The superintendent of a Wisconsin public school district has
apologized after high school students were shown a video that promotes same-sex
marriage.
The 16-minute video, "Kids React to Gay Marriage,"
recorded men and women proposing to members of the same sex at a Home Depot,
and other settings as music blared and people danced. It then went on to ask
comments of very young children about the highly complex and difficult issue of
Homosexuality and Same-Sex Marriage.
I warn you – you will
not be any smarter for having watched this video, though you may want to throw
something at your screen.
Notice some things in this video. Some of the kids at first
seem fine with this, while others have a look of disgust on their face.
Then notice the comments – ‘They were born that way’. This
is what kids are being taught; even though study after study has not yet found
conclusive scientific evidence that gay people are born that way.
The search for the ‘Gay Gene’ continues. In early 2014 there
was a new discovery that an area on the X chromosome – which men inherit from
their mothers -- known as Xq28 has some impact on sexual orientation. Another
stretch of DNA chromosome 8 also affects male sexual behavior, they said. That
being said, what this discovery points to are 'Chromosome Abnormalities' and not
a ‘Gay Gene’.
The outcomes of Chromosome Abnormalities include but are not limited to Down
syndrome, which is well known; but there are many you may have not even heard
of. Such as:
1. Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome
2. Jacobsen Syndrome
3. Angelman syndrome
4. Turner syndrome
5. 22q11.2 deletion syndrome
6. Triple X Syndrome
7. Williams Syndrome
8. Cri du Chat Syndrome
9. Trisomy 13/Patau syndrome
10. Trisomy 18/Edwards syndrome
11. Cat eye syndrome
12. Trisomy 16
13. Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease
Other Genetic Syndromes Caused by Chromosome Abnormalities
So – all of these Chromosome Abnormalities are listed, and
described by the Medical Community as ‘Birth Defects’ – but if we find a ‘Chromosome
Abnormality’ that may contribute to homosexuality – we are not allowed to call
it a birth defect; we are supposed to call it “normal”.
Why would pro-homosexual or pro-same-sex marriage folks
continue to tell kids that gay people are born that way, when in fact all of
the science unearthed thus far supports the antithesis of this conclusion? Rhetorical question - Because
they cannot support their position with facts and science – they can only rely
on propaganda like this video in order to brainwash the next generation.
At around minute 6:28, the video graphic says that ‘reparative
therapy (for gay people) is currently only favored by religious groups. This is
an outright lie – there are many counseling practices and organizations who support
and offer such therapy services; whose organizations, doctors and counselors have no
religious affiliation. Just more lies and propaganda in order to ensure no
opposition while they brainwash the young.
Notice that at no time in this video do the producers offer
any reputable sources for their assertions. They also in the production and
showing of this video to school children – NEVER – offer any input or details from any opposing viewpoint. The other side of the argument is completely left
out. With a subject as controversial as homosexuality and same-sex marriage –
leaving out the other side of the issue has to be by design. Such is usually the case when propaganda is false,
can easily be refuted - but is designed in order to totally deceive its target
audience; which in this case is SCHOOL CHILDREN! (Not just the children in the video, but the school kids who are being forced to watch this propaganda in their neighborhood public schools).
Between minutes 7 & 8 in the video, they now have the
CHILDREN regurgitation the same old tired arguments. Such as ‘what about love
and freedom’ – of course the fact that gay people are free in this country to
love one another and commit to each other is not touched on. What is glaringly
missing? They never discuss any of the philosophical or cultural questions such
as ‘What is marriage really about', or ‘do same-sex relationships have the same
outcomes as heterosexual relationships’; or 'are there any negative individual
or societal effects on public health, welfare and economics as a result of normalizing
same-sex relationships'? All of these are pretty important questions are they
not? We now have many studies in place from other countries that have already
legalized same-sex marriage. These studies all show that the outcomes are not
beneficial, but are in fact harmful. But God forbid they share that information with these young and impressionable children!
At one point the graphics at the bottom of the video talks
about other countries that have legalized same-sex marriage, they even mention
that ‘Only 14 states in the US allow same-sex marriage’ – to which a couple of
these children are appalled. This is expected when they are being bombarded
with propaganda that has no balance of opinions on the issue, or when no other facts,
research or ideas of opposition are presented.
