NOM BLOG

Why Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Will Never Live Up To The Real Thing

 

Two authors have penned an article at The Federalist pointing out several key reasons “why marriage deserves special attention from government – and its redefinition does not”:

ThinkstockPhotos-783213991. The Species Only Survives Because Of Heterosexual Relationships
Marriage produces more taxpayers. By providing a social stamp of approval and public policies friendly to marriage, government is encouraging the survival of the human species and the creation of more tax dollars in the environment that—study after study has found—is best for children.

2. Children Benefit From Marriage—Not Same Sex Marriage
[C]ontrary to popular reports, people raised by same-sex couples are not as well developed as those raised by married parents. Comprehensive research published earlier this year by Catholic University of America researcher Dr. Paul Sullins found that ‘emotional problems were over twice as prevalent for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents.’

3. Marriage Is Physically Healthy; Same Sex Marriage Is Not
In 2011, a survey of 90 studies found that single men die eight to 17 years earlier than married males. Life spans for single women decrease by seven to 15 years compared with their married counterparts.

Conversely, a number of studies have found lower life expectancies for same-sex sexual couples. While the invention of anti-retroviral drugs has narrowed the gap, anal sex between men has led to this small segment of society making up at least two-thirds of all HIV/AIDS cases in America.

. . .

Taxpayers have a right to not be held financially accountable for poor life decisions with predictable consequences.

4. Society Is Empowered By Marriage And Weakened By Its Redefinition
[T]he families that come from marriage create communities that empower each other. Bonds are formed, friends are made. As has been seen in Europe, Canada, and a number of U.S. states, however, redefining marriage brings persecution, reduction in liberties of speech and religion, and threatens the very fabric of equal treatment under the law.

. . .

The burden of proof to expand the government’s definition to “earn social approval, tax benefits, etc.,” of marriage is on same-sex couples. Like anyone who wants to receive a degree or a certificate, same-sex couples must make the case that they add benefits equal to those of marriage.

Alas, based upon the available science, the many benefits of marriage are not transferrable to its redefinition for same-sex couples.

Many people who advocate redefining marriage act as if it is a political institution, something that can be changed to suit changing societal whims. But marriage has intrinsic meaning – it is the union of one man and one woman – and it witnesses eternal truths: that men and women are complimentary, naturally made for each other, that only the union of men and women can create new life, and that children thrive when they receive the love of both their mother and their father.

See The Federalist for more.