Good links to argue against gay marriage from a secular perspective

  • Thread starter Thread starter WesleyF
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Kalmbach said:
You’re going in circles here:

I said: “And how is that bad for society [to not know one of your biological parents]?
You said: “A stable intact family structure produces civic minded, productive and lawful citizens”
I said: “And how does a family headed by homosexual partners go against being civic-minded, productive, and lawful?”
You said: “Children are denied the basic right to their biological mother and father.”

You’re totally dodging my question by going in loops (none of which are really addressing my question to begin with). You don’t have to have an answer for everything; if you don’t know, just say so.
Click to expand...
My answers stand.

Do you believe children have a right to their parents?
 
buffalo said:
My answers stand.
Click to expand...
Your answers don’t address my questions; not even closely.
Do you believe children have a right to their parents?
Click to expand...
I believe children have a right to protection and guardianship. I think the family setting is the most stable, secure place in which to grow up. I don’t have any beliefs that biological parents are the only form of family, or that the gender of the parents is crucial to development. I’ve tried in a number of ways to ask you why you believe differently, but you don’t want to comment. You’ve made a vague assertion that civic responsibility, productivity, and lawfulness are established only in the traditional nuclear family, but you haven’t supported (or even tried to support) this claim. I am still interested if you’d like to comment further; you have my answer about what children should have rights to.
 
What do clinical studies say?
Code: 
                       [New Lesbian Parenting Study Makes Claims Unsupported by the Evidence](http://narth.com/docs/makesclaims.html)
A Review of: “Sexual orientation and psychiatric vulnerability: A twin study of neuroticism and psychoticism”

Researcher Sees Hair Whorl Direction As Indicator Of Genetic Basis For Homosexuality
APA’s New Pamphlet on Homosexuality De-emphasizes the Biological Argument, Supports a Client’s Right to Self-Determination
Link: An Antiboy Antibody? Re-Examination Of The Maternal Immune Hypothesis by Neil Whitehead, NARTH advisor

Female Bisexuality: A Longitudinal Study By Psychologist Lisa Diamond
What Has Been Concluded From 1000 Recent Articles On Homosexuality?
Latest Twin Study Confirms Genetic Contribution To SSA Is Minor
Study To Be Published In Sexual Abuse Journal Alleges Pedophilia Influenced In Womb
Researchers Study Sexual Orientation, Body Motion And Morphology
NARTH Scientific Advisory Board Member Presents at APA Convention
[see list]
‘Nearly Straight’ Men And The Fraternal Birth Order Effect
NARTH Scientific Advisory Committee Member Publishes Analysis Of Maternal Immune Attack Theory
Researchers Examine Thought Suppression In Relation To HIV-related Behaviors
Yet Another Attempt To Discredit The Spitzer Study Fails
Review of study: Cochran, B. N & Cauce, A. M (March, 2006). Characteristics of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals entering substance abuse treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 30, 135-146.
Fordham University Dissertation Furthers Spitzer’s Landmark Study on Sexual Re-orientation Success
Review Of Study: ‘Sexual Behavior And Selected Health Measures’
Spitzer Study Published: Evidence Found for Effectiveness of Reorientation Therapy
Should Reorientation Therapy Be Available? — APA Journal Article Says Yes
Conversion Therapy Revisited: Parameters And Rationale For Ethical Care
Rationale for Sexual Reorientation Therapy Supported in Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
Study Supports the “Weak Father” Theory of Homosexuality
Gay-To-Straight Research Published In APA Journal
Researchers Study Male Anti-Homosexual Attitudes
APA Journal Article Discourages Reorientation Therapy
Spitzer Study Critiqued In the Journal of Gay and Lesbian Psychotherapy

** Link:** “People Can Change: Men Who Have Left Homosexuality Showing Others the Way Out” offers an informative article, “Is Change Possible?” with useful research citations — **click here **
****%between%
 
