Tag Archives: Traditional Marriage

Podcasts

Jennifer Roback Morse podcasts on same-sex marriage and prop 8

1 Comment
Cloning her would solve the marriage problem
Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse

From the Ruth Institute podcast page.

An update on the federal trial on California’s Proposition 8

The MP3 file is here. (from 1/19/2010)

Topics:

  • what is the prop 8 federal court trial about?
  • what is at stake in the prop 8 trial?
  • what is the only argument in favor of SSM?
  • what is the purpose of marriage?
  • what is the end goal of the marriage redefiners?
  • what would happen if sexual orientation were protected like race?
  • what happens to people today who disagree with SSM?
  • does SSM diminish the biological basis for assigning parenthood?

Reponding to Ted Olson’s pro-SSM arguments:

  • traditional marriage violate the Equal Protection clause
  • people have a right to demand respect from other people
  • children don’t need a mother and father
  • there are no differences between same-sex and opposite-sex couples

Understanding same-sex marriage

The MP3 file is here. (from 1/21/2010)

Topics:

  • how did Dr. J get interested in the marriage issue?
  • what got the pro-marriage Prop 8 movement started?
  • what do we know about the federal judge in the prop 8 trial?
  • how will the school curriculum change if SSM becomes legal?
  • how same-sex unions are a stepping stone to legalizing SSM
  • how SSM empowers the state to regulate private relationships
  • children have a right to a relationship with their parents
  • how SSM threatens the rights of free speech and association
  • how the purpose of SSM differs than the purpose of TM
  • how SSM expands the state’s power to coerce individuals
  • how the province of Quebec opposes heterosexuality as normal
  • SSM’s goal is the elimination of sex differences
  • how the SSM agenda is an extension of third-wave feminism

Wonderful stuff. I really, really like listening to her talk about these things!

Dr. J’s wonderful blog is here.  Please give it a visit! She has really been writing a lot of her own thoughts into her posts lately. It’s very fun and engaging!

It’s too bad that more single women don’t talk about the things that Dr. J talks about. Do you know what single Christian men think of when a single Christian woman comes along and starts talking about the role of husband/father, marriage and children? He thinks about marriage and children, of course, and it’s fun to talk about things like that.

Podcasts

New Jennifer Roback Morse podcast on the California prop 8 trial

Leave a comment

Right now there is a trial going on in California in which some plaintiffs are challenging the result of the recent referendum on marriage. California voted to recognize marriage as being between one man and one woman, and some people are complaining about that. Jennifer Roback Morse was interviewed about this trial on the Christian radio show “Issues, Etc.”, and she explained some of the issues they are debating in the trial and what it all means.

Here is the MP3 file.

And here’s my summary of what she and the host talked about:

  • Rosie O’Donnell’s twelve-year lesbian relationship is over
  • How children are affected by unstable relationships between partners
  • what do the statistics show about the stability of same-sex unions?
  • what is the purpose of marriage?
  • what characteristics define child-centered marriage?
  • what characteristics define adult-centered marriage?
  • who gets custody of the children when same-sex couples split?
  • how are parental rights understood today under the law?
  • how would same-sex marriage change parental rights?
  • what is the agenda of family law radicals for marriage?
  • what are the consequences of this California trial?
  • why does the judge want to broadcast the trial on TV?

I find her a real delight to listen to! I would be delighted if more people learned to talk about these issues the same way that she does. I find her blog is very helpful as well. In fact, she has an interesting post up about some “expert” testimony from a sociologist who testified in favor of same sex marriage. (H/T Lex Communis)

She cites this post from Protect Marriage:

UCLA social psychology professor Dr. Letitia Peppeau opined that, among other things, same-sex couples are “indistinguishable” from heterosexual couples in terms of their relationships, and that legalizing same sex marriage would not harm traditional marriage. However, she could offer no studies to prove her contention that there would be no impacts on traditional marriage.  On cross examination, she also admitted that the available studies do, in fact, show significant differences between gay couples and heterosexual couples. For example, one study reported that a significantly lower percentage of gay men think that monogamy is important in their relationships (only 36%) than do those in heterosexual relationships. Of those gay men who say that monogamy is important in their relationships, 74% still engage in sex with multiple partners. When pressed, she admitted that sexual exclusivity among gay men is the exception rather than the rule.

My previous post on why people favor traditional marriage explored the research on the differences between traditional marriage and same-sex unions. If we agree that the purpose of marriage is to provide a stable environment for the children, then it’s clear from the research that these two arrangements are not the same.

Related posts

News

In Australia, non-birth parents can now be named on birth certificates

Leave a comment

This applies to Victoria, own the more liberal states in Australia.

Story here from the Herald Sun. (H/T Thoughts Out Loud)

Excerpt:

Sweeping January 1 changes to the state’s reproductive laws mean that non-birth parents can now be named on birth certificates.

[…]Other changes to the Assisted Reproductive Act included recognition of “social” as well as “medical” infertility, meaning single women, gays and lesbians can access IVF treatment or commission a surrogate.

The new laws also mean children conceived using donors have the right to find out about their biological heritage once they turn 18.

Victorian Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages spokeswoman Erin Keleher, said the department was delighted it can recognise rainbow families. “It’s on the vanguard of social change,” she said.

So the state is assigning parental rights to people who are not biologically related to the child. Is that fair to the child? Is it in the best interests of the child? Do same-sex relationships offer the same benefits to a child as an opposite-sex marriage with two parents biologically linked to the child?

I wrote about the research that answers that last question here.