How about the idea that along with our freedoms of choice
also comes a share of consequences and responsibilities? At one point a young
student says, “Love is a freedom, and they are totally taking that away”. Uhh –
no their not. No one can or is trying to take away the freedom of one person to
love another; same-sex or otherwise. Nobody is being persecuted, locked-up, or
forced to ‘not’ love another; or forced to abandon their same-sex partner. What
an absurd assertion - that does not happen in freedom-loving America!
As is typical of the pro-homosexual movement; they talk a
lot about freedoms, but somehow almost never talk about any level of responsibilities or consequences that
come from exercising our freedoms or making some bad choices.
They then go on to talk about how it used to be illegal for
a black person to marry a white person; and that this issues is the same thing.
Uhh – no its not. Two people of the opposite sex who happen to be of different
ethnicity has nothing to do with the subject of same-sex marriage; they cannot
even be compared – outside of the word 'marriage' - the two subjects have nothing to do with each other.
At another point, they reference how the Supreme Court is
upholding same-sex marriage decisions. Well – the Supreme Court doesn’t always
get it right. The court used to declare that slavery was constitutional. They currently
declare abortion as constitutional, even though we know that from the moment of
conception, it is a unique human life inside the womb.The court and it's judges are not perfect or free from error.
At another point, a boy that seems to be about 5 year’s old
expresses that he does not think gay marriage is a good idea. The interviewer
(a GROWN-UP that is off camera), asked the boy, “do you know why you don’t like
it”; to which the little boy replies “No”. Isn’t that great?! Let’s put a 5 or 6
year old on camera, who is not mature or educated enough on the subject of
same-sex marriage and use them as a tool or a prop to support the pro-homosexual
movement. Many educated adults have trouble articulating why they don’t agree
with same-sex marriage. That is so unfair to this little boy – it just
infuriates me!
Later in the video – the same little boy is asked… “Why does
it matter to you so much about who you love or who you marry?” – To which the
boy says, “because gay is bad for you”. Newsflash – that is actually a true statement
that is now backed-up by hundreds of studies worldwide. But the producers of
this video NEVER share or reference any of these inconvenient facts. Go Figure! (They are referenced in spades at the bottom of this page. I don't propagandize, I educate and back it up with actual facts).
Then the host goes on and tells some of the kids… “In some
places of the world, you can be jailed or even put to death for being gay”. To which one teenage boy comments – “Nobody has a valid reason to
hate gays”. Well that is true, hatred is never reasonable or good. But that is
not the question or subject that is being propagandized in this video. The
questions is… why isn’t homosexuality or same-sex marriage normal? Is it normal
or is it abnormal? That not’s hatred… they are legitimate questions that deserves
an intelligent answer. Intelligent answers that are now available that the
makers of this video so conveniently left out! No... instead, they simply lead these young people to an incorrect idea that dissent or disagreement is somehow 'hatred'. Have they no shame?!
They then make an attempt to touch on some of the
reasons as to why some oppose same-sex marriage or homosexuality in general.
They really only touch the ‘Titles’ of these topics and do not get into
anything of substance on the matter. How convenient!
Then they predictably steer the conversation toward religion. Well, certainly
people have their religious beliefs. That being said; thorough cases and
arguments in opposition of same-sex marriage and in favor of traditional marriage
have been made that have nothing to do with religion nor do they speak about or
reference any scriptures or teaching of any religions; Christian or otherwise.
This is the same old trick of blaming religion. They use attacks on or critisims of religion as a diversion in order to avoid the basic questions they don't like the answers too. Take religion or scripture
completely out of the conversation and approach the subject only from
scientific or natural terms; we can answer the question... “Is homosexuality or
same-sex marriage the natural state of things, is it normal or is it abnormal?…
Is it beneficial or harmful? None these question need be answered in religious
terms in order to come to a conclusion that it is not a good idea to normalize
same-sex marriage.
