Same Sex Marriage CountriesThis is "Same Sex Marriage Countries," the second part of point four in a six point case regarding the same-sex marriage debate. The case is outlined here.
Same Sex Marriage Countries - The Pattern
We can look at results in other countries for confirmation. For example, in Norway, a country that has had de-facto same-sex marriage since the early nineties, illegitimacy is exploding. In Nordland, the most liberal county of Norway, where they fly gay “rainbow” flags over their churches, illegitimacy has soared—more than 80 percent of women giving birth for the first time do so out of wedlock, and nearly 70 percent of all children are born out of wedlock. Across the entire country of Norway, illegitimacy rose from 39 percent to 50 percent in the first decade of same-sex marriage.50
Anthropologist Stanley Kurtz writes, “When we look at Nordland and Nord-Troendelag—the Vermont and Massachusetts of Norway—we are peering as far as we can into the future of marriage in a world where gay marriage is almost totally accepted. What we see is a place where marriage itself has almost totally disappeared.”51
But it’s not just Norway. Blankenhorn reports this same trend in other countries. International surveys show a mutually re-enforcing relationship between same-sex marriage and illegitimacy. Natural marriage is weakest and illegitimacy strongest wherever same-sex marriage is legal.52
You might say, “Correlation doesn’t always indicate causation.” Yes, but often it does. Is there any doubt that liberalizing marriage laws impacts society for the worse? You need look no further than the last forty years of no-fault divorce laws in the United States (family disintegration destroys lives and now costs tax payers $112 billion per year53). No-fault divorce laws began in one state, California, and then spread to rest of the country. Those liberalized divorce laws helped change our attitudes and behaviors about the permanence of marriage. There is no question that liberalized marriage laws will help change our attitudes and behaviors about the purpose of marriage. The law is a great teacher, and if same-sex marriage advocates have their way, children will be expelled from the lesson on marriage.
Same Sex Marriage Countries - Law and Behavior
Furthermore, homosexual activists are fighting to change marriage laws because they know that there is a causal connection between law and behavior. As people like Sullivan and Signorile have admitted, they don’t want to change the law so they can get married, but because they know that a change in the law will change the attitudes and behaviors about marriage and homosexuality for all of society.
Blankenhorn and Kurtz also understand the causal connection between the law, attitudes, and behavior. That’s why they argue so forcefully against same-sex marriage. Blankenhorn asserts that anyone concerned about the welfare of children cannot be a supporter of same-sex marriage.
He writes, “One can believe in same-sex marriage. One can believe that every child deserves a mother and a father. One cannot believe both.”54
Why? Because, as data from other countries show, “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.”55 Blankenhorn goes so far as to say that he is amazed at how indifferent gay activists are about the negative effects of same-sex marriage on children. Many of them, he documents, deny that marriage has anything to do with children.56
Same Sex Marriage Countries - Restriction of Speech
He goes on to warn that if same-sex marriage is adopted, the claim that “every child needs a father and a mother” will probably be viewed as “divisive and discriminatory, possibly even as hate speech.”57 He doesn’t have to be much of a prophet to predict that. Canada and Sweden already restrict speech against homosexuality to the point that even pastors have been jailed for quoting Bible verses.58 In the United States, the Democrat Party continually puts forth “hate-crime” legislation which will lead to the same result. Endorsement of same-sex marriage will only pave the way for the hate-crime thought-police to get here faster.
Regarding the situation in Scandinavia, Kurtz writes, “Instead of encouraging a society-wide return to marriage, Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is outdated, and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock parenthood, is acceptable.”59
Well, if marriage is not about children, what institution is about children? And if we are going to redefine marriage into mere coupling, then why should the state endorse same-sex marriage at all? Contrary to what homosexual activists assume, the state doesn’t endorse marriage because people have feelings for one another. The state endorses marriage primarily because of what marriage does for children, and in turn, for society. Society gets no benefit by redefining marriage to include homosexual relationships, only harm, as the connection to illegitimacy shows. The very future of children and a civilized society depends on stable marriages between men and women. That’s why, regardless of what you think about homosexuality, the two types of relationships should never be legally equated.
We have enough problems already with illegitimacy in America. We don’t need to make matters worse. Unfortunately, if we go the route of other countries and approve government-backed same-sex marriage, we will likely get the same results—a significant rise in illegitimate parenthood and all of the social problems that come from it. Children will be hurt the most, but so will you.
Compliments of Correct, not Politically Correct, authored by Frank Turek. For more information, visit www.impactapologetics.com.
50 Stanley Kurtz, “The End of Marriage in Scandinavia,” Weekly Standard, February 2, 2004, http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/
51 Kurtz, “Slipping Toward Scandinavia.” Kurtz responds to his critics in, “Smoking Gun: The Netherlands shows the effect of Same-sex Marriage,” in National Review Online, June 2, 2006. Available here: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDFhMjk0YjI4NzgyZGM4NjMxZmY4NTQwZWNjYzkzYjg.
52 For example, only 37 percent of people from countries with same-sex marriage think they should marry if they want children while 60 percent of people from countries without same-sex marriage think so. The same attitude holds true with regard to cohabitation: 83 percent think it’s acceptable in same-sex marriage countries, but only 49 percent think so elsewhere. See David Blankenhorn, The Future of Marriage, (New York, Encounter Books), 2007, pg. 233.
53 See the 2008 report titled “The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing” at http://www.marriagedebate.com/pdf/ec_div.pdf.
54 David Blankenhorn, The Future of Marriage, (New York, Encounter Books), 2007, pg. 201.
55 Ibid, pg. 3.
56 Ibid, pg. 152.
57 Ibid, pg. 3.
58 Harry Jackson Jr., “The Massacre of the Pulpit,” April 23, 2007, posted on-line at http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/HarryRJacksonJr/2007/
59 Kurtz, “The End of Marriage in Scandinavia.”
What is your response?
Yes, today I am deciding to follow Jesus
Yes, I am already a follower of Jesus
I still have questions