joining us in studio is abby goldberg professor of psychology at clark
university in a renowned expert in the area of lesbian and gay parenting she's
also the author of lesbian and gay parents research on the family's life
cycle and joining us on the phone is tom mccluskey
vice president of government affairs for the family of researching counsel can
you hear me okay tom artistic advocate thanks for joining us
so last week we learned that prop eight was overturned in california by judge
gone walker
tom were you thrilled that with this decision urges a very happy
uh... well any actually neither man
we thought that the opinion of this one judge should not overrule the devote of
over seven million california benefit
well so abby let me go to you uh... the that argument the time is making has
been made a number of times which is the will of the people have has been
overturned
the counter-argument which which i've i've uh... taken uh... uh...
i've taken to heart because it seems to make sense to me is when we're talking
about cases of basic civil rights being violated
you can just put that back to a vote right i mean that's why we have an
independent judiciary to decide you know
if this is a vote that would violates the the bill of rights for example we
can just put that to a vote where do you come down on that
uh... gap and i would would concur with that of the issue of equal rights of
similar liberties should not be something that should be left up to
uh... you know popular vote but it's rather something that should rest on
principle
you know i might mention even rest and research we shouldn't have to prove that
class of people
is on as good as another class of people in order to for them to have a right
that should be granted them ana matically
so tom as part of the family research council with which you are vp of
government affairs for
is the objection just the the the so-called legal objection widget which
you just stated earlier you have a moral problem with gay marriage as well
we won't certainly the moral problem in a lot of that goes into
the research that has shown that i
children herb
basked in an environment where the mother or father
something that judge are completely just throughout
in what sense that he throw that out
what he didn't even included and that mister innes uh...
in his judgment and is rolling
so you're saying that that there is evidence which suggests that it is but
that
kids do better when they are in a home with a a male and female parent as
opposed to a gay couple is that right
ordered the evidence is overwhelming
i've just recently the repeat and uh... study by yale university
that support that
that belief
went and abby happen pat either of those studies what did the study say this is
really area of expertise
the body of research that for example the the proponents of prop eight have
relied on
is a body of research that compares married heterosexual two parent families
and their children to single parent families and divorce pair families and
those studies often fine
the children with to marion heterosexual
parents
do better in terms of sperry psychosocial outcomes compared to
children single parents and divorced parents
but they're is no study that compares married heterosexual parents with
children two married
same sex couples with children
so that's a big elite that that and think to some of these proponents are
making
that can automatically be extended to same sex couples as well
and the research that we do have that compares
heterosexual married same-sex couples with children to not mary but same sex
couples with children shows that these children are doing just fine emotionally
behaviorally they don't differ in any sort of you know psychosocial outcome
from the children of st parent so unusual we're going to talk about it or
freeways
buyer they've been thrown out i mean the most recent one it didn't even have a
control group in just a matter of
asking lesbian parents
uh... do you think you're good parent week study is that
uh...
it was the most recent study and i know i'm afraid i do not have the front of me
except locally study trip
i'm invested simple fact is that there are so few well i think you're referring
to was a study that was done eight university of california
san francisco got a lot of press and that's when you're referring to the
longitudinal
all i you know lesbian parents buddy
in fact
that study in several recent studies are saying that it to strip relied on
parents are poor but it also reply don t two reports so teachers are a great way
to provide some independent objective data to officer kind ascertain whether
these children are doing well and those teachers reports were included in that
report and those teaches portion of that these children again did not differ in
terms of behavioral emotional outcomes from children of heterosexual parents
sits on dewey's what is that the poll you referring to do it does not know
what all the newsletter and i i do believe that with the one hundred still
distant fees
showing with no control group and
simply asking then teacher and her friend of
uh... these families it is not
uh... scientific poll to make
what it what about his unscientific
you have no control group you have no
you're not comparing it to other family camp
your talking about a very small percentage
well the whole population it's self as a very small percentage upon the factual
and then even smaller population the kevin but the five q even on personal
union for marriage or anything like that but i'm because it's a small percentage
does that mean any study about it which is being accurate because there's not
that many people to study that could go both ways could it not
and that goes beyond any study as well
um...
the right to marry have granted by the u_s_ constitution but not the right to
define marriage
and in athens that is what is being after that is what judge walker tried to
do
okay let me in the interest of not getting bogged down here uh...
tumi uh...