Then they have a little girl comparing Dr. Martin Luther
King and the Civil Rights movement to the issues of the same-sex
marriage movement. Again – this is not a fair comparison, and is downright
insulting to those folks who fought for minority civil rights. Again, a person
is born black, white, Hispanic or otherwise, which has now been PROVEN through genetic research and science. But - there is no conclusive scientific
evidence that a person is born gay. In fact, even the most recent study of Chromosome
Abnormality that I referred to above; the doctor in that study himself said the
abnormality… "It is not completely determinative; there are certainly
other environmental factors involved." This means there is no proof that a person is
born gay.
Homosexuals understandably want their relationships to have
equal social status with those of heterosexuals, and they see the law as their
weapon to force that acceptance on the public. Homosexual activist Michelangelo
Signorile believes that legalized same-sex marriage is “a chance to wholly transform the
definition of family in American culture. It is the final tool with which to
dismantle all sodomy statutes, get education about homosexuality and AIDS into
public schools, and, in short, usher in a sea of change in how society views
and treats us.” (Michelangelo Signorile)
Andrew Sullivan agrees. He writes, “If nothing else were
done at all and gay marriage were legalized, 90 percent of the political work
necessary to achieve gay and lesbian equality will have been achieved. It’s ultimately the only reform that matters.” (Andrew
Sullivan, Virtually Normal)
By their own admission, the main reason homosexuals want the
government involved is to force acceptance of homosexuality on the public. I
apologize for the repetition, but I cannot emphasize this enough. They want to
change the law because they know that’s the way to change cultural attitudes
about their behavior. In other words, state sanction will lead to social
sanction. The approval by law will lead to approval of homosexuality. Since
many activists consider homosexual behavior their "identity", any approval of
homosexuality means approval of them as people. This fails to recognize that we do recognize them as people, we just don't approve of their behavior. Parents often disapprove of the behavior of their children; wives sometimes disapprove the behavior of their husbands, etc. Yet - we still recognize our children and our spouse as people. We do not see their sexuality as their identity. Many in the LBGT community want to force society into validating their behavior by using the force of law and government. That is what this is about. It’s
not really about marriage, but the validation legally recognized same-sex marriage will bring them; perceived or otherwise.
But government doesn’t exist to validate the desires of its
citizens when such validation would harm others or society. This is why
government does not validate most behavior; and particularly those that are
destructive. For example, nearly everyone agrees that pedophilia is bad behavior and
destructive. In fact, our society considers these so very destructive that we
expect government to protect children from such harm. Well, there are hundreds of reputable and reliable studies that support the position that homosexuality and same-sex marriage are also harmful. So contrary to the idea
that government exists to validate the desires of its citizens or their behaviors— the main purpose
of government is to protect its citizens from harm.
The Bottom-line is; gay and lesbian couples ARE free in this
nation to live together and even pledge themselves to each other for the
remainder of their lives. There are even churches and ministers that will
perform marriage ceremonies for them. We have laws that protect them from being
harassed, harmed and violated by any hate filled or bigoted people; and they
should have those protections. Hatred and the harming of others should never be tolerated in America or any other society. That being said, intelligent, reasonable and defensible disagreement is NOT hatred or intolerance - no matter how often they say it is, or how often they use the terms 'homophobic or bigot'.
However, the preponderance of evidence; when taken in its
totality - clearly shows homosexuality produces harm that should be avoided. Unfortunately, virtually NONE of these facts, studies
and evidence has been shared with the children in the video above. VIRTUALLY NONE!
How about this for a new law – perhaps we should make it
ILLEGAL for any organization or group of people to use children as a pawn or a prop in order push
an agenda, or produce propaganda? Perhaps we should wait until we’ve taken the time to present ALL OF
THE FACTS to children before we ask them what they think or feel about such a delicate and complex
subject.
The makers of this one-sided piece of propaganda are nothing
short of disgusting!
Just to be sure that no one can accuse me of exaggerating
just how many study’s and how much empirical evidence is out there that makes the case to support traditional marriage and NOT validate same-sex marriage – the evidence that
is not touched on - not EVEN ONCE in this
video… Here are six pages of them!
References, Links
& Resources
Does A ‘Gay Gene’ Exist? New Study Says ‘Xq28’ May Influence
Male Sexual Orientation
Whoops not enough after students shown homosexual propaganda
Genetic Syndromes Caused by Chromosome Abnormalities
Michelangelo Signorile, “I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do, I Do,” OUT Magazine,
May 1996, pg. 30.
