Canada | Gay Marriage | News

BigGayDeal.com

Canadian Paper Aghast By 181% Rise In Same-Sex Marriages

MountiesReporting on new census numbers out today, Kirsten Smith at conservative Canadian newspaper the National Post says the data, including statistics on same-sex marriages, amount to an "erosion" of family values.

From Smith's article:

The sanctity of marriage as the bedrock of the Canadian family is steadily eroding as the country’s social fabric evolves, new census data released today reveals. Instead, although married couples are still the norm — about two thirds of families — their numbers are lagging and only increased by 3.1% between 2006 and 2011. In contrast, the number of common-law couples rose by 13.9% and lone-parent families rose by 8% over the same period.

How ghastly.

Smith is apparently also alarmed by the number of same-sex couples headed to the altar: between 2006 and 2011, the number of gay and lesbian duos tying the knot skyrocketed by 181%.

The census also showed that the majority of married same-sex couples were men, but that more lesbian households had children. Meanwhile, the gay and lesbian couples entering marriage are younger than their heterosexual counterparts, which could mean any number of things.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. For the non-Canuck readers, the Post was created in the late 90s by criminal Conrad Black who didn't like the "liberal bias" of Canadian news media. And by "liberal bias" we mean the sheer fact that there's no FOX NEWS equivalent in Canada, because Canadian broadcasting standards require plain simple facts, and not nonsensical sound-bite rants that appeal to bigots.

    So this is not a shock. The paper is not a real newspaper. It's badly written, in a great big font for stupid people, and contains nothing more than daily doses of "anti-liberal" rhetoric.

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Sep 20, 2012 12:13:13 PM


  2. Thanks, LittleKiwi, for the explanation behind the "National Post" in Canada. It sounds a lot like the Moonie-founded Washington, DC pseudo-newspaper "The Washington Times".

    Anyway, why can no rightwinger - in any country - ever offer a logical and rational explanation as to how SSM erodes "family values" - much less threaten opposite-sex marriage? I've never ever read a coherent answer to this question. All these intolerant homophobes do is parrot this hate-filled expression without ever explaining why it's so. Incredible!

    Posted by: HadenoughBS | Sep 20, 2012 12:24:49 PM


  3. Why are conservatives surprised by the increase in same-sex marriage? Gay people were denied marriage for decades, many murdered and discriminated against without hesitation. Gay couples were purposely hidden in society - take Hitchcock's "Rope" for instance. Farley Granger and John Dall are described as friends but it was a no brainer when I saw the film that they were a committed gay couple (despite the fact that they committed murder together - LOL!).

    Give us the same equality as everyone else and we are going to marry and propagate.

    Posted by: OS2Guy | Sep 20, 2012 12:25:13 PM


  4. As it happens, I was listening to "As It Happens" last night on the CBC station in Vancouver as I was driving here in Southern California (love being able to listen to radio anywhere in the world on my smartphone!) and they did a story on this very subject.

    It appears that there are errors in the Statistics Canada methodology and Carol Off (love her!) interviewed one of their statisticians in Ottawa about the issue.

    The main point is how they determined who was married or co-habitating as same-sex partners also inadvertently included samples of two men, who are married, but not to each other, living in the same house.

    The hypothetical example Carol Off posed (the StatCan guy couldn't confirm or deny) was that of two Cape Breton fisherman who've moved to Fort MacMurray, Alberta to work in the oil sands, who know each other from back home, who have wives and kids, and are sharing a place while working far from home.

    The StatCan guy said this was a likely possibility and cautioned that users of the data shouldn't expect that suddenly there would be large numbers of same-sex households in small towns.

    He also said the trend is definitely up since 2006, but not as much as it would appear on first glance.

    You can find the story on the CBC website. It was broadcast on Wednesday, Sept 19th in the third segment of the show.

    Posted by: Frank Butterfield | Sep 20, 2012 12:35:55 PM


  5. @Frank Butterfield

    The Williams Institute did a study based on the US census data and they tried to account for that overcounting, so the numbers can be cleared up to some degree. But there are also people who are gay-married and don't want tell than on a census form.

    Posted by: Steve | Sep 20, 2012 12:40:58 PM


  6. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/06/23/barbara-kay-rob-fords-sin-against-the-catechism-of-gender-correctness/

    this is what the National Post does. Love this article as it points out all that is wrong with the anti-gay side. we have an article criticizing the pride parade. and a photo of two men .....at a beach. which is nowhere near Yonge Street, which is the parade route. and...the two men on the beach? in fun pride gear? well, they're actually OVER-dressed by beach standards. but they're wearing fun "pride attire" - and that's BADDDD, right? like, dangerous evil bad. because they're, like, having fun and not caring if they "look gay".

    the anti-gay demographic has no logic behind their bigotry. it's just bigotry. they just don't like gays and they really don't like gays who aren't afraid of being seen and known as gay

    thanks, Post, for continuing to pander to the dumbest folks in the country. nobody with a modicum of intelligence reads the post. it's the go-to-paper for those who are one step below a philistine, who want people to think they're 'edumacated'.

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Sep 20, 2012 12:46:08 PM


  7. @Steve -- The Canadian problem came down to how people identify themselves in the census, based on what the form allowed.

    One man is listed as head of household and says he is married.

