Focus on the Family's position on gay marriage
I sometimes read materials from Focus on the Family. Even though my views on many issues are quite the opposite of theirs, I still think they have a lot of worthwhile things to say.
Anyway, today I read a letter from Dr. Dobson on the subject of gay marriage. While I actually agreed with many of its points (that is, many of the points that weren't about gay marriage or polygamy), I was appalled by the astonishingly bad logic. He went through a list of reasons why gay marriage would destroy the family; here's an example:
(1) The implications for children in a world of decaying families are profound. A recent article in the Weekly Standard described how the advent of legally sanctioned gay unions in Scandinavian countries has already destroyed the institution of marriage, where half of today's children are born out of wedlock. It is predicted now, based on demographic trends in this country, that more than half of the babies born in the 1990s will spend at least part of their childhood in single-parent homes. Social scientists have been surprisingly consistent in warning against this fractured family. If it continues, almost every child will have several "moms" and "dads," perhaps six or eight "grandparents," and dozens of half-siblings. It will be a world where little boys and girls are shuffled from pillar to post in an ever-changing pattern of living arrangements -- where huge numbers of them will be raised in foster-care homes or living on the street (as millions do in other countries all over the world today). Imagine an environment where nothing is stable and where people think primarily about themselves and their own self-preservation.
Now, I happen to agree with the basic notion that divorce is, in general, bad for children. I believe that a stable home is what's best for kids -- oftentimes, even when the parents don't actually get along all that well. (Of course, there are plenty of exceptions, such as when the children are being abused.) I also believe that single parent households are not the most optimal situation for children.
But I find the connection he attempts to draw between legalizing gay marriage and decreasing the overall rate of marriage in a society unconvincing. He actually cites a reference, for what that's worth, but I was unable to find much in the article that suggested an actual connection. Perhaps the strongest case was made regarding Norway, but even that was pretty weak. As for the rest, there may have been a correlation between legalization of gay marriage and a decline in overall marriage rates, but that had been a trend for decades -- there's no particular reason to believe a causal relationship between the two.
I really did read this letter prepared to hear something that would make me think. Sadly, most of what I wound up thinking about was the holes in Dr. Dobson's logic, rather than the potential wisdom of his point of view.
Anyway, today I read a letter from Dr. Dobson on the subject of gay marriage. While I actually agreed with many of its points (that is, many of the points that weren't about gay marriage or polygamy), I was appalled by the astonishingly bad logic. He went through a list of reasons why gay marriage would destroy the family; here's an example:
(1) The implications for children in a world of decaying families are profound. A recent article in the Weekly Standard described how the advent of legally sanctioned gay unions in Scandinavian countries has already destroyed the institution of marriage, where half of today's children are born out of wedlock. It is predicted now, based on demographic trends in this country, that more than half of the babies born in the 1990s will spend at least part of their childhood in single-parent homes. Social scientists have been surprisingly consistent in warning against this fractured family. If it continues, almost every child will have several "moms" and "dads," perhaps six or eight "grandparents," and dozens of half-siblings. It will be a world where little boys and girls are shuffled from pillar to post in an ever-changing pattern of living arrangements -- where huge numbers of them will be raised in foster-care homes or living on the street (as millions do in other countries all over the world today). Imagine an environment where nothing is stable and where people think primarily about themselves and their own self-preservation.
Now, I happen to agree with the basic notion that divorce is, in general, bad for children. I believe that a stable home is what's best for kids -- oftentimes, even when the parents don't actually get along all that well. (Of course, there are plenty of exceptions, such as when the children are being abused.) I also believe that single parent households are not the most optimal situation for children.
But I find the connection he attempts to draw between legalizing gay marriage and decreasing the overall rate of marriage in a society unconvincing. He actually cites a reference, for what that's worth, but I was unable to find much in the article that suggested an actual connection. Perhaps the strongest case was made regarding Norway, but even that was pretty weak. As for the rest, there may have been a correlation between legalization of gay marriage and a decline in overall marriage rates, but that had been a trend for decades -- there's no particular reason to believe a causal relationship between the two.
I really did read this letter prepared to hear something that would make me think. Sadly, most of what I wound up thinking about was the holes in Dr. Dobson's logic, rather than the potential wisdom of his point of view.