[minn_stat]

Kathleen Kiernan, a British demographer, has noted four societal stages in modern since the liberalization of divorce laws and the introduction of contraceptives in the early to mid-1900s. Stage one is characterized by nations where the vast majority of children are produced and raised by a two parent family. Stage two sees the rise of cohabitation, although it is viewed as a testing period and is generally childless. Divorce becomes more commonplace, and more children are raised by a single parent. In stage three, cohabitation becomes increasingly acceptable, and parenting begins to be dissociated from marriage. In the fourth stage, marriage and cohabitation become practically indistinguishable, with many, perhaps even most, children born and raised outside of marriage.

Interestingly, the impact of all of this on children has been the subject of many studies. Keep in mind that academic research deals in objective statistics and trends, not exceptions. Some families and marriages are destructive and unsuccessful, but that does not invalidate the overall tendencies. This research overwhelmingly shows the harmful effects of de-coupling marriage and parenting. In the interest of space, let me provide just a few examples demonstrating this. One researcher, R.J. Shapiro, summarized his findings by saying “it is no exaggeration to say that a stable, two-parent family is an American child’s best protection against poverty.” Separate studies by G.T. Stanton, Steven Nock, and Linda Waite demonstrated that children of cohabiting couples are much more likely to be abused. British scholar Duncan Timms conducted long-term research on the lives of all children born in Stockholm, Sweden in 1953. The clear, unambiguous conclusion was that parental breakup has negative effects on the mental health of children, particularly boys.

So children need families. How does this tie in to the gay marriage issue?

In the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s, the nations of Scandinavia passed the world’s first laws recognizing gay unions and gay marriages. The experiences of these nations thus provide the best view into the effects of gay marriages on families and children. It is no coincidence that these nations are all in stage four of Kiernan’s model. These nations were in stage three prior to the recognition of gay unions, but their already high out-of-wedlock birthrates went up even higher after this recognition. In Norway in 1990, 39% of children were born out of wedlock. In 2000, this had increased to 50%. Sweden’s increased from 47% to 55% over this same period. Danish sociologist Mai Heide Ottosen has documented the increased risk to Scandinavian children from these rising rates. A 2003 study by a group of European researchers found that children of single parents in Sweden are much more likely to be injured, get sick, and to die than children in two parent households. The economies of these educated, advanced nations are stalling and in severe danger because of the mammoth costs of providing the welfare state necessary to support this system.

Stanley Kurtz notes that “gay marriage is both an effect and a reinforcing cause of the separation of marriage and parenthood. In states like Sweden and Denmark, where out-of-wedlock birthrates were already very high, and the public favored gay marriage, gay unions were an effect of earlier changes. Once in place, gay marriage symbolically ratified the separation of marriage and parenthood. And once established, gay marriage became one of several factors contributing to further increases in cohabitation and out-of-wedlock birthrates, as well as to early divorce. But in Norway, where out-of-wedlock birthrates were lower, religion stronger, and the public opposed same-sex unions, gay marriage had an even greater role in precipitating marital decline”.

All this, and for what cause? So homosexuals can marry and have children, too? Some proponents of gay marriage argue that doing so will establish more families to provide good, loving stable environments for children. But this simply has not happened. In the first four years of Sweden’s laws, only 749 homosexual couples married. For Norway, only 674 married in the first four years. So why go to all that effort for so few to benefit at such an extraordinary cost? Danish social theorist Henning Bech, himself a gay and a proponent of gay marriage laws, has stated that the goal of the gay marriage movement in Scandinavian nations was not marriage, but social approval for homosexuality. And those who want society to approve - not just tolerate, but approve their sexual proclivities - are willing to destroy the foundation of society to get that approval. That extreme narcissism I mentioned at the beginning of this article? It’s right in front of us, and it is called gay marriage.