1

Kelsey Hammel

Kindra Rounds

English 102

October 27, 2016

Analyzing Arguments Against Same-Sex Marriage

In the essay Ten Arguments From Social Science Against Same-Sex

Marriage the Family Research Council addresses the hardships on children that are

brought up by same-sex couples and the possible disadvantages of homosexuality.

Family Research Council fights that children are being brought up with a greater

chance of having a homoerotic relationship later in life and that to have the best

chance at life and developing fully, the child needs to have both a mother and

father in the home. Each author that took place in writing this article had previously

written books on this subject. Each argument that is presented is completely bias to

their argument and does not consider the opposing sides thoughts. Im guessing

that each author does not have homoerotic tendencies and therefore do not feel the

need to address the pros of children going into same-sex marital homes.

Family Research Council brings up good points regarding the development of

children that do not have either a mother or father present. Author of Life Without

a Father, David Popenoe argues that fathers have unique social and biological

influence on their children. It is proposed that fathers help in the reduction of

delinquency in young boys but also in reducing sexual activity in daughters or

young girls. In many cases I believe this to be true. Another argument that is made

is that mothers are an important role in the development of children. Author Steven

Rhodes adds that mothers give their daughters insight on overcoming or

experiencing differences emotionally and physically during puberty changes.

 2

Mothers are important in this aspect but I do know that fathers can be just as

capable of sharing that kind of bond with their daughters.

In the article, one of the authors revealed that another source researched

homoerotic relationships in young children and that it is more likely to occur if they

are raised by same-sex couples. The author then goes into extensive detail about

how that is very wrong because he did not think that that could possibly be a fact.

He argued that the research was not well sourced and not done in a proper way in

accordance to good research. I think it is good that the author tried to fight this

other source but it was irrelevant. The author did not actually portray facts to

defend himself, only opinions on what he thought were wrong with the sources

information on the subject.

The idea of marriage is meant to bring children into the world is highly

addressed in this article. It is written that same-sex marriage would only further

undercut the procreative norm long associated with marriage insofar as it

establishes that there is no necessary link between procreation and marriage. The

Family Research Council further informs us that same-sex marriage support is

coming from countries that arent populating as quickly as others. It is blatantly put

that It is no accident that the countries that have legalized or are considering

legalizing same-sex marriage have some of the lowest fertility rates in the world.

This to me is very closed minded. Family Research Council is pushing their opinions

on the subject more than bringing out the facts and letting their personal views

come across in the article. They do not happen to mention that more kids have

homes now that homosexual couples are able to marry and have a family. More kids

are being adopted or fostered now than ever before and I think that is a great

advantage of legalizing same-sex marriage.

 3

To sum up the article, Family Research Council is very against same-sex

marriage and having kids be associated with that. From explaining the parts that

both a mother and father play in a child life is imperative for growth, less children

are being born in certain areas, and that kids that are born or raised in a same-sex

household will more than likely have homoerotic relationships themselves, they are

trying to look out for what is best for children growing up. Although the article is full

of great arguments that are believable, the content is weak. There are no

arguments that are for same-sex marriage to balance out the article. If there was, it

would make the entire article stronger because it shows versatility in their ability to

explain their side against arguments instead of just saying their opinions and facts

that they agree with.