their i happen to believe that homosexuality is not the choice where
does family research council come down on that time
wanted to have an instrument conclude
um... and i either side so
right now it's just down the personal opinion and what's yours
my personal opinion is that it's inconclusive
so i would i mean i are not going to have the requests in the upper noe wen
uh... all the facts are not no
and should that make a difference in terms of a ruling like this
i wouldn't see why it worked
unique shade said the matter of whether it's a choice or not twice have any
should that doesn't have any legal bearing should play inside of a percent
mel i think it's completely irrelevant again i really feel that these kinds of
decisions should be made han
it whether it's a choice are not and you know
there's a lot of research showing that it's not a choice but whether it's too
as he has a relevant again to granting certain writes that human beings
said to have automatically that's what this case was all about
hate solid well go here it'd already restrictions on
what the definition of marriage is
uh... trying to redefine it is not a right
do you think that that this type of legislation would open the door to
three-way marriages are marriages between people and animals those are two
talking points a year
you're going to hear the people and animals argument from our separate
through historical evidence on other type of marriages flight like polygamy
uh... buddy additionally
it there are restrictions were put on
uh... merit and there's a reason for that
here trying to redefine marriages
not quite
uh... in the competition
but so
if they were to be an amendment that wanted to redefined marriage as
specifically between a man in a woman you would also be against that right i
mean in the interest of just being un unbiased and having the same policy
about redefining things
well that's not redefining marriage when you're defining at between one man and
one woman
what to do everything if they were already defined that way at the would
there be a need to to do that again i guess is when it when i think about the
defense of marriage amendments where it needs to be said
we will say it is between a man or woman if it's already defined that way they
wouldn't be a need to do it again with their
i don't think so so what what is the party you why don't understand that time
explaining to me
it's why i would think you'd need it
uh... explain to me how it not defined already at between one man one woman
edge beyond
some
usual liberal judges rulings and handful of state but this particular judges is a
libertarian appointed by a republican racer which liberal judges you talking
about
just walkers
had a personal state in this rolling
each american francisco chronicle of even reported about
within were the first one to report about
so i i don't think it judgment actually
should be
well taken for on this case
abby what do you think about that must give me that he goldberg professor of
psychology at clark university intel mccluskey from the family research
council the argument that this particular judge wood jan's was in some
way biased
board knots uh... not capable of making a fair decision what was your thought on
that
you know my opinion is that who would be impartial if one sexual orientation is
sort of on trial here what a heterosexual touch of an impartial
it seems like a silly argument to say that because
he might or might not be gay
that has some relevance in in the case uh... you know again if if if he was
straight and he had to pay you know argued for at the uh... proponents of
prop eight
with people have been saying well that he straight you know he's clearly not
impartial
i don't know about that suggests because he's gay people i serve jumping on that
how did you get a lot of people are sexual orientation but when you look at
it
is actual supported findings
most of them are
are his personal opinion and then certainly not something that's found out
in the cms
prosecution or in the long but hold on a second abby work was not the testimony
that the judge was deciding the case on
not presented well from those who are are against
the uh... legalization of gay marriage it was not strong evidence and that is
the evidence that the judge needs to decide on is it not
yes we indeed hundred and thirty six page you know decision on them from the
trial
anne really outlines and kind of uh... exquisite detail
heidi's of areas uh... expert witnesses their opinions the data that they
presented their various qualifications unfortunately you know fourth for
proponents of prop eight the data really doesn't support
um... supporting i mean eight it's really hard i think for anyone to argue
reading this document how he could've possibly found
for the defendants
what do you think tell them you did your side here in this case just just blow
the case
rick r_e_i_t_ think the cases moral stacked against him at the beginning i
mean they're president he did not bite
in his case uh... the overwhelming body of evidence but was presented to the
judge
uh... he completely depressed immune rolling itself could have been written
out by the attorneys who were arguing to overturn proposition eight
i want to in the last minute or so we have what they want to just open up and
and throughout uh... not a monkey wrench into just another thought about this
entire issue
lyle menendez of the menendez brothers right now is serving a life sentence for
killing
both of his parents now since he was incarcerated he's gotten married divorce
and remarried so my question is how is it that a convicted murderer can get
married and that doesn't devalue marriages that your devalue because
that's something i've heard from uh... from tom side but is same sex couples
getting married somehow does devalue uh... america mobile how would you react
to that time
well trite
george the whole home a factual community
on the actions of
uh...
out of one percent
uh... yeah me i mean that art is the whole home a factual community
uh... elton john or press built in the course is not
so uh... i i mean in example here an example bear i mean
britney spears or uh...
wyoming that men and uh...
are friday hello menendez specifically do you see rambling this at the
convicted murder
is allowed to marry and divorce is many times as he wants
what does it mean that i hope a homosexual couple is not allowed to do
that but this convicted murderer is
one right and sort of is the value of marriage so high you know many people
said you know straight people are doing justice
their jobs growing up marriages you know gay people could ever do um...
but you know the defect is not just put this out there is that all you know
there's a lot of data set that suggest that in the country's warm air same-sex
marriage has been introduced
um... in massachusetts you know we've had
marriage rates extended same-sex couples at ccs dot two thousand three
there have been no
changes in marriage rates or divorce rates in heterosexual couples there's
just a continuation of existing trends
so we have the day that actually supports
that they're no affect on on that institution of marriage on all these
fears have really not come to pass
tom any response and we just have about thirty seconds left here there've also
been overwhelming evidence on down
the other side that shows that uh...
such relationship
but not in not only affect marriage but it can affect other
uh... heterosexual marriages
partnerships as well so what did it is that because i've looked at data from
the netherlands and massachusetts well i i i do know that i mean
are problematic in other stanley kirkpatrick other
quite a body of evidence uh... showing that in the netherlands uh...
such cases are like the so
i think right now it's a matter of dueling tracked well we will do the
research and we will present all of the evidence i want to thank both of our
guests on the phone ta mccluskey vice president of government affairs for the
family research council
in studio abby goldberg professor of psychology at clark university burnout
expert in the area of lesbian and gay parenting
also the author of the book lesbian and gay parents research on the family
life-cycle thanks to both the crowd for being here in for calling in today thank
you