Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse on the Ruth Institute blog:

... Perhaps Mr. Ford [of ThinkProgress] doesn’t realize that the issue of fatherlessness would be a serious issue, even if the definition of marriage were completely off the table. Even if we weren’t debating “gay marriage,” some of us would still be worried about the impact of absent fathers on children. As proof of this, I offer my own works; I wrote two books, one in 2001, and another in 2005, which deal extensively with impact of family structure on the lives of children, arguing for the importance of the two parent married couple household for the development and happiness of children. Neither book has a single word about homosexuality or same sex unions.

Glen Stanton [of Focus on the Family] is not being duplicitous when he talks about the importance of mothers and fathers: he is talking about what he sees as a serious issue, with or without the gay marriage issue. Likewise, Maggie Gallagher, whose earlier books on family structure have nothing to say about homosexuality or same sex unions. Likewise, David Blankenhorn, whose seminal work, Fatherless America, put the topic on the map. These books are not about same sex unions.

It is only the gay blogmen and their compatriots, who equate every mention of the fatherlessness issue as a personal affront. Why might this be? I will discuss that question in another post. For now, let us just note that the common-sense general conclusion that Glen Stanton and Focus on the Family “intact families are best for children of either gender,” is more about children than about adults, and is certainly consistent with the evidence in this paper. And the marriage redefiners do themselves no credit if they consider a statement like that to be fighting words.