Web Resource Cites Research on Sexual Orientation Change** **
“Getting It Straight”: What the Research Shows About Homosexuality
Treatment of Male Homosexuality: A Cognitive-Behavioral and Interpersonal Approach
Some Gay Advocates Acknowledge Reorientation Therapy as a Legitimate Option–Simon LeVay Joins Douglas Haldeman in Qualified Support
Research Studies and Journal Articles of Interest
Historic Gay Advocate Now Believes Change is Possible–see story
More Balance Needed in the Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy
NARTH Research Studies Published
Questions and Answers, by Sander Breiner, M.D.
Does “Born That Way” Mean “Designed That Way”?
Questions and Answers, by David Leaman, Ed.D.
Archives of General Psychiatry Article Asks, Could Homosexuality be a “Developmental Error”?
Journal Articles Support the Reparative-Therapy Treatment Option
Sexual Orientation Conversion Therapy: Help or Hindrance?
Fathers of Male Homosexuals: A Collective Clinical Profile
 
First of all, this is not scientific literature; it’s not in a journal; it is a review and unscientific summary of some of the research, compiled by an anti-homosexual lobby group, and these reviews are, themselves, not published in a journal. This is not what I asked for. I read through snippets of them and found a lot of stuff like this:
One psychoanalytic hypothesis for the connection between poor early father-son relationship and homosexuality is that during the critical gender-identity phase of development, the boy perceives the father as rejecting. As a result, he grows up failing to fully identify with his father and the masculinity he represents.
Click to expand...
Nonmasculine or feminine behavior in boyhood has been repeatedly shown to be correlated with later homosexuality (Green, l987, Zuger, l988); taken together with related factors–particularly the often-reported alienation from same-sex peers and poor relationship with father–this suggests a failure to fully gender-identify. In its more extreme form, this same syndrome (usually resulting in homosexuality) is diagnosed as Childhood Gender-Identity Deficit (Zucker and Bradley, 1996).
Click to expand...
One likely cause for “failure to identify” is a narcissistic injury inflicted by the father onto the son (who is usually temperamentally sensitive) during the preoedipal stage of the boy’s development. This hurt appears to have been inflicted during the critical gender-identity phase when the boy must undertake the task of assuming a masculine identification. The hurt manifests itself as a defensive detachment from masculinity in the self, and in others. As an adult, the homosexual is often characterized by this complex which takes the form of “the hurt little boy” (Nicolosi, 1991).
Click to expand...
This is old research, reifying long-outdated constructs (Preoedipal? Seriously?). This reflects, also, only associations. It can’t be determined that this strained relationship to the father leads to homosexuality. It may, as easily, be the case that the relationship is strained because the father doesn’t accept the boy’s characteristics, ones that may later centre around his sexual orientation.

The research is complex. It doesn’t matter whether one is born gay, becomes gay do to environmental factors, or chooses to be gay. We’re talking about inalienable rights, none of which rest on the inception of that identity.

So, in your purview, where is the harm. I want to hear what you think (addressing my specific questions from my previous post).
 
Kalmbach said:
First of all, this is not scientific literature; it’s not in a journal; it is a review and unscientific summary of some of the research, compiled by an anti-homosexual lobby group, and these reviews are, themselves, not published in a journal. This is not what I asked for. I read through snippets of them and found a lot of stuff like this:

This is old research, reifying long-outdated constructs (Preoedipal? Seriously?). This reflects, also, only associations. It can’t be determined that this strained relationship to the father leads to homosexuality. It may, as easily, be the case that the relationship is strained because the father doesn’t accept the boy’s characteristics, ones that may later centre around his sexual orientation.

The research is complex. It doesn’t matter whether one is born gay, becomes gay do to environmental factors, or chooses to be gay. We’re talking about inalienable rights, none of which rest on the inception of that identity.

So, in your purview, where is the harm. I want to hear what you think (addressing my specific questions from my previous post).
Click to expand...
Who is the giver of inalienable rights?
 
