What do you think?
Rate this book
Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom
In the first book to respond to the Supreme Court's decision on same-sex marriage, Ryan Anderson draws on the best philosophy and social science to explain what marriage is, why it matters for public policy, and the consequences of its legal redefinition.
Attacks on religious liberty have already begun, and modest efforts to protect believers' rights have met with hysterics from media and corporate elites. Innocent citizens have been coerced and penalized by the government, and Anderson offers a strategy to protect the natural right of religious liberty.
Gathering the latest scholarly research on same-sex parenting, Anderson adds a human face to the statistics with the testimony of children raised by gays and lesbians. He closes with a comprehensive roadmap on how to rebuild a culture of marriage, with work to be done by everyone.
The nation's leading defender of marriage in the media and on university campuses, Ryan Anderson has produced the must-read manual on where to go from here. There are reasonable and compelling arguments for the truth about marriage, but too many of our neighbors haven't heard them. Truth is never on "the wrong side of history," but we have to make the case.
Attacks on religious liberty have already begun, and modest efforts to protect believers' rights have met with hysterics from media and corporate elites. Innocent citizens have been coerced and penalized by the government, and Anderson offers a strategy to protect the natural right of religious liberty.
Gathering the latest scholarly research on same-sex parenting, Anderson adds a human face to the statistics with the testimony of children raised by gays and lesbians. He closes with a comprehensive roadmap on how to rebuild a culture of marriage, with work to be done by everyone.
The nation's leading defender of marriage in the media and on university campuses, Ryan Anderson has produced the must-read manual on where to go from here. There are reasonable and compelling arguments for the truth about marriage, but too many of our neighbors haven't heard them. Truth is never on "the wrong side of history," but we have to make the case.
256 pages, Paperback
First published July 14, 2015
89 people are currently reading
769 people want to read
About the author
Ryan T. Anderson
15books106followersRyan T. Anderson researches and writes about marriage and religious liberty as the William E. Simon Fellow in Religion and a Free Society at The Heritage Foundation. He also focuses on justice and moral principles in economic thought, health care and education, and has expertise in bioethics and natural law theory.
Anderson, who joined Heritage’s DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society in 2012, also is the editor of Public Discourse, the online journal of the Witherspoon Institute of Princeton, N.J.
Anderson’s recent work focuses on the moral and constitutional questions surrounding same-sex “marriage.� He is the co-author with Princeton’s Robert P. George and Sherif Girgis of “What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense� (Encounter Books, December 2012). The three also co-wrote the article “What is Marriage?� in the winter 2011 issue of Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.
Anderson, George and Girgis filed amicus briefs with the 9th Circuit Court on the appeal of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the case reviewing the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8, and with the 1st Circuit Court on the challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act. In January 2013, the co-authors filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court after it agreed to hear the cases.
Anderson’s previous positions include assistant editor of First Things; journalism fellow of the Phillips Foundation; and executive director of the Witherspoon Institute, where he was research assistant to Robert P. George and Jean Bethke Elshtain.
His articles have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, First Things, Weekly Standard, National Review, Ricochet.com, New Atlantis, Claremont Review of Books, Touchstone, Books and Culture, Christianity Today, The City and Human Life Review.
Anderson received his bachelor of arts degree from Princeton University, graduating Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude. He is a doctoral candidate in political philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, where he received his master’s degree. His research spans the natural law tradition in conversation with classical and contemporary liberalism. The tentative title of his dissertation: “Beyond Private Property and Social Welfare: Economic Justice and Economic Rights.�
Anderson, who was born in Baltimore, Md., currently resides in Washington, D.C
(from Heritage Foundation Website)
Anderson, who joined Heritage’s DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society in 2012, also is the editor of Public Discourse, the online journal of the Witherspoon Institute of Princeton, N.J.
Anderson’s recent work focuses on the moral and constitutional questions surrounding same-sex “marriage.� He is the co-author with Princeton’s Robert P. George and Sherif Girgis of “What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense� (Encounter Books, December 2012). The three also co-wrote the article “What is Marriage?� in the winter 2011 issue of Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.
Anderson, George and Girgis filed amicus briefs with the 9th Circuit Court on the appeal of Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the case reviewing the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8, and with the 1st Circuit Court on the challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act. In January 2013, the co-authors filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court after it agreed to hear the cases.
