Social Science Data Affirms Mom and Dad Still the Best
2-26-14 Update: “Gay Parenting” Social Science Data Denied. Read more.
San Antonio, TX, February 25, 2014 – Late yesterday, Texas Values refiled a legal brief with the San Antonio federal court in a case where homosexual advocates seek to force gay marriage on Texas. Texas Values’ previous effort to file its amicus brief in early January of this year with the court was denied as Judge Orlando Garcia claimed that Texas Values brief amounted to “attempts to present ‘social science’ which will not be useful for the Court in making a legal determination of the constitutional issues raised in this case.”
However, it was clear later in the hearing in Judge Garcia’s courtroom on February 12th that homosexual advocates’ (Plaintiffs) main evidence to support their efforts to redefine marriage in Texas is their suspect opinion about social science data, not legal precedent. As stated in the motion by Texas Values:
“Plaintiffs’ counsel contended that there is no difference in the outcome for children raised in same sex households and as a result, this basis for the State to exclude these households from a recognized marriage is not rational. In advancing this argument, the Plaintiffs’ counsel relied upon social science citing affidavits from their expert witnesses and also relied on the purported findings of the American Psychological Association among others.”
“If homosexual advocates want to use social science to attack traditional marriage, they need to have their facts straight, said Jonathan Saenz, attorney and president of Texas Values. “Social science continues to confirm that children benefit most when they are raised by their biological mom and dad as a married couple. The argument that there is “no difference” in the outcome of children raised in same-sex households has no legitimate support. If Judge Garcia goes against his previous order and relies on any social science evidence to make his decision, our proposed brief must be considered,” said Saenz.
Texas Values’ has refiled its amicus brief to set the record straight on the clear and long standing findings of the social science community. The brief points out that “the studies purportedly showing no difference are flawed in numerous respects as was the finding of the Eleventh Circuit in Lofton v. Secty of Children Services, 358 F.3d 804, 825 (11th Cir. 2004). Further, the brief shows that longstanding research supports the idea that raising children in a stable home with their own biological mother and father is the ideal and most beneficial environment for children. This is in large part because of the unique roles that each gender brings to childrearing.”
Read the Brief here.
Read the Motion to Reconsider here.