"According to Jeffrey Satinover, M. D., a psychiatrist and member of the Department of Politics at Princeton University, there is no more important reason to prohibit same-sex marriage than the effects it would have on children. And he doesn’t say this for sentimental reasons. He says it because it’s sound science.
"'In every area of life, cognitive, emotional, social, developmental...at every phase of the life cycle...social evidence shows that there are measurable effects when children lack either a mother or a father...The evidence is overwhelming. Mountains of evidence, collected over decades, show that children need both mothers and fathers.'”
To read the full article click here. Just another reason why I will be voting YES on Prop 8.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Scientific Proof
Posted by Aubrey Messick at 3:47 PM
Labels: children, princeton, Prop. 8, Proposition 8, same-sex marriage, science
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
thank you so much for your comments. i'm going to feature them on my blog if that is okay (with your name of course). Also this website sort of rocks. I'm going to send tons of people your way. i am really impressed the talents and kindness of the people participating in this effort.
and by banning same-sex marriage, children who would normally be raised by same-sex parents will suddenly be raised by a man and a woman? This kind of logic is completely confounding. Ban single parent homes, then, too.
Emily, please feel free to feature any of the information you see. We're all so excited to be sharin this important information with the California voters. Good luck to you in your quest to inform the uninformed.
Fs Carrie, I can see why you were concerned. Doctor Santivore is not saying that we should ban single parent homes. If I had the time I would have posted the remainder of his views. However, you may click on the link provided to read the rest of the article. Certainly there are many unfortunate circumstances in life that occur where a parent is left alone to raise a child and I do not condone that at all. I am simply stating that the best/ideal/most healthy environment for a child to be reared in is one where there is a mother & a father. Each plays a vital role in the development of a child that can only be provided by these opposite genders. I thank you for voicing you concerns.
When it comes to children (and a lot of other things) we should be striving for the ideal situation. The best thing for kids, the ideal situation is for there to be a mother and father to compliment each other AND most importantly the needs of the child. Do we often fall short of the ideal in life? Yes, but that doesn't mean we should give up and give in, and stop trying to give children the best in life.
I have 2 points on this issue.
1. There will be more single parents then gay couples with kids. There are 20 million kids that will have only one parent.
2. Are gay couples worse parents than single parents? Will gay people take away strait parents rights somehow? I was in a single parent home, I would rather have 2 moms than one.
Post a Comment