    A second man occupies the household, says he is married, and lists his relationship to the first man as "Other."

    They are both married, but not to each other.

    Hopefully StatCan will be able to devise a better form in the future that will be able to sort these things out.

    Unfortunately, in the US, the Congress won't allow the Census Bureau to create such a form. Or at least there was a lot of push-back in 2010 on this topic.

    That's why the study you pointed to was necessary. There was a real Don't Ask, Don't Tell mentality in the 2010 census (among all the other Palin / Bachmann nuttiness surrounding it).

    Posted by: Frank Butterfield | Sep 20, 2012 12:48:34 PM


  8. With Global Warming and resources running out on earth we should thank the gays for getting married and helping to control the population.

    Posted by: Bob | Sep 20, 2012 12:50:39 PM


  9. OMG MORE GAY PEOPLE ARE GETTING MARRIED IN CANADA! IT'S RIPPING THE COUNTRY APART AT THE SEAMS! DON'T GET TOO CLOSE OR THEY'LL SHOOT PINK LASERS FROM THEIR EYES THAT'LL INFECT YOU WITH THE GAY!

    Posted by: FuryOfFirestorm | Sep 20, 2012 12:50:43 PM


  10. Is she similarly shocked by the 1/3 of Quebecois (straight) couples who live in common law marriages?

    Posted by: Diogenes Arktos | Sep 20, 2012 12:57:06 PM


  11. These idiots should realize by so many gay people marrying it only firms up that bedrock institution.

    plus we'll make marriage cool again.

    Posted by: oousslander | Sep 20, 2012 1:25:26 PM


  12. The National Post is more like the Wall Street Journal with more news, right wing but not Moonie. Here's another editorial from the National Post: "The non-conventional family boom — Is social conservatism dead politically?" http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/09/19/michael-den-tandt-census-increase-in-non-conventional-families-suggests-social-conservatism-dead-politically/

    The 64,575 lesbian and gay couples (married and common-law) had 6,070 children at home. (Multiply by 10 for U.S. comparison.) Since sexual orientation wasn't in the Census, kids of a gay or lesbian single parent aren't separately identified. The over-count of gays and lesbians is probably offset by "room-mates" who don't consider themselves to be common-law spouses.

    Posted by: Hue-Man | Sep 20, 2012 1:29:11 PM


  13. Thanks to LITTLEKIWI (love you) and Frank (have we met?)I don't have to explain to you that: 1) we do have knuckle-dragging bigots in Canada as well and, 2) we despise them and laugh at them (in that order) as much as you do yours in the United States. Thankfully we're a smaller country, there are fewer of them and they generally keep their cray-cray quiet for the most part, unlike the lovely Michele Bachmann and Miss Tony Perkins.

    Posted by: Gigi | Sep 20, 2012 1:49:08 PM


  14. The Post has another idiot story today about how couples who don't have children are selfish.

    Posted by: Sam I Am | Sep 20, 2012 2:39:10 PM


  15. Regarding Canadian census statistics, if you think they're unreliable now, you just wait. The most recent census was optional. The long form, which is randomly sent to a subset of the population to measure some things (beyond the most basic, sex and age) was made optional for the first time. I received one but I didn't bother filling it out primarily because my answers were meaningless if nobody else had to answer theirs. It's all distorted and worthless. This, of course, is intentional. If the results are unusable, the conservatives can say and do anything they want, and there's no evidence to counter them.

    Posted by: Randy | Sep 20, 2012 2:42:55 PM


  16. Statistics Canada has decided to leave out the same-sex numbers for smaller comminities because, once they (or "somebody" working there) saw the results, they thought they looked too high.
    To me, this decisions makes StatsCan look incompetent.
    The results can still be reported as the answers to WHAT WAS ASKED.
    Yes, there are no doubt some men married to women but living with men. But there is also every other conceivable scenario: a man married to a man but living with a woman; a man legally married to one woman but living with a different woman; a woman married to a man and living with him plus a boarder in the spare room; etc., etc., etc.

    They should report the numbers as answering not more nor less than what was asked.
    If they want to find out how many married people in Canada live separately from their spouses, then that's a different question to ask next time.

    Posted by: GregV | Sep 20, 2012 4:47:37 PM


  17. Uh, so, uh, could somebody explain to me again how same-sex marriages of loving, committed couple is an "erosion of family values"?

    Posted by: jamal49 | Sep 21, 2012 11:09:23 AM


  18. Pathetic and embarrassing quality of analysis and comment from the screed producing National Post. This covers the time frame just after the legalization of same sex marriage in 2005, and so there was a big surge to gay marriage as was expected. Another skewing bit is in the absolute numbers. If you had 100 homo marrieds at the start of the study period and you add 200 more in the time frame you have an increase of 200%. If you have a hetero married base of 9,000,000 [which is close to reality] and you add 300,000 you have an increase of only 3.3%.
    Homo marriage is not taking over my home city of Vancouver although it is pretty much accepted and has not caused the local mountains to fall on the city!!

    Posted by: acd | Sep 21, 2012 11:39:19 AM


  19. express gratitude you for the thoughts on this so far.
    http://www.facebook.com/antoniogiacca

    Posted by: Antonio Giacca | Jan 19, 2013 4:40:11 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Harvey Milk's Nephew Fighting For Fighter Tammy Baldwin« «