Children need normal marriage not gay marriage
Image via WikipediaGiven the marital relationship’s natural orientation to children, it is not surprising that, according to the best
available sociological evidence, children fare best on virtually every indicator of well-being when reared by
their wedded biological parents.
Studies that allow for other relevant factors, including poverty and even
genetics, suggest that children reared in intact homes fare best on the following measures:
Educational achievement: literacy and graduation rates;
Emotional health: rates of anxiety, depression, substance abuse, and suicide;
Familial and sexual development: strong sense of identity, timing of onset of puberty, rates of teen and out‐of‐wedlock pregnancy, and rates of sexual
abuse; and
Child and adult behaviour: rates of aggression, attention deficit disorder, delinquency, and incarceration. 1
The bodily union integral to marriage helps to create stable and harmonious conditions suitable for children. Consider the conclusions of the reputably progressive research institution Child Trends:
[R]esearch clearly demonstrates that family structure matters for children, and the family structure that helps children the most is a family headed by two biological parents in a low-conflict marriage.
Children in single-parent families, children born to unmarried mothers, and children in stepfamilies or cohabiting relationships face higher risks of poor outcomes. . . . There is thus value for children in promoting strong, stable
marriages between biological parents. . . .“[I]t is not simply the presence of two parents, . . . but the presence of two biological parents that seems to
support children’s development.2
In contrast to the current understanding of marriage, the revisionist view asserts that marriage is the union of two people (whatever their sexual identity or orientation) who commit to romantically loving and caring for each
other and to sharing the burdens and benefits of domestic life, so long as love and mutual care remain.
It is essentially a union of hearts and minds, enhanced by whatever forms of sexual intimacy both partners find agreeable. In this revisionist view, the couple also has a right to rear children, however conceived. The procreative element intrinsic to marriage is replaced by an expectation that children may be acquired optionally, by acts of the will, not of the body.
According to this understanding, the State should recognise and regulate
marriage because it has more interest in romantic partnerships than in the concrete needs of children.
