marriage as currently defined in the Marriage Act 2004 “…the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life” provides the best environment for children to grow
“Marriage is fundamentally about the needs of children, writes David Blankenhorn, a supporter of gay rights in the US who nevertheless draws the line at same-sex marriage. Redefining marriage to include gay and lesbian couples would eliminate entirely in law, and weaken still further in culture, the basic idea of a mother and a father for every child.” http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/a-dad-does-matter-to-a-child-whether-gay-couples-like-it-or-not/story-e6frg6zo-1226124001348
“…if there is one major demographic change in western societies that can be linked to a large range of adverse consequences for many children and young people, it is the growth in the numbers of children who experience life in a family other than living with their two biological parents, at some point before the age of 15.” For Kids’ Sake – Repairing the Social Environment for Australian Children and Young People, Professor Patrick Parkinson AM July 2011
“ …if there is one major demographic change in western societies that can be linked to a large range of adverse consequences for many children and young people, it is the growth in the numbers of children who experience life in a family other than living with their two biological parents, at some point before the age of 15.”
For Kids’ Sake – Repairing the Social Environment for Australian Children and Young People
Professor Patrick Parkinson AM July 2011 http://sydney.edu.au/law/news/docs_pdfs_images/2011/Sep/FKS-ResearchReport.pdf
marriage as currently defined is more stable than so-called same-sex “marriage”
Dennis Altmann writes “monogamy is not a realistic choice” [Zoe Beaumont, “The sanctimony of marriage”, B.News, August 21, 2008, p10] and Schmidt writes “…if we set aside infidelity and allow a generous definition of ‘long-term relationships’ as those that last at least four years, under 8% of either male or female homosexual relationships fit the definition.” Helen Razer, “Homosexuality is a bore now so many gays are wedded to a rickety institution”, Sydney Morning Herald, March 3, 2011
Indeed it is argued that commitment and fidelity within marriage would be stifling and that if homosexual marriage was approved it would have to be different and allow for “extra-marital outlets.” Andrew Sullivan, Virtually Normal: An Argument about Homosexuality (London:Picador, 1996), p202
children who grow up in a family with mother and father do better in all parameters than children without
“Adolescents in married, two-biological-parent families generally fare better…” [Wendy Manning and Kathleen Lamb, “Adolescent well-being in co-habiting, married, and single-parent families”, Journal of Marriage and Family, vol 65, no.4, Nov 2003, pp876-893, p890]
the further “normalising” of homosexual behaviour through education with all the health consequences of that behaviour for our children
In Quebec, an ethics and religious culture course has been imposed by the government on public and private schools and even for home schooled students which teaches homosexuality as normal. http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/supreme-court-hears-case-of-compulsory-quebec-relativistic-ethics-course/ also see
The rate of new HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men was 44 times that of other men and 40 times that of women, and primary and secondary syphilis rates were 46 times that of other men and 71 times that of women, according to data presented at the 2010 National STD Prevention Conference in Atlanta. http://www.infectiousdiseasenews.com/view.aspx?rid=61780
CDC Analysis Provides New Look at Disproportionate Impact of HIV and Syphilis Among U.S. Gay and Bisexual Men
denial of parental request to withdraw their children from that education – a fundamental rejection of the rights of the family
The Toronto school board, one of the largest in North America has forbidden parents from withdrawing their children from pro-homosexual education. Permission will not be granted because it violates their human rights policy. See p10
http://www.tdsb.on.ca/wwwdocuments/programs/Equity_in_Education/docs/Challenging%20Homophobia%20and%20Heterosexism%20Final%202011.pdf (Nov 2011)
The chair of the Toronto District School Board has confirmed their policy of forbidding exemptions from the board’s radical pro-homosexual curriculum, insisting that any such attempts by parents “would not be condoned” in their schools. http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/toronto-school-board-parents-cant-opt-kids-out-of-pro-homosexual-curriculum/
Christian fathers put in jail for shunning explicit sex education. An international human rights organization today announced it will pursue a civil lawsuit on behalf of parents who want to control their children’s education and withhold them from explicit sex education and play-acting classes required by the German government. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=118635
further pressure on adoption agencies to approve adoption to same-sex couples and closure of agencies that fail to do that
See http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html for consequences in Massachusetts
In 2008, a judgement was delivered in favour of a homosexual couple who appeared as plaintiffs against Wesley Mission in NSW in a matter concerning the fostering of children. Wesley Mission argued that the fostering of children by homosexual couples was contrary to its religious beliefs; however the magistrate presiding at the hearing rejected the defence plea.
the risk of vilification, if we voice our belief that every child needs a mother and a father, will gain further legitimacy
Dr van Gend is the subject of a complaint to the Anti-Discrimination Commission of Queensland for comments he made in a public forum on the issue of same-sex parents. The Courier-Mail sponsored the forum, aimed at providing a balance of opinion both for and against this issue, which is important to many Australians. It was a democratic exchange of ideas and opinions. http://www.menzieshouse.com.au/2011/10/ron-boswell-i-wish-to-raise-a-matter-pertaining-to-the-restrictions-that-we-have-in-australia-on-free-speech-this-issue.html
likewise freedom of speech and belief regarding the position we believe marriage has in society will be more limited.
The new outlaws: how same-sex marriage suffocates freedom
Bryce J. Christensen | Monday, 23 January 2012
“The new ‘haters,’ in this era of sexual license, are those who maintain that marriage has an intrinsic meaning – the union of man and woman – that simply cannot be extended to homosexual couplings. Crying ‘hate speech,’ the Southern Poverty Law Center denounced ‘anti-gay’ groups for spreading ‘falsehoods’ that say children do best when raised by a mom and a dad, as opposed to two dads or two moms. ‘Falsehoods’ that support traditional marriage are now ‘hate speech,’ thrown into the same filthy bucket as KKK and Neo-Nazi ideology.” Rebecca Hagelin.
“The legal definition of marriage does not exist in isolation; changing it alters many areas of the law. For example, the definition of marriage plays an important role in the law of adoption, education, employee benefits, health care, employment discrimination, government contracts and subsidies, taxation, tort law, and trusts and estates. In turn, these legal regimes directly govern the ongoing daily operations of religious organizations of all stripes, including parishes, schools, temples, hospitals, orphanages, retreat centers, soup kitchens, and universities. Moreover, current law provides no room for non-uniform definitions of marriage within a state, it is all or nothing….
“Changes in marriage law impact religious institutions disproportionately because their role is so deeply intertwined with the public concept of marriage. . . . The specific consequences that will likely flow from legalizing same-sex marriage include both government compulsion of religious institutions to provide financial or other support for same-sex married couples and government withdrawal of public benefits from those institutions that oppose same-sex marriage. In other words, wherever religious institutions provide preferential treatment to husband-wife couples, state laws will likely require them to either extend identical benefits to same-sex married couples or withdraw the benefits altogether.”
Roger Severino, “Or for poorer? How same-sex marriage threatens religious liberty,” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy Vol. 30