Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet

[Anima]

The welfare therefore increasing births to unwed mothers is a canard.
http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers...es-akerlof

The facts suggest the lowered social stigma associated led to far fewer shotgun weddings. The article also points out that if welfare was the cause unwed births would have risen sharply in the early 60s and then tapered off in the 70s and 80s commensurate with welfare variations. I can't help but wonder how the anti-abortion fervor has contributed.

This article was very interesting. I looked up a few others and most seem to agree that no fault divorce has increased the rate of marriage (as the institution is viewed as less permanent) while decreasing the duration of marriage (divorce is used more often as a means to resolve marital disputes). As, such less children are born out of wedlock, but more children are raised in a broken home.
http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/alesina...e-0407.pdf

As stated by Respondents, the government's interest in bonding children to their biological parents when possible is not solely limited to the establishment and improvement of that bond, but also to the maintenance of that bond as held in Ngyuen V INS.

Biological parents are held liable for child care regardless of marital status. This line of reasoning is a non-starter.

Actually parents listed on the birth certificate are liable for the child until such time as either biological parentage may be determined (in which case liability may be transferred) or parental rights are waved (explicitly by affirmative statement or implicitly by inability). Then the parental liability falls upon a single parent or if both parents forego their rights the liability falls upon the State. Thus, the state has an interest in the offspring produced by opposite gender copulation.

(Interesting article on the philosophy of Parental rights should you have time to read it. http://www.iep.utm.edu/parentri/#SH2d)

I have no problem accepting that no fault divorces may have led to a change in attitude towards the institution; however, I fail to see how allowing same sex marriages does anything to change this.

Respondents argument that is reasonable to believe that just as no fault had an impact changing the understanding of marriage from one of permanency, by means of shifting the focus of marriage from permanent for the raising of children to temporary depending on the adult whims (rather than child needs), resulting in more children being raised in broken homes. So will the further shifting of marriage from a procreation centric (bonding of parents together with their children and one another) to a recognition centric (public recognition of a private relationship) of the adult relationships (of all marriages) further result in marriage being more about the adults whims than the children's needs increasing the likelihood of divorce and children raised in broken homes.

There is also no evidence to support the claim that same sex marriages will impact traditional marriage rates:
http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers...es-akerlof

As argued by Justice Kennedy, Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Breyer, and Respondents: it is not invidious discrimination in and of itself for the respondents to wait and see what the full impact of same sex marriage is. Now if the petitioners wish to argue that respondents may not wait and see than petitioners may not base there argument upon studies which have not had sufficient time to account for the impacts of the institutional change.

---

We knew that, but it isn't only incest, it's child abuse. What about consenting adults in an incestuous relationship?

Yeah, why does incest automatically equal abuse of minors in your mind, Anima?

I provided the link. It also discuss the impacts between incestuous relationships between siblings and consenting adults. Generally it states they are the same as those between children. Feel free to follow the link and read up on it. As I said I have no desire to become well versed on the subject of incest. I blame Marquis De Sade for that. I heard so much about him from people that I finally read several of his books. That guy was one sick puppy!!