Kalmbach said:
The research is complex. It doesn’t matter whether one is born gay, becomes gay do to environmental factors, or chooses to be gay. We’re talking about inalienable rights, none of which rest on the inception of that identity.
Click to expand...
Marriage and children are not inalienable rights. Limitations and restrictions on marriage and the raising of children have been around since before written law.

You may believe people have the right to marry who ever they wish without restrictions. Historically, that has never been the case. Age, religion, class, race, mental health issues, prior/current marriages or enrollment in Holy Orders have all factor into the marriage laws.

You may believe people have the right to raise children that need to be raised. But if you are not a biological parent if is amazing how intrusive the government can be concerning who should or should not raise children.

Please understand I am not saying all those restrictions are necessarily a good thing. But to argue marriage and children inalienable rights is pushing it.
 
buffalo said:
Web Resource Cites Research on Sexual Orientation Change****
“Getting It Straight”: What the Research Shows About Homosexuality
Treatment of Male Homosexuality: A Cognitive-Behavioral and Interpersonal Approach
Some Gay Advocates Acknowledge Reorientation Therapy as a Legitimate Option–Simon LeVay Joins Douglas Haldeman in Qualified Support
Research Studies and Journal Articles of Interest
Historic Gay Advocate Now Believes Change is Possible–see story
More Balance Needed in the Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy
NARTH Research Studies Published
Questions and Answers, by Sander Breiner, M.D.
Does “Born That Way” Mean “Designed That Way”?
Questions and Answers, by David Leaman, Ed.D.
Archives of General Psychiatry Article Asks, Could Homosexuality be a “Developmental Error”?
Journal Articles Support the Reparative-Therapy Treatment Option
Sexual Orientation Conversion Therapy: Help or Hindrance?
Fathers of Male Homosexuals: A Collective Clinical Profile
Click to expand...
Now that’s what I mean by “links”! 😃 Thanks! 👍
 
WesleyF said:
Gimme more!!
Click to expand...
Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples

“Married and Gay Couples Not All that Different,” proclaimed the headline of a news article portraying homosexual households as remarkably similar to married couples. “We’re the couple next door,” claimed one partnered homosexual. “We have a dog and a cat. I drive a Volvo. I’m boring.”[1] Such down-home portrayals of homosexual couples are meant to provoke the question: Since gay couples really differ only in that both partners are of the same sex, what rational basis exists for denying them full marriage rights?
Are homosexual households, as the article suggests, simply another variant of human relationships that should be considered, along with marriage, as “part of mainstream American society”?
On the contrary, the evidence indicates that “committed” homosexual relationships are radically different from married couples in several key respects:
· relationship duration
· monogamy vs. promiscuity
· relationship commitment
· number of children being raised
· health risks
· rates of intimate partner violence
Finally, this paper will present evidence from gay activists themselves indicating that behind the push for gay marriage lies a political agenda to radically change the institution of marriage itself.

more…
 
buffalo said:
Children are denied the basic right to their biological mother and father.

It violates natural law.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, this argument flops. “Natural Law” is a made up philosophical construct. In other words, an opinion. No more and no less. Look it up, if you don’t believe me. Started with Aristotle and elaborated for the CC by Aquinas. It has nothing to do with nature. It is not a “law”.
 
StarFireKK said:
Marriage and children are not inalienable rights. Limitations and restrictions on marriage and the raising of children have been around since before written law.

You may believe people have the right to marry who ever they wish without restrictions. Historically, that has never been the case. Age, religion, class, race, mental health issues, prior/current marriages or enrollment in Holy Orders have all factor into the marriage laws.

You may believe people have the right to raise children that need to be raised. But if you are not a biological parent if is amazing how intrusive the government can be concerning who should or should not raise children.