Andrew Sullivan, Virtually Normal, (USA, Vintage Books,
1996), pg. 185.
Stanley Kurtz, “The End of Marriage in Scandinavia,” Weekly
Standard, February 2, 2004,
Kurtz, “Slipping Toward Scandinavia.” Kurtz responds to his
critics in, “Smoking Gun:
The Netherlands shows the effect of Same-sex Marriage,” in
National Review Online, June 2,
2006. Available here: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/217803/smoking-gun/stanley-kurtz
Only 37 percent of people from countries with same-sex
marriage think they should marry if they want children while 60 percent of
people from countries without same-sex marriage think so. The same attitude
holds true with regard to cohabitation: 83 percent think it’s acceptable in
same-sex marriage countries, but only 49 percent think so elsewhere. See
David Blankenhorn, The Future of Marriage, (New York, Encounter Books),
2007, pg. 233.
See the 2008 report titled “The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce
and Unwed Childbearing” at
Health Facts of
Homosexual Activity
Even if we ignore the cultural issue of
procreation or any arguments based on religious grounds, the evidence shows
that homosexual unions are medically inferior to man-woman unions.
Homosexual
behavior:
a.
Results in numerous health problems
to those who practice it, including increases in AIDS, other STDs, colon and
rectal cancer, and hepatitis. According to the Center for Disease Control, more
than 82 percent of all known sexually-transmitted AIDS cases in 2006 were the
result of male-to-male sexual contact. Moreover, gay and bisexual men account
for more than 60 percent of all syphilis cases.21
b. Shortens
the life span of homosexuals, probably by eight to twenty years (see note 22
for data on homosexual life span studies, some of which are controversial).22 Smoking,
on average, reduces life span by seven years. Since we discourage smoking, why
are we thinking of endorsing homosexuality?
21 The actual AIDS figure is probably higher than 82
percent because nearly all of the supposedly heterosexually-transmitted cases
have a “risk factor not specified.” Since homosexual contact is one of the most
efficient ways of transmitting the disease, many of those not specified cases
probably originated with homosexual contact. See Center for Disease Control, Cases
of HIV infection and AIDS in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2006
HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, Volume 17, April 2008. See Table 17: Reported
AIDS cases, by age category, transmission category, and sex, 2006 and
cumulative—United States and dependent areas. Available online at:
According to the Centers for Disease Control, gay and
bisexual men account for the vast majority of syphilis cases (more than 60
percent in 2005). See also William Dunham, “Syphilis rise in U.S. gay, bisexual
men causes worry,” Reuters, May 4, 2007.
Posted online at http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2007-05-04T170053Z_01_N04373052_RTRUKOC_0_US-SYPHILIS-USA.xml&src=rss&rpc=22.
22 John R. Diggs, Jr. M.D, “The Health Risks of Gay Sex,”
Corporate Resource Council, 2002. Available on-line at http://www.corporateresourcecouncil.org/white_papers/Health_Risks.pdf.
R.S. Hogg, S.A. Strathdee, K.J. Craib, M.V. O’Shaughnessy,
J.S. Montaner, and M.T. Schechter “Modeling the impact of HIV disease on
mortality in gay and bisexual men,” International Journal of Epidemiology,
Vol 26, 657-661.
Available online at http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/26/3/657
Jeffrey Satinover, M.D., Homosexuality and the Politics
of Truth (Grand Rapids,MI: Baker Books, 1996), 54, 69. For a recent study
on HIV soaring among men having sex with teenage boys, see
More controversial studies have been conducted by Dr. Paul
Cameron
Some researchers and
many homosexual activists question the methodology of Dr. Cameron’s life span
studies which found that the median age of death for male homosexuals is in the
forties and lesbians in the fifties. A summary and discussion of Cameron’s
research can be found in “Only the gay die young? An exchange between Warren
Throckmorton, Morten.
c.
Spreads disease to innocent people who never engage in homosexual sex. A
prominent example is Ryan White, the teenage boy who died of AIDS after a blood
transfusion. There are thousands of Ryan Whites—according to the CDC, there are
nearly ten thousand known cases of innocent people in the United States who
have contracted AIDS the same way, including 160 in 2005 and 131 in 2006 (this
despite improvements in blood screening).23 Moreover, there are thousands of
innocent heterosexuals (many are spouses) who have contracted STDs via sexual
contact with bisexuals.
