Saturday, June 25, 2005

Traditional Marriage Good For Family and Society

The debate about SSM rages on (but not for much longer I suspect). As I mentioned in one of my previous chats, the results on kids hasn't been thought out. To me, marriage isn't about two people sharing a private relationship - marriage is a social obligation for the benefit and sake of children.

So what happens to the children - the outcome for them? The Feds are going to put this Bill through without thinking out the consequences. Or do they know and just don't care? Check out this article I uncovered and draw your own conclusions.

This finding was prepared for the Attorney General of Canada in 2000 (Halpern vs. Ont. Supreme Court - 684/00). The AG called on expert Stephen Nock, a sociologist at the U of Virginia to review several hundred pro SS family studies.

His findings ......

He concluded that "all of the articles contained at least one fatal flaw of design or execution; and not a single one of these studies was conducted according to general accepted standards of scientific research". Flaws found:

1) No samples were given by which to go by. Even those pundits enthusiastic about SS parenting acknowledged that there were NO studies of child development done based on random sampling of same-sex families - only situational ones (ie. lesbian single mother or single gay dad vs. single hetero mother or father).

2) Most of the outcomes determined by SS proponents are NOT those used by experts to measure child well-being.

3) Most of the studies relied on the mother’s report of her parenting skills and abilities, rather than objective reporting.

4) All of the studies conducted focused on short-term measures of child development. Few followed the children of SS parents to adulthood to see what the outcomes were and if they did, they did not report their findings.

And what do the unflawed studies conclude:

That children do better in traditional family settings. Studies show that kids from intact married homes, to biologically related parents, are healthier mentally and physically, have lower rates of substance abuse, and are less likely to commit crimes; while kids raised outside of intact marriages are more likely to be victims of abuse and have higher suicide rates and had higher school drop out rates.

So if the Feds know - based on their own expert's report in 2000, that keeping traditional marriage laws intact is good for children, then why are they so hellbent on changing it?


At Sat. Jun. 25, 09:39:00 p.m. MDT, Blogger Justthinkin said...

One simple word Aizlynne...VOTES...since when has gov't ever looked seriously at any study,let alone implemented some of the suggestions?? Ok,the ones that suggest social engineering and/or tax raises don't count.

Per Ardua Ad Astra

At Sat. Jun. 25, 10:09:00 p.m. MDT, Blogger Candace said...

I can't figure out the big deal over passing SSM - we hear in the HoC Boudria whining about his fax machine & inbox (from anti-ssm citizens), we see/hear small-c conservative MPs of both Lib & CPC bent filing petitions (surprisingly, no petitions from NDP or Bloc ridings? maybe I missed them...maybe they aren't being presented?), etc.

But I'm not hearing about pro-ssm petitions, or pro-ssm citizens blocking faxes and emails.

Yet "Canadians want us to pass this law" - says who?

At Sun. Jun. 26, 07:37:00 p.m. MDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wrong questions: Ask yourself what the ramifications are for a woman who is facing her ex-husband and his new male spouse in court, petitioning for custody of her two young boys on the basis of a more stable home environment by virtue of marriage and the fact that the new spouse can stay at home with the children?

At Mon. Jun. 27, 08:20:00 a.m. MDT, Blogger Candace said...


At Mon. Jun. 27, 12:52:00 p.m. MDT, Blogger Aizlynne said...

Anoynomous has a good point and this is what will transgress in court, much to the detriment of children.

I am also concerned about pedophiles who live together being able to claim "common law" status and then being able to adopt young boys. I am sure the naysayers will say this would never happen, but look at the two pedo's who were shacking up and molested over 36,000 children!!!

Like I said, it's opened up a can of worms and is a verily poorily written piece of legislation.

At Tue. Jun. 28, 06:49:00 a.m. MDT, Blogger RightGirl said...

Hi Aizlynne

I like your blog, and I've just linked you over on Girl on the Right. You don't have a trackback function, so I thought you'd like to know.


At Tue. Jun. 28, 08:56:00 a.m. MDT, Blogger Garza said...

We need to get down to the basics. The home was ESTABLISHED first, before any other association, and it was not SSM. Why, because of children and the family makup. If we stray from this, regardless of anyone's "study", our society will plumit. Remember the lessons learned from Sodom and Gomorah, and Rome? These societies did not survive for a reason, and it had nothing to do with economics.

At Tue. Jun. 28, 02:24:00 p.m. MDT, Blogger Aizlynne said...

Thanks Rightgirl. I am not sure how to do trackbacks, but I will sure try and figure it out!

Thanks for visiting my blog. I have visited yours several times and must say it is quite impressive.


At Tue. Jun. 28, 07:59:00 p.m. MDT, Blogger Shaken said...

Marriage is a framework and a template of behavior. That framework and template has seen mankind through millenia of wars, wayward political experiments, depositism, pograms, inquisitions, triumphs, disasters, migrations and collapses. We have just weakened it, and therefore, have weakened ourselves. There was another way which was win-win. I won't be around all that much longer to face the music, but since I am highly invested in my children, I despair for them this day.


Post a Comment

<< Home

"Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts" - Sir Winston Churchill.

Free Hit Counter
Free Counter