Please understand I am not saying all those restrictions are necessarily a good thing. But to argue marriage and children inalienable rights is pushing it.
Click to expand...
errr… what the “founding fathers” meant by inalienable right, is a right which you as a person cannot give up, even if you want to. It is not something granted by the State, but rather something which cannot be taken away legitimately. In that sense, everyone has the right to have children and to associate freely.

We get into rights discussion with gay marriage when we start looking at the equal protection guarantees. There is no longer a LEGAL gender distinction in marriage. Therefore, there is no legal bar to same gender marriage. This is the trend in the courts. However, there have only been a handful of cases. So it is sparse, and could go in any direction with each decision. This is the logical result of the women’s rights movement desire to eliminate gender distinction in all aspects of life.

It is a state’s right to confer marriage. If a marriage contract is legally conferred in NY, VT, etc… then it is legal. However, federal law denies benefits to legally married partners if they are same gender, but confers the benefits on opposite gender. Therefore, DOMA violates the equal protection clause.

This has nothing to do with the Catholic Church or religion. It is a secular legal and civil rights issue. Those who glibly claim that gay people have the same rights as straights, may now take some of their own medicine (funny how that works). If you don’t want to marry someone of your own gender, then don’t. Simple. If the CC does not want to perform same sex marriages, then it shouldn’t.

Move along people. There is nothing to look at here. Stop the drama. We are talking about 2-4% of the population. This is not a big issue. The earth will not stop rotating because a gay couple gets married. Move on.
 
Mudgely said:
Unfortunately, this argument flops. “Natural Law” is a made up philosophical construct. In other words, an opinion. No more and no less. Look it up, if you don’t believe me. Started with Aristotle and elaborated for the CC by Aquinas. It has nothing to do with nature. It is not a “law”.
Click to expand...
Natural law shows the plumbing isn’t setup for homosexual acts.
 
Mudgely said:
“Natural Law” is a made up philosophical construct. In other words, an opinion. No more and no less. /QUOTE]

Wow. I cannot wait for your upcoming book, then! If this is true, you have a bright future in philosophy ahead of you. You will be just about destroying some of the biggest thinkers (Aquinas, Finnis, Feser, et al) and schools in Western philosophy. Good luck with that 🙂
Click to expand...
 
NewsTheMan said:
Mudgely;8483061 said:
“Natural Law” is a made up philosophical construct. In other words, an opinion. No more and no less. /QUOTE]

Wow. I cannot wait for your upcoming book, then! If this is true, you have a bright future in philosophy ahead of you. You will be just about destroying some of the biggest thinkers (Aquinas, Finnis, Feser, et al) and schools in Western philosophy. Good luck with that 🙂
Click to expand...
Last I checked, they were all philosophers. So, what is your point? All I said is that the idea of Natural Law is philosophical. No more, and no less. You just confirmed what I said.

Send me your credit card number and address, and I’ll send you a copy of my book.
Click to expand...
 
Natural Law

…According to St. Thomas, the natural law is “nothing else than the rational creature’s participation in the eternal law” (I-II.94). The eternal law is God’s wisdom, inasmuch as it is the directive norm of all movement and action. When God willed to give existence to creatures, He willed to ordain and direct them to an end. In the case of inanimate things, this Divine direction is provided for in the nature which God has given to each; in them determinism reigns. Like all the rest of creation, man is destined by God to an end, and receives from Him a direction towards this end. This ordination is of a character in harmony with his free intelligent nature. In virtue of his intelligence and free will, man is master of his conduct. Unlike the things of the mere material world he can vary his action, act, or abstain from action, as he pleases. Yet he is not a lawless being in an ordered universe. In the very constitution of his nature, he too has a law laid down for him, reflecting that ordination and direction of all things, which is the eternal law. The rule, then, which God has prescribed for our conduct, is found in our nature itself. Those actions which conform with its tendencies, lead to our destined end, and are thereby constituted right and morally good; those at variance with our nature are wrong and immoral.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top