|
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
REAL WOMEN'S APPEARANCE BEFORE THE JUSTICE
COMMITTEE ON SAME-SEX UNIONS
REAL Women appeared before the Standing Committee
on Justice and Human Rights studying same-sex unions on February
13, 2003.
In our brief, we made several important points:
1. Marriage Is Unique In Society
We pointed out that marriage is unique because
it is necessary in order to respond to the needs of society
in three significant ways, as follows;
(a) Marriage promotes the long-term co-operation
between men and women.
(b) Marriage perpetuates humanity through procreation.
(c) Marriage provides the crucible for the socialization
and raising of children.
2. Homosexual Parenting Is Not Shown To
Be In A Child's Best Interests
Although current social science literature
may conclude that same-sex parenting is not detrimental to
children, this material, we pointed out, is a reflection of
the unfortunate fact that, today, scholars pay a high cost
(which is well documented) if they oppose or criticize the
preferred, politically correct pro-homosexual parenting position.
Moreover, most of the articles advocating
homosexual parenting are adult rights-directed, which, of
course, should not be the most important focus of the studies.
Rather, the welfare of the children should be central. Yet
current literature is clearly adult-advocacy literature attempting
to vindicate a particular role for the benefit of same-sex
adults.
On close examination of these pro-same-sex
parenting studies, the evidence does not effectively establish
that homosexual parenting is equivalent to heterosexual parenting,
or that it is not harmful in significant ways to children.
This is due to the fact that most of the studies on homosexual
parenting have been based on unreliable quantitative research
and flawed methodology (some of it little more than anecdotal
quality). As a result, these studies provide a very tenuous
basis for setting public policy on the best interests of children.
The unreliability of current studies on same-sex
parenting has been pointed out in a number of reviews. For
example, the study by Philip A. Belcastro, who conducted an
independent examination of the methodological validity and
reliability of 14 post-1975 published, data-based studies,
addressing the effects of homosexual parenting on children's
sexual and social functioning, were all found to be deeply
flawed. Belcastro's findings have also been verified and supported
by several other researchers, such as Professor Richard Williams,
an expert in psychometrics and empirical research in psychology,
who concluded that research on homosexual parenting is uniformly
of poor quality. Apparently, most pro-homosexual parenting
studies fail to meet even minimal standards of scientific
regulation. Such studies are flawed for: using samples which
are not of a significant numerical size; using subjects who
are not randomly selected; failing to provide control groups
with which children and their homosexual parents are compared.
In fact, the studies seldom used heterosexual parents as a
control group; and they applied different methods for collecting
data from different groups, such as personal interviews for
homosexual parents compared to mailed information for heterosexual
parents etc., etc.
Objective researchers have, in fact, concluded
definitively that the statement that there are no significant
differences in children reared by homosexual parents versus
heterosexual parents is not supported by the published research
base.
3. Same-sex Unions Are Not Functionally
Equivalent To Marriage
Same-sex relationships are completely different
from marriage, and should be recognized as something different,
not as marriage. Same-sex unions differ from marriage in the
following ways:
(a) Sexual Infidelity: Homosexual couples
regard sex as recreational without emotional content, and
regard freedom to sexually engage others as one of the most
important factors in maintaining their bond.
(b) Complete Financial Independence: The expectation in
same-sex unions is that each partner will take care of himself
financially.
(c) Skills Conflict: Finding 'compatibility' in skills with
each other does not arise naturally, as it does between
different sexes, and this is one of the main sources of
difficulties in same-sex unions.
(d) Short Duration of Unions: One study found that the average
length of time that same-sex relationships were maintained
was 5.0 years. However, other researchers found male relationships
commonly end at the end of the third year.
(e) Use of Drugs: The majority of the male
couples use drugs as a regular part of both their social
and sexual lives.
The conclusion is that same-sex unions are
consensual sexual liaisons, and not marriages since they differ
in structure, values, practices and longevity.
4. Marriage Will Be Opened to Radical Reform
The characteristic that defines same-sex partners
as a group and, as couples, is not belief or biology, but
behaviour - a particular kind of erotic behaviour. Sexual
and sex-like behaviour is not an inherent personal characteristic,
such as race or gender, nor is it an exercise of conscience,
like religion or speech. Homosexual behaviour incidentally,
is not comparable to race as a basis of marriage regulation,
since race is irrelevant to the capacity to marry. However,
heterosexual behaviour is directly related to the fundamental
purpose of marriage laws, which regulate sexual behaviour
and protect the mores that define the core identity, boundaries,
structure, and order of society. In short, skin colour is
a benign, non-behavioural characteristic, but sexual orientation
is a human behaviour characteristic. Comparison of the two
is a convenient, but invalid argument.
If the guiding rule to marriage is behaviour,
then there can be no valid, reasoned, or principled argument
to exclude other sexual relationships from the definition
of "marriage," such as brother and a sister, a father
and adult daughter, or perhaps three or more individuals together
In a marriage (polygamy). In short, if we accept behaviour
as the guide, then there can be no meaningful limit to such
"marriages", which can only lead society to social
and moral confusion.
Claims for same-sex marriage not only demand
a radical redefinition of marriage, but are predicated on
a foundation of relativism that compels almost unlimited extension
and virtually unrestricted restructuring of marriage as a
legal and social unit. Marriage will then become just another
socially created institution that can be shaped by the power-builders.
By keeping the label and the legal status
of marriage, but changing the meaning and concept, legalization
of same-sex marriage necessarily involves rejection of what
marriage actually is and has meant for millennia, replacing
it with relativistic, post-modern extensions of private preference
(choice) or personal intimacy (commitment) relationships.
Thus, legalization of same-sex marriage entails a radical
rejection of marriage by redefinition and replacement. If
marriage means everything, and includes anything, it means
nothing.
5. Public Policy on Marriage
Public benefits should not be awarded to
promote personal or special interest agendas. The evidence
supporting the claim that the contribution to society of same-sex
couples is comparable to that of traditional marriages is
completely lacking.
Public laws are intended to protect and promote
public interests, not private lifestyle preferences. The question
to be addressed is whether the social interest - the public
good - is served, not whether some private interests are advanced
by same-sex unions. Legal marriage is a public institution
established to achieve public purposes. It is not meant to
promote private interests.
Copies of REAL Women's brief can be obtained
in hard copy or electronic form by contacting the head office.
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
