Who really supports 'family values'?

[Hatman 🍁]

Just an interesting statistic I picked up today from the paper:

Percentage of households that have one parent:
*Netherlands: 3.5%
*Belgium: 4.3%

Both of these countries allow gay mairrages

*United States: 10.6%

I have a feeling allowing gays to marry has nothing to do with corrupting family values.

[Hatman 🍁]

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.

[Hatman 🍁]

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.

[Hatman 🍁]

My point is that they have nothing to do with eachother. My point is that the people who think that gay marriages will hurt family values are all wrong. I know they have no relation.

[Hatman 🍁]

Well, those numbers, while still lower than the US number actually have gotten wrose since gay marriage was legalized.  Trends matter, too.

I'd also direct people's attention to countries like Norway and Sweden, which legalized gay marriage or civil unions and now see 50% of first children born out of wedlock.

I'm not so sure how these married gay fellows are able to have children out of wedlock

[Hatman 🍁]

Well, those numbers, while still lower than the US number actually have gotten wrose since gay marriage was legalized.  Trends matter, too.

I'd also direct people's attention to countries like Norway and Sweden, which legalized gay marriage or civil unions and now see 50% of first children born out of wedlock.

I'm not so sure how these married gay fellows are able to have children out of wedlock

I think the point he was making is that once homosexual marriage is legalized, "family values" are disregarded and people start having their children out of wedlock.  A correlation of some sort.

That has about as much bearing as the correlation I have provided. As stated by another poster a  correlation does not prove cause and effect.

[Hatman 🍁]

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.

Oh, I agree completely. The definition of family has changed quite a bit over the years. Who is anyone to say their opinion of family values is better than someone elses? I just used these statistics as a way of showing this, not that gay families somehow strengthen family values. All it is, is the evolution of the family.

[Hatman 🍁]

Only problem is, these three statistics don't matter one way or another. If the best you can do to prove gays marrying is good is cherry pick two countries and an irrelevent statistic, that's pretty bad.

That wasn't the point at all. What it shows is that allowing gays to marry has no correlation with family values.

[Hatman 🍁]

According to to the National Center for Health Statistics, unmarried women accounted for 68 percent of black births in 2002 compared to 43.4 percent for Hispanics and 22.9 percent for whites. In 1965, the out-of-wedlock birth rate for blacks stood at 25 percent.

I think your argument that somehow gay marriage is related to out of wedlock relationships is pretty fanciful and not addressing the issue.  The real problem is in the general feeling in our culture that somehow the above statistic is not disturbing.  Our culture has been force fed this idiotic girl power, I don't need no man and feminist empowerment b.s. down our throat.  Young woman have been led to believe that just because it is possible to raise a child on your own that it is adviseable.  Young men have failed to take responsibility for their actions because we live in a society where we avoid things that are difficult at all costs and always choose the path of least resistance.  My own mother was a single mom for sometime (natural father was a p.o.s.).  Being a single parent is extraordinarily difficult and you cannot substitute the role of a father.  In summation, Dan Quayle was right,  albeit awkward, about Murphy Brown.

You are absolutely right. 

The problem is not so much that gay marriage causes family structure decay and breakdown.  It doesn't.  The problem is that the same people who are unconcerned about the highly disturbing statistics put forth by patrick1, statistics with which I was already familiar, are the ones who are pushing gay marriage.  These people simply have no credibility when it comes to family values.

Hey, I am concerned about these statistics, and am pushing for same-sex marriage.

[Hatman 🍁]

Hey, I am concerned about these statistics, and am pushing for same-sex marriage.

If you are concerned with those statistics, you're in a distinct minority among those of your political leanings.

The same people who are pushing gay marriage are, by and large, those who applauded the social changes that led to the rapid deterioration of family structures, with catastrophic results for blacks in particular.

That's one of the reasons why many people, including myself, are suspicious of the motives of those pushing gay marriage.

Well there's nothing to worry about gays getting married in terms of family values. If anything, they would make better families than families with straight parents, if the gay people I know are any indication.