23 Center for Disease Control, Cases of HIV infection and
AIDS in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2005 HIV/AIDS Surveillance
Report, Volume 17, Revised Edition, June 2007. See Table 17: Reported AIDS
cases, by age category, transmission category, and sex, 2005 and cumulative—
United States and dependent areas.
Available online at http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/resources/reports/2005report/table17.htm
for 2006 numbers.
Costs Americans millions in higher health insurance premiums
because increased health costs from homosexual behavior are reflected in those
premiums. In fact, the homosexual lobby has induced some states to prevent
insurers from asking potential consumers any medical questions, including if
they are HIV positive! As a result, every consumer is paying a higher premium
because insurance companies are prevented from identifying clients who engage
in high-risk sexual behavior.
The bottom line is that homosexual behavior is unhealthy.
All sexual behaviors are not equally beneficial, and some of them can have
negative public consequences. Innocent people can and do get hurt. Due to the
devastating health effects of male homosexuality, most of the research into gay
health issues has been concentrated on homosexual men. However, the research
that has been conducted with respect to lesbians does not yield good news.
Lesbians experience many more health problems than heterosexual women.
Even the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association admits the
following about lesbian women:
Lesbians have the richest concentration of risk;
Factors for breast cancer than any subset of women in the
world.
They have higher risks for cervical cancers.
They are more likely to be obese.
They use more tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drugs.
A study of over 1,400 lesbians found the following:
Lesbians experience higher rates of bacterial vaginosis and
hepatitis C.
They have more than twice the number of male partners
than heterosexual women (only 7 percent who identify themselves as lesbians
never have sex with men).
They are 4.5 times more likely to have fifty or more male
sexual partners in a lifetime.
They are three to four times more likely to have sex with
men who are at high risk for HIV— homosexuals, bisexuals, and IV drug users.
Gay and Lesbian Medical
Association, “Ten Things Lesbians Should Discuss With Their Health Care
Provider,” http://www.glma.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageID=691
They are six times more likely to abuse
drugs intravenously.25
Other studies also confirm lesbian health
problems.26
Many homosexual activists get angry when
you cite these health facts. But why would anyone get angry over facts?
As Augustine said, we love the truth when
it enlightens us, but we hate it when it convicts us.
However, other homosexual activists
acknowledge negative health effects and then use them as a reason to support
their cause. This “conservative” case for same-sex marriage suggests that
homosexual monogamy, encouraged by government-backed same-sex marriage, would
alleviate these health problems. Andrew Sullivan writes, “A law
institutionalizing gay marriage would merely reinforce a healthy social trend.
It would also, in the wake of AIDS, qualify as a genuine public health
measure.”27
Unfortunately, health problems and life
span are not likely to improve significantly in so-called committed” homosexual
relationships. Why not? There are at least four reasons. First, monogamy is not
the main issue—homosexual behavior is. Homosexual acts are inherently
unhealthy, not just multiple-partner homosexual acts. This is especially true
of male homosexuality. Does anyone really believe that it is natural and
healthy to insert the penis into the rectum—the organ whose sole purpose is to
expel poisons from the body? The rectum is a one-way street. It’s a sewer. It
was designed that way. Labeling its abuse as an act of “love” will not change
that fact.
The standard homosexual response to this
is, “It’s natural for me because I desire to do it.” I don’t mean “natural” in
the sense of desire, but “natural” in the sense of design. Human beings have
all kinds of “natural” desires to do things that are physically destructive
(e.g. smoking, getting drunk, violence, etc.), and those things often feel
good. But we don’t excuse those behaviors because they come “naturally.” The
human body was not designed for anal intercourse. Such an act violates
For a summary of lesbian health
problems, see John R. Diggs, Jr. M.D, “The Health Risks of Gay Sex,” Corporate Resource Council, 2002, pgs. 5-6.
