PA Senators Leach and Eichelberger Spar on Radio Over Gay Marriage

As a Pennsylvania resident and a listener of various NPR podcasts, I took particular interest in the recent WHYY radio podcast that pitted PA Senator Daylin Leach (D- 17th District — that’s my district, by the way) against fellow PA Senator John Eichelberger (R – 30th District). The focus of their wordy battle? None other than that ever-controversial and divisive-of-all topics that has been making national news (see: California and Iowa, among others) — gay marriage. 

Why is this relevant? It seems that Senator Leach “introduced a this month bill that would give full and equal marriage rights to same-sex couples in Pennsylvania.” Last month, Senator Eichelberger introduced a bill that would ban same-sex marriage in PA. Uh oh, we’ve got a battle on our hands here, and I’ll be here to look at their claims, see what I can dig up on Google and (be aware) inject my own opinion in (though I try to qualify it).

Predictably, Senator Eichelberger represents a more conservative section of the Keystone State, while Senator Leach represents an increasingly Democratic area. 

The hour-long program must have been somewhat painful for Senator Eichelberger, as Senator Leach repeatedly challenged the veracity of his statements and positions on the issue at every turn. This leads to the whole hour effectively being a loop of the same arguments over and over again as Senator Eichelberger repeats his spiel ad nauseam, resulting in Senator Leach repeating his rebuttal of Senator Eichelberger, which then segues into Senator Eichelberger repeating his views again, and so on and so forth. Thus, the first exchange they have is really very representative of the entire program. Check it.

Senator Eichelberger says…

“I think we’re framing this wrong… first of all, what I’m trying to do is define marriage, which is not an anti-same-sex argument. What I’m saying is that we have a proven model, which is the family of one man, one woman. There’s been thousands of years of this model. There are tens of thousands of studies that show that this is the best model for a society to operate under, this is the fundamental building block of our society. To change that, there’s no evidence to show that we should change the fundamental building block of our society. Anytime that — there is evidence on the other side that shows that anytime we tamper with this fundamental building block — we liberalize our divorce laws, we do things like that — the statistics show that children are affected, and our society is affected. We’re devaluing marriage, and in societies where this has been done, we see more children born out of wedlock, we see higher divorce rates, we see all sorts of societal problems because we’ve devalued marriage.”

Meanwhile, Senator Daylin Leach says…

“The idea that there are tens of thousands of studies is just wrong. I have every study ever done in front of me right now. And every one of them shows that gay children — children of gay marriage — and gay marriage in general does nothing adverse to society. You would think that if it did, we would notice it. In Massachusetts, people have been married for well over — gay people have been allowed to get married for well over 5 years. The divorce rate is actually down since that happened. The marriage rate remains the same, the rate of childbirth remains the same. Every statistic you can cite — and that’s true of the 23 nations that have legalized same-sex marriage in the last 12 years. So the notion that this is going to somehow gonna undermine marriage is not borne out statistically.” 

There is some variation in the exchanges following that one, and I’ll try to summarize (and also highlight some points that struck me):

• Senator Eichelberger brings up the ‘slippery slope argument‘ — the line of thinking that says if you say gays can get married, then it’s only a matter of time before you have pedophilia and polygamy. Some people, like Bill O’Reilly apparently, also believe that if you don’t draw the line on marriage now, it’ll lead to bestiality. 
• Senator Leach responds to this by saying “you draw the line where it allows everyone to be included in the opportunity to get married… you have to allow everyone to marry one other person.”
• Senator Leach brings up the fact that: “In most cases, civil unions and domestic partnership laws only offer a fraction of the 1,049 benefits the United States government provides for couples in a heterosexual marriage.” (quote from About.com page)
• Senator Eichelberger says that gay couples should not be allowed to get married because their marriages (unlike, he holds, straight marriages) “will not grant any benefit to society.”
• Senator Eichelberger compares not rewarding homosexuals who want to get married to not “reward[ing] people for walking out on relationships.”
• Senator Eichelberger compares preventing gays getting married to setting the speed limit on a road. “We have standards,” he says, “and they’re scientifically shown.” Ironically, there are studies out there that show that “Drivers who receive speeding citations are at increased risk of receiving subsequent speeding citations, suggesting that speeding citations have limited effects on deterrence in the context of the current traffic enforcement system.” (Emphasis mine)
• Possible economic disadvantage to banning gay marriage, as gay residents will move to states recognizing gay marriage and the state will collect less in income taxes.
• Senator Leach compares the fight for gay marriage to the civil rights movement — “This is in line not only with the racial civil rights issues, but the struggle for equality that women went through, the struggle for equality that immigrants fought.” 
• A caller challenges Senator Eichelberger’s argument about preventing gay marriage because it cannot benefit society by asking why, then, there are not more restrictions on the marriage of the poor, the disabled, those with criminal records, those who are unhealthy, etc…
• Senator Eichelberger’s response to the above caller: “Well, it’s not discriminatory, that’s why.”

