Apr 07 2009
Not Just a Sterotype
|
This past Friday the Iowa Supreme Court rewrote the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples. Justifying their rejection of the argument that “the optimal environment for children is to be raised within a marriage of both a father and a mother,” Justice Mark Cady wrote: “The research … suggests that the traditional notion that children need a mother and a father to be raised into healthy adjusted adults is based more on stereotype than anything else.” |
Recent Entries
|
||||||||||||||||||
| First of all, the court is just wrong on the facts. Children whose parents marry and stay married have been found to have better health and are less likely to be depressed, are less likely to repeat a grade in school, and have fewer developmental problems than other children. If poor women who have children out of wedlock were married to the actual fathers of their children, nearly two-thirds would be lifted out of poverty immediately.
But let’s leave the social science aside for a moment. The real story here is the court’s dismissal of the traditional family as a mere stereotype which unmasks the left’s true agenda here: the rejection the nuclear family as the core of civil society. Heritage’s Matthew Spalding explains: What is happening is no minor adjustment… It does not expand marriage; it alters its core meaning, for to redefine marriage so that it is not intrinsically related to the relationship between fathers, mothers, and children formally severs the institution from its nature and purpose. Expanding marriage supposedly to make it more inclusive, no matter what we call the new arrangement, necessarily ends marriage as we now know it by remaking the institution into something different: a mere contract between any two individuals.
|
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.