Synopsis of the evidence in the defense of marriage

by Dale O’Leary

• November 4, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The defenders of marriage should take advantage of what is known about same-sex attraction (SSA), because those promoting the redefinition of marriage have manipulated public opinion by distorting the facts and research. The five main distortions are:

1) Persons with SSA are born that way.
2) Persons with SSA can’t change.
3) Persons with SSA are just as healthy as persons in husband/wife marriages.
4) Same-sex relationships are just like husband/wife marriages except for the sex of the partners.
5) Children acquired by persons in same-sex relationships don’t have excess problems.

There are numerous studies refuting the first two points and no credible studies supporting either.

There are numerous well-designed large studies which have found that persons with SSA are far more likely that married men and women to suffer from:

· Psychological disorders
· Sexual additions and paraphilias
· Suicidal ideation and attempts
· Substance abuse and addiction, including to drugs, alcohol and cigarettes
· To have unstable, unfaithful, non-permanent, non-exclusive relationships
· To have health problems, particularly STDs including HIV and cancer
· To have been victims of sexual abuse, rape, or domestic violence

Those defending marriage frequently point out that same-sex relationships lack complementarity, but fail to explain how that lack affects the quality of the relationship and causes one or both of the partners to sacrifice something essential to their human dignity. Same-sex relationships fall into a number of patterns. The following list covers some of these patterns and how the lack of natural complementarity negatively impacts individuals involved:

1) Pseudo husband or wife – The man imitating the role of the wife senses it is unmanly to be dependent on another man. The woman imitating the role of husband often still wants to mother.

2) Parent/child – The younger male partner by accepting the child role sacrifices his right to become a full adult. The woman accepting the child role becomes permanently dependent. The relationship is inherently incestuous.

3) Asexual friendship – Many same-sex relationships start passionately and quickly devolve into asexual friendships. The same-sex friend no longer excites passion. The males in asexual friendships engage in casual sex outside the relationship. Among women, the “dead bed” is common. Asexual friendships do not need to be recognized as marriages.

4) Clones/fusion – Persons in some same-sex relationships try to eradicate all differences. Individuality is not tolerated

5) Loneliness caused by absence of the other sex or fear of the other sex caused by abuse – The persons involved sacrifice their natural heterosexuality. These relationships are inherently unstable and the person may, when the opportunity occurs, return to a heterosexual relationship.

Same-sex relationships do not promote the best interests or meet the real needs of the persons involved. The push for social recognition may be motivated by the erroneous belief that their relationship problems are caused by external forces rather than the inherent lack of true complementarity.

Children acquired by same-sex couples are also subject to problems inherent in their status. In addition, same-sex couples are more likely to be at risk for a number of problems which directly impact their ability to parent.

1) Intrinsic Factors – Every child acquired by a same sex couple has by definition been separated from one or both of his biological parents, through death, desertion, single parenthood, foster care, adoption, artificial insemination donor, or surrogate motherhood. Even in the best of circumstances such separation is perceived by the child as a loss. A same-sex couple is never the best of circumstances. It is by definition second best because it lacks a parent of both sexes. Worse still this particular tragedy is not accidental, but the result of the conscious, planned action of the persons on whom the child is dependent. These children are purposefully and permanently made fatherless or motherless. In addition, same-sex families with children function like a cult. The child’s loss is denied. The children are made to feel that their legitimate desire for a parent of both sexes is a betrayal of their family’s sacrifice in the face of a hostile, non-accepting, homophobic culture.

2) Risk Factors —Persons with SSA are far more likely than married men and women to suffer from psychological disorders, sexual addiction and paraphilias, suicidal ideation and attempts, unstable relationships, health problems, and to have been victims of abuse or violence. These problems rarely occur singly. Many persons with SSA suffer from a combination of disorders. In addition each same-sex relationship contains two persons who are at high risk, doubling the potential for a sub-optimum outcome. One has to ask: Are social workers intentionally ignoring problems when placing children with same-sex couples who have serious problems? 

Those defending marriage need to make this information known. 

Evidence supporting the material presented here can be found in my book One Man, One Woman.  Those who need specific references may email me at dalemoleary@yahoo.com or my blog.