The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) (love that name) has an interesting commentary on a recent Washington Post article that documents the problems that gay couples are having, trying to get divorces in states that don’t recognize their Massachusetts marriages. You see, they lack the same rights to divorce that straights have! It seems that, esp. for young children, courts favored giving custody to the mother, but what if the child has two mothers, or none? Do they favor the less "butch" of the two?
Of course, gay advocates would answer that we just need to write new laws to
cover their specific problems, since hetero laws don’t apply. But as
the CBMW discusses, what is really troubling about this is that
having gay parents was not so great for the children in the first place
(children, I might add, that did not come from their union), but now,
coming from a divorced gay home? Insult to injury.
Add to that statistics showing that gay unions last even less and less often than hetero ones, and you can see that gay marriage is a disaster visited mostly upon our children. (Here’s some statistics critics can ignore due to their source, but not their substance ;)
RELATED POSTS:
Classic bigotry.
Any straights who divorce should be executed – new law proposal – because it's "bad for the kids."
since they are not really married, it seems they could just split and be done with it. have a nice life and all that.
The issue is what to do with their kids.
yes seeker, that is why i say just split.
make a equitable split. who ever entered the "marriage" with the kid(s) of course has custody.
if the kid(s) were adopted then pull a solomon.
You've got to be kidding, right? Pull a Solomon? That's your solution? Let me know when you are serious about this issue and we will talk ;)
The real answer is that we have created intractable problems by affirming gay marriage and gay adoption and child creation through artificial means. Now, we could figure out new rules for deciding which parent the child lives with, but again, my real point is that gay marriage/adoption victimizes children because gay unions are inherently unstable.
Just like straight marriage, with some 50% divorce rate (including my own parents)?
The answer is simple: apply the same rules to gay divorce as to straight divorce.
I assume that the gay divorce rate is even higher.
"Assume"?
More than 50%?
Your bias is showing.
Gay divorce rates are comparable to, if not lower than, hetero divorce rates. Red states–those states which consistently vote "family values" and are constantly on the march to keep god "in the public sphere" not only have the highest divorce rates, but divorce rates among "firm bible believers" are the highest in the nation!
For one to "assume" gay divorce rates a somehow "higher" is to severely limit the amount of information available on the internet so that "assuming" need not be substantiated in some way. I've done the homework, and here are the results. Your choice on whether to read or not, of course, but it's much better to be informed as to what you are trying to argue than to "assume," don't ya think?
In every country that has legalized same-sex marriage, same-sex divorce rates are slightly lower.
As to children: Neither is it an "insult to injury," nor is it really an issue. Of the gay divorces that have had children involved, usually some type of shared custody, as is seen in most straight divorces with children, is established.
Children in families with two same-gender parents suffer no ill effects, and indeed show the same amount of promise, of self-respect, of self-confidence as children from hetero couples. This scientific fact can also easily be found all over the Internet from reputable sources if one simply used their fingers to surf instead of "assuming."
I was honest enough to say I was assuming, Jason, so back off. However, I think you are being very selective about the data you choose. I tried going to the link you provided, but couldn't take the time to parse through the nonsense to find the references. Can you provide them?
Here's one for you. Enjoy. Looks like my assumption was not unfounded.
2004 Longitudinal study of Norway and Sweden show higher divorce rates among same-sex marriages (Max Planck Institute)
This study also mentions difficulties in gathering gay/lesbian stats, and I would question any study that has self-reporting or unusual samples.
What's even scarier is that in these countries, esp. Norway, marriage is already on a steep decline, so these rates for same sex marriags are plainly horrendous.
"You've got to be kidding, right? Pull a Solomon? That's your solution? Let me know when you are serious about this issue and we will talk ;)" ——-
this and the comment of instability, yup, i must agree. that tongue in cheek solomon comment was just that( i know you got it, but john has an etiquette fetish, and so i am exercising my cya right here)… but, i must say calling something marriage that is not marriage and then allowing children to be brought in to the picture is wrong, and false. if you try to apply law or LAW(sorry, not yelling)to something false in order to make sense out of it, you just get a mass of confusion.
even if hetero and homo "married couples" would have the same "divorce" rates(i have been married twice), a hetero person may, at some point, finally get it right and find a mate and then become the nuclear family, the building block of civilization. with all of the bad things that can happen or is generated by failed hetero marriage, at some point, the failed heteros can make it right and join established society by finding a mate and staying together. homo marriage, not really being something that builds society or civilization, no matter all of the feel good legislation and movements, will make this style of life truly legitimate.
How, precisely, is gay marriage "not really being something that builds society or civilization"?
I've know gay couples who've been together (faithfully) for 20 years or more. My parents split after 17 years.
I also know gay (and straight) people who scorn marriage as a failed, middle-class institution. I'm not particularly fond of it myself, but I think it should an option. Or, make marriage solely a religious option while the gov't establishes civil unions for all. I don't really care what you call it. That way christianists can scorn gay people all they want without interfering with our equality under the law.
btw: I really don't see how one can determine any sort of statistical basis for the success of gay marriages given the small number which have taken place. Also, how does one take into account the tremendous influence of societal homophobia on these unions? This isn't taking place in a vacuum.