Proposition 8 a triumph for families

Back in 2000, 61.4 percent of California voters agreed to the traditional definition of marriage by supporting Proposition 22. Then the state Supreme Court struck down the same-sex marriage ban in March 2008. Now, 52 percent of California voters supported Proposition 8.

Proponents were vilified, campaign materials were stolen and destroyed, churches were defaced and properties were damaged. Jose Nunez was violently assaulted and received 16 stitches.

The amendment in no way interferes with peaceful, private relationships, but guards against activist pressures evident everywhere same-sex marriage is not protected.

David Parker, the parent of a kindergartner, was imprisoned overnight after he refused to leave school premises, insisting to be notified before his child was taught about homosexuality. Others were denied the right to opt their child out and were identified as exhibiting “inappropriate behavior” for their requests and informed that school and civil authorities had a duty to “normalize” homosexual relationships to children. In September 2004, an eighth-grade teacher in Brookline, Mass., told NPR she tells her students that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex toys.

Parents have few options and little voice. How would you feel if your child was taught something you had strong fact-based concerns about – say, creationism?

Legitimate argument comes from the benefits of marriage. Studies show repeatedly the committed “nuclear” family enjoys higher contentment, better emotional and physical health and longer life. Children have better health and academic results and fewer emotional problems, criminal incidents, and addictions to drugs.

They contribute to a society which is sustainable. Wide support could result in reductions in prison populations, health care needs, academic crisis and much more.

We need to support the best designs. We encourage abuse upon innocent children when we confine them to a family unit which cannot supply the most critical supports they’ll need. Children excel with both a father and a mother who are committed to each other.

Let’s not look only for a way to do that which is convenient. Some believe they must accept a lifestyle they feel is good. Can’t we protect and encourage the proven best for both now and the future? I hope for a good solution that doesn’t damage our collective futures.

David House
IU staff