On another note, I phoned Senator Eichelberger’s office today and asked his extremely kind and polite staff what studies Senator Eichelberger was referring to during the radio show. They’re forwarding my question to the Senator who, hopefully, will get back to me.

Until then, I’ve had to rely on Google to satisfy attempt to examine Senator Eichelberger’s claim that there are “tens of thousands of studies” that show that gay marriage is detrimental to society (or, at the least, unbeneficial) and Senator Leach’s claim that there are no studies at all that say this. 

The answer I got was mixed. Here’s how I break it down. 

• Senator Eichelberger says Marty Moss-Coane is wrong when she quotes the divorce rate in America at 50% — Turns out both Senator Eichelberger and Marty Moss-Coane are right one this one:

“It is frequently reported that the divorce rate in America is 50%. This data is not accurately correct, however, it is reasonably close to actual. The Americans for Divorce Reform estimates that “Probably, 40 or possibly even 50 percent of marriages will end in divorce if current trends continue.”, which is actually a projection.

“50% of all marriages in the America end in divorce.“
The above statement about the divorce rate in America hides all the details about distribution, however.”

 

 

• Claim that there are no benefits to society that can be derived from gay marriage.
  –Well, it seems there is an entire website devoted to listing the benefits of gay marriage, and provides research to back up these views. For instance, one study says that of the gay-married households with children in Massachusetts, “nearly all respondents (93%) agreed or somewhat agreed that their children are happier and better off as a result of their marriage.” That is just one example from one study of many.
  –A study from Scandanavia refutes the idea that gay marriages cause a decline in straight marriages.
  –The Congressional Budget Office released a document on “The Potential Budgetary Impact of Recognizing Same-Sex Marriages“

 

 

 ”The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that on net, those impacts would improve the budget’s bottom line to a small extent: by less than $1 billion in each of the next 10 years (CBO’s usual estimating period). That result assumes that same-sex marriages are legalized in all 50 states and recognized by the federal government.”

• On the Eichelberger side of things, it seems there are also studies that can be used to oppose gay marriage
  – This one from Sweden/Norway talks about the higher levels of same-sex marriages that end divorce, as opposed to straight marriages.
  – Homosexuals are more likely to suffer psychological issues such as depression, and engage in substance abuse.
• However, there is a counter to some of these arguments (specifically the ones on mental health and substance abuse). First, I’d like to say that my common sense instinct, upon reading those studies and statistics in the above section, was to say that of course there is a higher incidence of mental health issues when you’re dealing with a group of people who have consistently been discriminated against both physically and psychologically in the past (and today). Think about it. Anyway, here’s some links to things:
  –University of Minnesota released a study that it is not the act of being homosexual that causes poor mental health (duh), but rather the act of treating homosexuality as a disorder that causes the harm. Senator Eichelberger must not have read that one, as he admitted he viewed homosexual marriage as “dysfunctional.”
  –”Professor Michael King, of University College London, who co-wrote [Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health] article, said: “Civil partnerships are likely to break down some of the prejudice and promote greater understanding, including among staff working in the health service.”  

   

• Finally, there’s a report that kids raised by a homosexual are “far more likely to engage in homosexual behavior”. I’d say that this is fairly logical as well. If a behavior is, inadvertently or otherwise, discouraged or characterized by parents as unacceptable, it will be less likely to occur. It will be suppressed because it is “not normal” — this despite the increasing support for a biological basis of homosexuality. I mean, how many times do we hear about someone coming out of the closet years later, after they’ve been married and had kids? It’s not because they just became gay, its because they suppressed it so long. Also, I submit that the figures of homosexuals in the general population are probably incorrect, as many people will be loathe to admit that they are homosexual, due to prejudice. Thus, though many people would try to use this report negatively to convince people that homosexuals are turning their kids gay, I’d argue that it actually helps counter a more harmful system that could result in suppression and poor mental health.

Honestly (and in my opinion), denying the many benefits of marriage, both on a rights level and only a psychological level, is just plain wrong. Allowing same-sex marriage does not disturb the rights of straight-married citizens (other than to give their majority less power over a minority), whereas denying same-sex marriage is a discriminatory practice. 

I think of the futuristic science fiction films I see in which people extoll the evils of discrimination and prejudice, and as we exit the theaters we pat ourselves on the backs and say how great it is that we’re so much better than the people from whatever film’s future society and how everyone in our society is so free and so equal. 

Hm.