Homosexual Marriage & Science

Please report broken hyperlinks using the Reply option at the bottom of each page.

[Also see ASND’s  Children of Homosexual Couples  page for many more scientific references on the observed consequences and effects of homosexual marriage.]

“[Many] Social scientists who conduct research on the politically charged question of the wellbeing of children in the care of same-sex parents have emphatically asserted unqualified and universal support for the finding of ‘no differences.’  In his meticulously researched new book, Professor Walter Schumm turns this scenario on its head.  Through a detailed review of virtually all extant research, Schumm demonstrates decisively that contrary evidence not only exists, it is abundant and methodologically strong.



More than 80 non-governmental organizations and experts [from around the world] have endorsed a statement that describes alternatives to a husband-and-wife family, ‘particularly … same-sex unions‘ as ‘socially destructive.'”


[And that was reported where, again, in the mainstream, left wing media?]


… social science… confirm[s] that there are significant differences between SSM and traditional marriage.



Marriage: What It Is, Why It Matters, and the Consequences of Redefining It



The American Psychological Association (APA):

… strong assertions, including those made by the APA, were not empirically warranted.


[Nobody Important wonders why  the APA  would have made such glaringly anti-scientific errors.]



[homosexual] male relationships are 50 percent more likely to break up than heterosexual marriages, while lesbian relationships are 167 percent more likely to break up than heterosexual marriages.
“… [homosexual] parenting approximately triples or quadruples the rate of same-sex attraction.  It may be technically true that ‘the vast majority of these children eventually grow up to be heterosexual, but only because if being raised by same-sex parents increases the occurrence of same-sex attraction from 2 percent to 8 percent, 92 percent are still heterosexual.  But a fourfold increase is still a sizable effect statistically.
Declarations that homosexuality is ‘normal,’ ‘positive,’ and ‘legitimate‘ would seem be the product of value judgments rather than objective science… how does science establish that such a grounding of human identity is ‘positive‘… how did science become the arbiter of what is positive?

[Or “legitimate?”  Both of those terms are values-driven, not science-driven.  The APA even stated as much…]

In a moment of exceptional clarity, the task force put its finger on a core issue: Gay-affirming psychologies necessarily embody extrascientific moral and ethical deliberations that raise the potential of conflict with religious beliefs, precisely because the very act of giving priority to organismic congruence is a religious and ethical choice.


[Regarding that last quote, religious and ethical choices are moral choices, not scientific observations.  The APA even acknowledges that fact.]

[Anyone interested in a recent — and interesting — article about the founder of this country’s largest ministry to ex-homosexuals can read it  here .]


Same-sex marriage will do nothing to address the five real-life crises facing people with same-sex attractions…  depression ,   eating disorders ,   suicide ,   sexually transmitted diseases ,   and   addictions …  [and] the five aforementioned crises are overwhelmingly the result of the way [ homosexual]s treat one another ].”



It has sometimes been suggested that the conjugal understanding of marriage is based only on religious beliefs.  This is false.  Although the world’s major religious traditions have historically understood marriage as a union of man and woman that is by nature apt for procreation and childrearing, this suggests merely that no one religion invented marriage.  Instead, the demands of our common human nature have shaped (however imperfectly) all of our religious traditions to recognize this natural institution.  As such, marriage is the type of social practice whose basic contours can be discerned by our common human reason, whatever our religious background.  We argue in this Article for legally enshrining the conjugal view of marriage, using arguments that require no appeal to religious authority.

… &

… there are decisive principled as well as prudential reasons for the state to enshrine this understanding of marriage in its positive law, and to resist the call to recognize as marriages the sexual unions of same-sex partners.


– Sherif Girgis, Robert George & Ryan T. Anderson (2010), Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 245-287.


Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Will Increase Prevalence of Homosexuality:
Research Provides Significant Evidence



Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples



I. There is substantial evidence that sexual orientation may be changed through reorientation therapy.

II. Efforts to change sexual orientation have not been shown to be consistently harmful or to regularly lead to greater self-hatred, depression, and other self-destructive behaviors.

III. There is significantly greater medical, psychological, and relational pathology in the homosexual population than the general population.


“What Research Shows: NARTH’s Response to the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Claims on Homosexuality,” Journal of Human Sexuality, 1, 1-128.



Want to Leave a Reply?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s