Who really supports 'family values'?

[Colin]

You have to  understand that the Netherland and Belgium are far, far richer countries than the United States, at least in terms of the standard of living and quality of life of the common people.  Quite simply they support families with real resources (high wages and a generous welfare state), not just a lot of offensive moralistic diatribes.

Well I wouldn't say that they are far far better. The UN rankings, which can be found here show that while the Netherlands and Belgium have a higher, at fifth and sixth respectively, well being than the United States, which is number 8. This is not a very large difference though. Is their much difference between the quality of life in the United Kingdom or Germany when compared to the United States or the Netherlands? I would probably say that the top 20 countries on that index are not very different from each other in terms of well-being and that their placement has more to do with small advantages in GDP per capita, do not know if they use perchasing power parity though, and possibly life expectancy. As in Japan is probably hurt by the ongoing recession in that country while the US is probably hurt more by having a lower life expectancy than some of the other nations, due to a number of reasons obesity being the most likely. This leads to the assumption that this scale, which is probably the most accurate measure of "standard of living" or "well-being", really doesn't show much of a difference in the living standards of the top 20 or top 30 nations. If you believe that the United States has a much worse standard of living/quality of life/well-being than places like the Netherlands and Belgium than Germany, which is number 19, must be a complete third world sh**thole.

In response to the first post I have to say that other nations have higher rates than the US and have higher number of birth from unmarried women than the United States. Both Denmark and Sweden have over twice the amount of births to unmarried women, as a percent of births, than the United States. Denmark also comes close to the United States in terms of teenage single mothers as a percentage of all mothers. This information can all be found here. It is from the March 1990 edition of the Monthly Labor Review. Granted the data is rather old and only a certain set number of countries are compared but the data is still rather interesting.

[Colin]

You have to  understand that the Netherland and Belgium are far, far richer countries than the United States, at least in terms of the standard of living and quality of life of the common people.  Quite simply they support families with real resources (high wages and a generous welfare state), not just a lot of offensive moralistic diatribes.

Well I wouldn't say that they are far far better. The UN rankings, which can be found here show that while the Netherlands and Belgium have a higher, at fifth and sixth respectively, well being than the United States, which is number 8. This is not a very large difference though. Is their much difference between the quality of life in the United Kingdom or Germany when compared to the United States or the Netherlands? I would probably say that the top 20 countries on that index are not very different from each other in terms of well-being and that their placement has more to do with small advantages in GDP per capita, do not know if they use perchasing power parity though, and possibly life expectancy. As in Japan is probably hurt by the ongoing recession in that country while the US is probably hurt more by having a lower life expectancy than some of the other nations, due to a number of reasons obesity being the most likely. This leads to the assumption that this scale, which is probably the most accurate measure of "standard of living" or "well-being", really doesn't show much of a difference in the living standards of the top 20 or top 30 nations. If you believe that the United States has a much worse standard of living/quality of life/well-being than places like the Netherlands and Belgium than Germany, which is number 19, must be a complete third world sh**thole.

In response to the first post I have to say that other nations have higher rates than the US and have higher number of birth from unmarried women than the United States. Both Denmark and Sweden have over twice the amount of births to unmarried women, as a percent of births, than the United States. Denmark also comes close to the United States in terms of teenage single mothers as a percentage of all mothers. This information can all be found here. It is from the March 1990 edition of the Monthly Labor Review. Granted the data is rather old and only a certain set number of countries are compared but the data is still rather interesting.

That doesn't explain the Netherlands and Belgium though.  It looks to me like "moral decay" is not happening in countries that support Same-sex marriage.

I don't know. I would need to see more data on families in countries with same sex marriage and see if those actually are affected by a certain nation having a more liberal treatment of marriage. I personally see this as a rather weak argument for gay marriage, the argument that I agree with the most is the personal freedom arguement.

[Colin]

Frankly, I have always found the "family values" argument to be a straw man. I do not think that the institution of marriage will be ruined by gay people getting married. If heterosexuals say "hey, let's not get married because gay people can do it too!", I already question how strong the "institution" is.

While it's true that family values can only be strengthed by allowing gay marriage, I just figured that this was a way of showing that people who think that family values would be effected by gay marriage are not thinking straight.

I personally don't know why people actually give a sh**t, pardon my language, about "family values". Most people can't define them, they have no bearing on the overall well-being of the country, and the two words basically mean nothing, at least to me. Give me an argument about how it would help personal freedoms or how it would help the economy and I think I, and I hope most people, would be more receptive to the idea. By invoking the name of "family values" all you are doing is trying to cause conflict since "family values" is almost entirely in the eyes of the beholder. My parents have much different ideas about what "family values" are from their parents. So by saying that gay marriage would be upholding "family values" would be prone to just as much bickering and squabbling as saying that a consumption tax would help the poor. Bad way to try to make people see your side of the argument only good if you want to argue with people and insult them.