not an utter liar, would he omit this crucial information?

Then he cites more studies revealing the severe problems in heterosexual relationships, with their fatal tendency to leave children with only one caring parent, the mother. Why would he see these studies, all of them about the problems in heterosexual parenting, as reflecting on same-sex parenting? I can't imagine how an honest person could twist facts like that. Oh, maybe it's because he isn't. Honest, that is.

Code: Select all

This was interesting:

"A study in Adolescence found:
A disproportionate percentage--29 percent--of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents having reported sexual relations with their parent. . . . Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50.[60]"

Ha ha ha, that's a good one. "A study in adolescence..." he omits to mention the "study" is actually a propaganda piece by that discredited liar and hate-monger, Paul Cameron.

Cameron's survey data are subject to so many methodological flaws as to be virtually meaningless.

See http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/h ... ation.html for a detailed refutation of these lies.

In reality, of course, as the longitudinal study shows, almost all child sexual abuse is perpetrated by men, usually heterosexual men, and in this area as in others, the safest place for children to be raised is with two women.

This study and others have found a sexual abuse rate in lesbian families of approximately zero.

But the research shows that most pedophiles -- adults who sexually abuse children -- are male, and that such behaviour in women is extremely rare. Furthermore, girls are overwhelmingly the victims of male sexual abuse, and gay men are no more likely than heterosexual men to commit it. (There is no association between homosexuality and pedophilia.) One study concluded that "a child's risk of being molested by his or her relative's heterosexual partner is over 100 times greater than by someone who might be identifiable as being homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual."

Are Children at Risk for Sexual Abuse by Homosexuals?

Carole Jenny,
Thomas A. Roesler,
Kimberly L. Poyer
American Academy of Pediatrics, 1994

Finally, he cites a number of outdated studies about the promiscuity of unmarried gay men. What one earth could this have to do with the lives of married lesbian mothers? I can't imagine, can you?

[Autodidact]

What you call facts seem to be based on flawed studies, which makes them opinions.

That's interesting. So you have read and analysed each and every one of these studies, and found that they all have exactly the same flaws, flaws, that, for some reason, always come out with the same results. No matter what groups are studied, by what methods, they all have flaws that, for some mysterious reason, always favor the same group. These flaws mysteriously never cause different results, never happen to come out showing that heterosexuals do better.

I note that the only people who find these mysterious flaws are doctors of divinity from known hate-mongers. For some of the reason, all of the child welfare organizations in the country are quite satisfied with these results. Organizations such as the The Child Welfare League of America, the North American Council on Adoptable Children, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Association of Social Workers, the Evan B. Donadson Adoption Institute , the National Adoption Center, Voice for Adoption, and even the AMA all find the data persuasive. Only the extremist, right-wing hate groups and propaganda mills seem to have the slightest problem with it. Maybe that's because, like you, they just don't like the results?

You prefer non-existent studies, the ones that show to the contrary. I wonder why no one, not even Paul Cameron and his ilk, ever manage to do a single study that compares the two groups, and finds that heterosexuals do better? Don't you find that interesting? I do.

I repeat, you have not cited a single study to support your position. Not one. Zero. Zilch. Bupkus. Nada. That's because it's not true. It is a lie.