Found here...
The changes that have swept over American families in the last two generations have inspired a large body of social scientific research and a growing number of marriage education programs aimed at better preparing couples for marriage and better equipping couples with the knowledge, values, and skills required for successful marriage in today's world. This report, the second edition of Why Marriage Matters, is an attempt to summarize the research into a succinct form useful to Americans on all sides of ongoing family debates to report what we know about the importance of marriage for our families and for our society.
What does the social science tell us? In addition to reviewing research on family topics covered in the first edition of the report, this report highlights five new themes in marriage-related research.
Excellent reading every way you slice it.
Thought I would stop in for a moment.
ReplyDeleteLast night I was speaking with some other guests at a party. I was mentioning if I wrote a paper or article in college or law school merely ten years ago concerning low-income families in Massachusetts, that as a matter of public policy marriage should address the well-being of mother and child in a healthy relationship with the father. To promote and suggest that strong healthy marriages within these poorer communities is of utmost importance I would be a liberal.
No flying spaghetti monster here. No religious bigotry. No imposing of morals or hetero normative culture.
The biological purpose of sex for women, is to get pregnant and to form a bond with the father of the child. If it wasn't, women wouldn't be bending over backwards NOT to get pregnant. Human sexuality is what it is, to make and care for individuals through a biological kinship model. That's evolution.
I'm glad Opine is still here, it's a tiresome job to consistently and patiently remind people the reality of biological nature. The opposing arguments are constantly in the terms of denying equality or promoting hate.
But where is the hatred really directed at?
The hatred, the anger, the illogical arguments come from those who say marriage really never mattered. So what's the motivation to redefine it?
What are we trying to make equal?
The equality is making the father to be equally accountable to the child, since he is unable get pregnant, give birth, and breastfeed. The only way to make things equal is to acknowledge the difference between man and woman.
I always wish to pursue and be respectful of any individual who happens to be gay/homosexual and has feelings of orientation towards the same sex in these discussion. Marriage matters to all, not because we should all marry, but because we're all individuals with a mother and a father. It's unfortunate when mothers and fathers do not get along, and it is even sadder when a parent can not accept and love their child also.
Laws of of man can't change mother nature.
Humanity is is made of two sexes, male and female. This is the formation of how we procreate. Every human life has value, and to value human life we must acknowledge and respect our obligation to the conjugal act and not misrepresent the truthful and honest nature of human sexuality
It's a fool's errand, to proclaim human sexuality as anything else.
Former Contributor of Opine Editorials,
Renee Aste
Lowell Massachusetts
(Yep, putting my whole name to it)
God Bless You Renee
ReplyDeleteIf only ideology would submit itself to Truth...
"Fitz"
Patrick Fitzgerald
Grosse Pointe Farms Michigan
Renee,
ReplyDeleteThe biological purpose of sex for women, is to get pregnant and to form a bond with the father of the child.
Is that the biological purpose of sex for all women, or for heterosexual women? What is the biological purpose of sex for lesbians?
Is it your contention that lesbians ought to marry men?
Phil: Is that the biological purpose of sex for all women...
ReplyDeleteI suggest you look up the phrase "biological purpose."
What is the biological purpose of sex for lesbians?
You tell me. Imagine two populations, one in which "lesbian" sex occurred and one in which it didn't. Would either population have a survival advantage over the other?
Is it your contention that lesbians ought to marry men?
Nothing in Renee's comment can be construed to mean that, Phil. You are once again paradoxically using your reading incompetence, either real or feigned, to try and make your arguments more credible.