Family Council Calls on Justices to Stand by Arkansans

Current Events, ,

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, April 28, 2015

On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Obergefell v. Hodges. This is considered by many to be a landmark case that will determine the future of marriage in America.

Family Council President Jerry Cox released a statement, saying, “Contrary to what some may believe, this is not simply a fight over same-sex marriage. This is about how marriage will be defined in America and who gets to write that definition.”

Cox said the U.S. Supreme Court should uphold state marriage laws in order to be consistent with its decision in United States v. Windsor. “In that ruling, the court said that marriage would be defined by each individual state. Upholding state marriage amendments as constitutional is the only way the court can be consistent with its 2013 Windsor decision.”

Cox said state marriage laws do more than simply ban same-sex marriage. “When the law says marriage is the union of one man to one woman, that is not simply a same-sex marriage ban. That defines the institution of marriage, and it prevents any other union from being classified as ‘marriage,’ including everything from same-sex marriage to polygamy.”

Cox said the U.S. Supreme Court should respect the will of the people concerning marriage. “If the court chooses to strike state marriage laws now, it will be doing so at the expense of democracy. Voters in Arkansas and thirty other states chose to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Voters in only three states have voted to define marriage differently. Every poll in more than a decade has indicated Arkansans still support the definition of marriage they adopted in 2004. This is something voters have handled very capably up to this point. Unilaterally striking these state marriage laws would signal that voters are incapable or irrelevant in the eyes of the U.S. Supreme Court.”

###

READ MORE

New Study Confirms Kids Do Best With a Married Mom and Dad

Homosexuality, , ,

What appears to be the largest study to date  examining the outcomes of children in same-sex households has demonstrated, once again, that children do best with a married mom and dad.

After examining more than 500 children with same-sex parents chosen from an overall sample of more than 200,000 children, the study–which appeared in last month’s British Journal of Education, Society, and Behavioral Research—concluded that emotional problems were more than twice as prevalent among children with same-sex parents as opposed to children with opposite-sex parents.

“At minimum,” Dr. Paul Sullins, the study’s author, writes, “it is no longer accurate to claim that no study has found children in same-sex families to be disadvantaged relative to those in opposite-sex families.”

Among other things, the study found children ages 4 – 17 years with same-sex parents were more likely:

  • To see a mental health professional;
  • To report higher rates of ADHD;
  • To suffer from learning disabilities;
  • To suffer from serious emotional problems.

What is particularly striking about this study is that it also found children with same-sex parents reported being bullied at a rate comparable to that of children with opposite-sex parents. In other words, having same-sex parents does not appear to increase a child’s likelihood of being bullied at school or elsewhere.

Concerning bullying and stigmatization, the author writes,

“In sum, while the experience of peer rejection, abuse or stigmatization is strongly associated with child emotional problems, it appears that the rate of abuse and susceptibility to emotional distress due to stigmatization does not differentiate sharply between children in same-sex and opposite-sex families.”

The study’s author concludes,

“Whether or not same-sex families attain the legal right, as opposite-sex couples now have, to solemnize their relationship in civil marriage, the two family forms will continue to have fundamentally different, even contrasting, effects on the biological component of child wellbeing, to the relative detriment of children in same-sex families. Functionally, opposite-sex marriage is a social practice that, as much as possible, ensures to children the joint care of both biological parents, with the attendant benefits that brings; same-sex marriage ensures the opposite.”

To put those words another way: There simply is no replacement for a married mother and father.

You can download the study here.

You can find further commentary on this study and others here.

READ MORE

Why Churches Should Not Get Out of the “Marriage Business”

Marriage,

As judges continue to redefine marriage in spite of millenia of human history, religious tradition, and overwhelming majorities of voters, many Christians have called for churches and ministers to get out of the “marriage business” altogether.

The idea is as the legal definition of marriage has changed, ministers may be compromising their convictions by signing state-issued marriage licenses for Christian couples.

John Stonestreet at the Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview has authored an excellent commentary on why ministers should not get out of the “marriage business”–at least not yet.

Stonestreet writes,

“First of all, there’s nothing on a state marriage license that requires clergy to say that marriage is something that it is not. But by refusing to sign any marriage licenses, we’re missing an opportunity to proclaim to the state and to the public what marriage truly is.

“Second, by backing out of the civil marriage business, we risk perpetuating that illusion that marriage is something the government defines instead of something it recognizes, and we perpetuate the myth that the Christian view of marriage is only for us Christians. In fact, marriage existed before the church and before the state. It’s the job of both institutions to recognize it.

“And here’s a question that bothers me. If clergy should not participate in civil marriage, why should laity? If it’s wrong for pastors, isn’t it wrong for parishioners?”

You can read Stonestreet’s full commentary here or listen to it below.

[audio:http://bit.ly/1ATLii9|titles=John Stonestreet – Separating Civil and Christian Marriage]

READ MORE