Home > Children's Issues, Excerpts, Psychology, Resources, Same-Sex 'Marriage' > Dr. Trayce Hanson – Same-Sex Marriage: Not in the best interest of children

Dr. Trayce Hanson – Same-Sex Marriage: Not in the best interest of children

27 October 2009

[Elder’s Note:  Jackie Bruchi of StandFirm has found an excellent article on the effects of purported same-sex marriages on children.  While I am trying to make this blog unique from StandFirm, I find this article is too good to not excerpt here. 

Since non-celibate homosexuals are also, in addition to being caught up in sin, the victims of the Church in those instances when her clerics fail to discourage the sin, I know the tone of my readers will be respectful.]

From the Ruth Institute Blog:

“..To date, very little research exists that assesses long-term outcomes for homosexually parented children. According to Charlotte Patterson, a self-proclaimed, pro-same-sex-marriage researcher, there are only two longitudinal studies of children raised by lesbians.(23) And no long-term studies of children raised by homosexual men. A professional organization dedicated to the welfare of its patients cannot and should not support drastic change in social policy based on just two, small and non-representative longitudinal studies.

Certainly homosexual couples can be just as loving toward children as heterosexual couples, but children need more than love. They require the distinctive qualities and complementary natures of a male and female parent. The accumulated wisdom of over 5,000 years concludes that the ideal marital and parental configuration is composed of one man and one woman. This time-tested wisdom is now supported by the most advanced, scientifically sound research available.

Importantly, and to their credit, many self-proclaimed pro-same-sex-marriage researchers acknowledge that there is as of yet no definitive evidence as to the impact of homosexual parenting on children. Regardless, some of those advocates support same-sex marriage because they believe it offers a natural laboratory in which to assess the long-term impact on children.(24) That position is unconscionable and indefensible…”

I find the first comment (Sean McLaughlin) to be particularly apt:

“In all the onerous debate over same sex marriage, its proponents NEVER address this most obvious and fundamental issue of what’s best for the children involved. And, they believe that once the “social stigma” against gays and gay marriage is dampened or removed, that somehow magically, the inherent needs and problems of children exposed to those situations will be removed.
I couldn’t disagree more. The rights of children are what are at stake here. As society makes decisions as to what’s best for everyone, children’s rights cannot and must not be ignored, what’s best for them needs to be put first and foremost in a legal sense.”

Finally, Jill Woodliff of Lent and Beyond has pointed out a resource from NARTH on how homosexuality was mainstreamed into the APA in the 1970’s.  An excerpt:

“A lifelong hard-left political activist, the psychologist Evelyn Hooker is more than anyone else credited by believers with having demonstrated that homosexuality is normal. Even today, almost fifty years after its publication in 1957 in Projective Testing, her “The Adjustment of the Male Overt Homosexual” is the only paper referenced in detail on the main website of the American Psychological Association in its discussion of Gay and Lesbian issues, as it attempts to make the case that there is no evidence for an association between homosexuality and psychopathology.  Crucially, her study was one of the two upon which in 1973, the APA decided to remove homosexuality from the list of disorders in the DSM and the one study discussed in the APA’s brief in 2003 in the Lawrence case. It claims to show that “homosexuals [are] not inherently abnormal and that there [is] no difference between the pathologies of homosexual and heterosexual men.”

Eight years after her landmark study, she found herself chair of a newly -established National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Task Force on Homosexuality, hand -picked by Judd Marmor, an influential psychiatrist at UCLA. The only other “mental health” representatives were Alfred Kinsey’s close colleagues Paul Gebhard, and John Money, the latter a psychologist from Johns Hopkins and an early (but recently discredited and fired) proponent of transsexual surgery. In 1969 the Task Force issued its report. It claimed, parroting the Kinsey reports almost word-for-word, that sexuality was a continuum from exclusive homosexuality to exclusive heterosexuality, and that some degree of bisexuality was the human norm. Without evidence, it stated that any homosexual suffering was caused by societal prejudice. (It avoided mentioning, however, that in Kinsey’s view, human sexual taste was almost infinitely malleable.)…”

Apt.  Read it all.

– Elder

%d bloggers like this: