Anti-gay activists are constantly implying that children of straight parents are better off than children of gay or lesbian parents. Usually they claim that "studies show children do best with a mother and a father," citing studies that compared children of two-parent homes to children of single-parent homes. Those studies did NOT compare children of spouses of straight couples to children of gay and lesbian couples.
All of the US's leading mainstream medical, educational and psychological associations overwhelmingly agree that children of gay and lesbian couples fare just as well as children of straight couples.
For example; The American Academy of Pediatrics says: "[S]cientific literature demonstrates" that same-sex couple children "fare as well. A study published in in the journal Demography concludes that children being raised by gay and lesbian couples have almost exactly the same educational achievement as children raised by married heterosexual couples.
Data released in from the US National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Studyfound that "[c]ompared to the traditionally reared teens, adolescents with lesbian parents rated significantly higher in social, academic and total competence," and that "teens with lesbian parents also rated significantly lower when it came to social problems, rule-breaking and aggressive behavior than teens raised in more traditional families. This isn't just a recent development, either.
A report published in the American Sociological Reviewback in examined 21 studies which "almost uniformly found no notable differences between children reared by heterosexual parents and those reared by lesbian and gay parents Skip to main content. Search form. Recent search terms transgender zeke survivor glaad awards trump accountability project spirit day.
Committed same-sex couples who are legally married in their own states can now receive federal protections - like Social Security, veterans' benefits, health insurance and retirement savings.
Find out more at glaad. What is the status of DOMA right now? Because DOMA was ruled unconstitutional, does that make marriage equality legal throughout the country? How does the ruling on DOMA affect families? The landmark Respect for Marriage Act was re-introduced in the U. House of Representatives and introduced for the first time in the U.
The bills were introduced with House cosponsors and 22 Senate cosponsors, and introductory press conferences heralded the goal of the legislation — to dismantle DOMA and extend federal respect to the marriages of thousands of same-sex couples.
One of the key vehicles for organizing around the Respect for Marriage Act and ending federal marriage discrimination was the Respect for Marriage Coalition, launched by Freedom to Marry in February with the Human Rights Campaign as co-chair. On the first panel, Ron Wallen told his heart-breaking story of the loss of his husband of 55 years. After Tom Carrollo died of cancer, Ron Wallen was unable to collect the Social Security survivor benefits that opposite sex spouses are entitled to receive, leaving him unable to make payments on their house.
Freedom to Marry flew Ron Wallen to D. Freedom to Marry also reviewed the testimony of Susan Murray, the lead attorney in Vermont. Our founder and president Evan Wolfson testified on the second panel. By the end of the th Congress, there were cosponsors in the House including three Republicans and 32 cosponsors in the Senate. At the end of the th Congress, there were cosponsors in the House and 45 in the Senate, the highest numbers for the Respect for Marriage Act, including all but one of the Democratic Senators.
Beebe and Jonathan Franqui were one of dozens of stories shared with members of Congress during meetings on the Respect for Marriage Act. In June , the U. Supreme Court ruled in Windsor v. The Supreme Court ruled that Section 3, which prohibited the federal government from respecting marriages between different-sex couples, was unconstitutional and affirmed that all committed, married couples deserve equal legal respect and treatment from the federal government.
The ruling, however, did not strike down all of DOMA. WHEREAS only equal access to marriage for civil purposes would respect the right of couples of the same sex to equality without discrimination, and civil union, as an institution other than marriage, would not offer them that equal access and would violate their human dignity, in breach of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ;.
WHEREAS the Supreme Court of Canada has determined that the Parliament of Canada has legislative jurisdiction over marriage but does not have the jurisdiction to establish an institution other than marriage for couples of the same sex;. WHEREAS nothing in this Act affects the guarantee of freedom of conscience and religion and, in particular, the freedom of members of religious groups to hold and declare their religious beliefs and the freedom of officials of religious groups to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs;.
WHEREAS marriage is a fundamental institution in Canadian society and the Parliament of Canada has a responsibility to support that institution because it strengthens commitment in relationships and represents the foundation of family life for many Canadians;. AND WHEREAS, in order to reflect values of tolerance, respect and equality consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , access to marriage for civil purposes should be extended by legislation to couples of the same sex;.
Marginal note: Marriage — certain aspects of capacity.
0コメント