5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Compassionate societies never create fatherless and motherless families, January 27, 2006
This review is from: Marriage on Trial: The Case Against Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting (Hardcover)
According to Stanton and Maier, compassionate societies never create fatherless and motherless families . . . (my comments in parenthesis)
A same-sex family is never the answer to a child's developmental problems. (One way to inoculate a fatherless child from the ill-effects of not having a father is for society to have a clear idea of what a good father is. Same-sex marriage denies even that benefit to the fatherless.)
The push for same-sex families will subject generations of children to an uncontrolled, ill-advised social experiment to meet the "needs" of homosexual adults. (Children will be but "trophies" that symbolize achievement of a certain status for anxious gays working out psychological issues -- the same way one sometimes sees a luxury automobile parked in front of a run-down shack -- an "aspirin on wheels.")
Homosexual adoption is not necessary to provide homes for orphaned children. Same-sex marriage is not about providing rights or physical resources to children. No child in a same-sex family would ever ask, "Why don't we have the same rights as other families." Instead, they ask "Why don't I have a daddy?" or "Why don't I have a mommy?" (There are many heterosexual families looking to adopt children, but the legal system often interferes, making some children practically "unadoptable.")
Male and female are not "Mr. Potato Heads" where the cores are all the same and only the externals are different. Gender matters.
Endorsements of same-sex families by professional organizations are traceable to gay activism, not science. (Scientists are ill-equipped to deal with the philosophical and emotional arguments used by gay activists -- so they "cave.")
A common challenge of same-sex family proponents is "how does my family situation hurt you." (I would use the illustration of currency. One person counterfeiting a $20 bill doesn't appreciably depreciate a genuine $20 bill -- but an initiative to make monopoly money equal to legal tender would have enormous impact. The push for gay marriage makes counterfeit relationships equal to legitimate ones and diminishes every marriage)
Traditional marriage has huge public benefits backed up by overwhelming scientific evidence. Homosexual marriage will have enormous, negative public consequences. (If homosexuality were held to the same standard of public harm as smoking, there would be no public debate. Instead, we would have attorneys general of the states bringing lawsuits that would eventually bankrupt pro-homosexual organizations.)
Arguments for same-sex marriage also break down barriers to other kinds of marriage. The first couple in line in Massachusetts for a same-sex marriage license had an "open relationship." (In recognizing same-sex marriage, society will have leap-frogged over polygamy into a more radical form of sexual relationship. Consistency will demand legalization of polygamy since it's less extreme than what will have already been accomplished in allowing gays to marry.)
The debate over same-sex marriage has been poisoned by name calling. Concerns about gay marriage cannot be reduced simply to "homophobia." Many gays recognize the social harm gay marriage would bring and are therefore against gay marriage.
Gay advocates conflate same-sex marriage with interracial marriage -- but saying "I have a mommy who's a (particular race)" is radically different than saying "I have a mommy who's a man."
If legalized, same-sex marriage will not just be acceptable in public schooling; it will be relentlessly indoctrinated. (Humans have a perverse impulse to "worship" the unnatural.) Promotion of traditional marriage will eventually be labeled as "hate speech" if same-sex marriage becomes legal. We've already seen it in Sweden and in Canada.
-- Bill Brewer
[...]
Glen Stanton is director of social research and cultural affairs, and senior analyst for marriage and sexuality, at Focus on the Family, based in Colorado Springs, Colorado. He is the author of Why Marriage Matters and a contributor to many books, including Same-Sex Marriage: The Moral and Legal Debate. His book My Crazy, Imperfect Christian Family explores the virtue of imperfect families and the sacredness of the mundaneness of family life. Stanton has published articles in Christianity Today, the American Enterprise, National Forum, Citizen, Dr. Laura's Perspective, Christian American, and The Sunday Times. He is also a winner of the 2001 Amy Foundation Writing Award and is featured in the PBS documentary Affluenza. As a media spokesperson for Focus on the Family, he has been interviewed by hundreds of print and media outlets, including MSNBC and CNN, and he has been quoted in the New York Times, the Washington Post, USA TODAY, Salon.com, Newsweek, Rolling Stone, the Washington Blade and the Advocate.
Bill Maier is a clinical psychologist and serves as vice president and psychologist-in-residence at Focus on the Family. He hosts the national Weekend Magazine radio program and The Family Minute with Dr. Bill Maier. He is a regular contributor to Focus on the Family magazine and has written for Current Thoughts and Trends, Today's Christian Woman, the Houston Chronicle and the Colorado Springs Gazette. Maier received his master's and doctoral degrees from the Rosemead School of Psychology at Biola University. He has served at respected institutions such as Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Camarillo State Hospital and the Long Beach Child Guidance Center. He has extensive experience in parent training and education, and his major area of research interest is the impact of cultural trends on child development and family functioning.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5.0 out of 5 stars
Misunderstood, November 9, 2011
This review is from: Marriage on Trial: The Case Against Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting (Hardcover)
Apart from ad hominem attacks on the author's personal character, a reviewer of this book must admit that the points made in this book are well taken. On an charged issue like marriage, most people are not willing to suspent their suspicions and biases to fully understand what the other side is really saying. If you have already made up your mind on the issue and you are just looking to pick a fight - this book will be a waste of your time.
The Author points out a lot of flaws in the arguments supporting same sex marraige such as the interracial marraige analogy, the "how will this affect you?" argument, and various other postmodern stances on marriage. One of the most important points he makes is that marriage seves several functions (raise children, enculture men, etc) that are best performed by a union involving both sexes.
His slippery slope argument is quite strong. Namely that if marriage is definted as a right for anyone who wants it - whats to say that a someone can't marry their sibling, that a 50 year old can't marry a 12 year old, that 4 men can't get married to eachother? He exposes that his opponents have no good answer to this question except recourse to their own personal beliefs - recourse I might add, which is not afforded to people on his side of the issue.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
31 of 48 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Consider this book if you are open minded and fair, October 18, 2004
This review is from: Marriage on Trial: The Case Against Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting (Hardcover)
Stanton and Maier have produced a book that makes a well documented case for traditional marriage. The book is very well written with numerous references for further study and research. The book is organized around most of the contemporary questions people ask about same sex marriage and homosexuality in general. This is not only a good book concerning the rationale for traditional marriage but is infomative concerning the traditional view of homosexuality.
Despite the clear value framework of this book, the authors do not show disrespect for gay and lesbian identified people. On the contrary, the book is clear about principles but the authors convey compassion for people.
Many people think that are no divisions within the gay and lesbian community concerning same sex marriage. This book documents the reality that not all of those who are gay want same sex marriage legally recognized.
The book is very well organized and despite the scholarly foundations, quite readable.
In reading the reviews written previous to mine, I cannot believe they read the same book. The authors take great pains to document their points and use good social science research to do so.
If you are open minded concerning this subject, you will want to get this book as an aspect of your investigation.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