The natural design, and having a desire to
engage in it does not change the fact that it is unnatural and physically
destructive. Second, coupled homosexuals tend to practice more anal intercourse
and more anal-oral sex than those without a steady partner. They also forego
safer-sex practices because they are “in love.”28 In other words, coupled
homosexuals tend to engage in more risky sexual contact than their single
counterparts. So while married men improve their health and life span by being
faithful to their wives, there is no comparable benefit in homosexual couples.
Third, if AIDS will not break promiscuity
in homosexuals, it is unlikely government-backed marriage will. As AIDS is
falling among heterosexuals, it is rising among homosexual men.
Finally, even if monogamy could
reduce health problems, monogamy is the exception rather than the rule among
homosexuals. The average number of sexual partners in a lifetime for a
heterosexual is four, but for a homosexual it is fifty. The vast Sex in
America survey published by the University of Chicago found monogamy among
heterosexuals to be 83 percent but less than 2 percent for homosexuals.
Another survey had more moderate
results, but still found infidelity in about 62 percent of gay couples. That
led researchers in the Journal of Family Psychology to write, “The
practice of sexual non-monogamy among some gay couples is one variable that
differentiates gay and heterosexual couples.”
Why is monogamy much more common
between men and women? Could it be because men and women are designed for one
another and are therefore complementary? Think about it. One of the
least-mentioned aspects of this debate is how men and women complement one
another. Each sex balances and moderates the other by providing what’s lacking
in the other.
David Dunlap, “In Age of AIDS,
Love and Hope Can Lead to Risk,” New York Times, July 27, 1996.
Mike Stobbe, “CDC understated
number of new HIV infections in US,” Reuters, August 2,2008.
Jeffrey Satinover, M.D., Homosexuality and the Politics
of Truth (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1996), the data from which Dr. Satinover draws these
figures is the Sex
in America survey
published by researchers from the University of Chicago in 1994.
Quoted in Warren Throckmorton,
Ph.D., “Chris Matthews’ Hard Sell: Pay attention to the common Assumptions
about Gay Marriage,” online at http://www.pfm.org/AM/Templatecfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=13210
NBC News - See
Maggie Gallagher and Joshua Baker, “Demand for Same-Sex Marriage: Evidence from
the United States, Canada, and Europe,” Institute for Marriage and Public
Policy, April 26, 2006. Posted online at http://www.marriagedebate.com
See marital status and longevity
in the United States population, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16905719
Andrew Sullivan, “Here Comes the
Groom: A Conservative Case for Gay Marriage,” posted online at http://www.andrewsullivan.com/homosexuality.php - (This one is quite hilarious
because he is making a case ‘for gay marriage’ but all of the sources he
references show how dangerous homosexual sex is).
According to the Centers for
Disease Control, gay and bisexual men account for the vast majority of syphilis
cases (more than 60 percent in the last decade). See also William Dunham,
“Syphilis rise in U.S. gay, bisexual men causes worry,” Reuters, May 4, 2007.
Posted online at:
See Literature Review of the Economic
Impact of Homophobia on Canada (see http://www.lgbthealth.net/downloads/research/Human_Impact_of_Homophobia.pdf
The Problem of Pedophilia, National Association for
Research & Therapy of Homosexuality,
September 21, 2004, available
online at http://www.narth.com/docs/pedophNEW.html
Judith Stacey, In the Name of the Family, (Boston: Beacon Press, 1997),
pgs. 123-124
How about doctors who are
experts in human sexuality – is that a ‘RIGHTWING’ source?
See Dr. Robert L. Spitzer, Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 32, No. 5, October 2003,
pp. 403-
417. For a summary of the findings
see Roy Waller and Linda A. Nicolosi, Spitzer Study Published:
Evidence Found for
Effectiveness of Reorientation Therapy, National Association for Research &
Therapy of Homosexuality,
September 21, 2004, available online at http://www.narth.com/docs/evidencefound.html
Are Same-Sex Couples Just Like
You?
A study of two generations of
British couples (one born 1958, the other 1970) in same-sex cohabiting,
opposite-sex cohabiting and opposite-sex marriage relationships found the
same-sex relationships dramatically more likely to break up than the
opposite-sex cohabiting and married relationships. The probabilities of the
various relationships surviving to the 4 and 8 year anniversaries are dramatic
(p. 981):
