I am sick to death of right-wingers trying to pass off homophobia as "Family Values". It is both ignorant and bigoted.
I saw Santorum recently on the Daily Show defending this blatantly homophobic piece of garbage. His basic argument was that "one man/one woman" was the most stable family structure for raising children and that government's endorsement of that form (and only that form) of union is its obligation in supporting the continuation of society.
The corollary of this is the notion that the government should not sanction in (any legal way) any family structure that does not conform to his ideal "one man/one woman" model. It should not give any other family form support in the form of tax credits, spousal benefits, etc.
As an anthropologist, I can tell you that this is an extremely ethnocentric view of the situation. Clearly it is his opinion. However, many societies where polygamy, polyandry and other family forms are common prove that there is no single "Best" family structure in which to raise a child. Children are extremely adaptable little buggers. What they DO need is love and some basic stability in terms of who is there taking care of them from day to day, as familiarity breeds trust and bonding.
Santorum and all those that support his homophobic agenda need to look around the world a bit. Get outside of the Washington bubble and find out about raising children.
How about a federally funded, cross-cultural study of childrearing practices so that we can all be better informed of the possibilities that exist for raising happy, healthy, and functional children? How about we apply some of that dreaded "SCIENCE" to the problem?
The government has no business telling any of us how we should structure our families in order to raise children. They should most certainly not do so in the complete lack of data on the issue.
Hey Rick, if you insist on being involved in supporting children (social engineering), a nice fat child tax credit would be nice. Get busy on that. While you are at is would you please do something about these damn non-breeders? Maybe a no marriage without formal plans to have a child contract (with a clause that they maintain a nursery in the house as a sign of good faith).
After all, why should we support all of those freeloading straight people out there living without procreating? I thought it was the government's job to support breeders.
You have made it quite clear that all of that individual love and companionship is nice and maybe even needed. But, it has nothing to do with furthering the society.
"Family Values" is nothing more than a code word for "White, Christian Values". Remember that every time you hear the phrase.