Anderson’s previous positions include assistant editor of First Things; journalism fellow of the Phillips Foundation; and executive director of the Witherspoon Institute, where he was research assistant to Robert P. George and Jean Bethke Elshtain.
His articles have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, First Things, Weekly Standard, National Review, Ricochet.com, New Atlantis, Claremont Review of Books, Touchstone, Books and Culture, Christianity Today, The City and Human Life Review.
Anderson received his bachelor of arts degree from Princeton University, graduating Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude. He is a doctoral candidate in political philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, where he received his master’s degree. His research spans the natural law tradition in conversation with classical and contemporary liberalism. The tentative title of his dissertation: “Beyond Private Property and Social Welfare: Economic Justice and Economic Rights.�
Anderson, who was born in Baltimore, Md., currently resides in Washington, D.C
(from Heritage Foundation Website)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews
July 18, 2015
There are 2 kinds of opponents of the gay marriage (and by extension LGBT equality) movement.
The 1st kind is the likes of Bryan J. Fischer of the Amer Family Association and Todd Starnes of Fox News,these ghouls would scare the bejesus out of U with their anti LGBT bigotry and the 2nd kind is younger 'cool dudes' who give exactly the same bigoted homophobic msg in a civil and polite language,Ryan T.Anderson belongs to this category!He poses as the 'intellectual face' of the conservative movement in media,online and in debates,essentially giving exactly the same homophobic assertions in a palatable language..
If you follow him on twitter (I do) you'd see a slew of anti #LoveWins tweets and articles,many of them denying equal rights to LGBT,esp very harsh on transgender people seeking corrective surgeries as their 'gawd ' messed up and gave them a horribly wrong body!While ogre like Starnes and Fischer indulge in crass crude homophobic language and memes and thus open themselves up to mockery by every1 w 2 brain cells and above,Ryan and people like him spread the same msg without much scrutiny!But the essential bigotry remains the same!
No arguments against marriage equality hold up,just because your gawd spewed nonsense on LGBT,the world doesnt need to ostracize them and deny them basic rights!Reproduction is ONE component out of many in marriage,LGBT couples make better parents than heterosexual couples!World won't end if LGBT couples get to marry and adopt children!Marriage equality doesn't impact you more than it does to your dog and cat,unless you belong to the LGBT community,in which case we won!Yay :-)
Ryan's 'book' repeats same all diatribe of how marriage is bwn 1 man,1 woman for millennia,how xtians are the persecuted minority due to their anti LGBT bigotry (Massive eyeroll!) and how mean gays are elitist and enjoy persecuting 'pious people of faith(BS)' its the same old tripe,recycled hatred packed in acceptable language!
So I am done reading the book,it took me just like 6 hours to go thru the book coz the actual book isn't 256 pages long,main part ends at 76% mark so its actually less than 200 pages long!
And boy,this 'book' aside from being terrible,is actually a very dull reading!Typical incessant whining and 'Christian Persecution' nonsense,however the most appalling aspect of the 'book' is Ryan's shameless self promotion and narcissism..
He claims to have rcvd 1000s of notes telling him that after watching his debates on the issue,many have turned pro-'traditional marriage' even at the liberal kingdoms of Harvard and Yale he found tremendous success in converting the fence sitters etc.
But the shameless part is how he promotes his personal teachers (3 of them separately over 3 pages of the book!) as the voices conservatives should listen to!He also promotes Heritage foundation and basically everyone that is related to him professionally!This smacks of opportunism and ridiculous self promotion!
There are many bizarre pearls in this tome,he has very peculiar ideas about a dad's role in children's lives and in particular in a girl's life!For example:
At 12% mark of the book,Anderson claims that
"BIOLOGICAL fathers produce pheromones-chemicals secreted by men and women that actually slows down the rate of sexual maturity in a young girl!!"
DID YOUR JAW Drop down?His ideas about fathers and daughters would appeal to the Duggar Family and that family in the 1972 movie Deliverance!Or those 'dads' who parade around their virgin daughters in purity balls for sure!But any1 normal would feel sick in their stomach upon reading Anderson's 'Science'.
Also at the same mark (12%) he says Dads tend to be bigger and have deeper voices compared to moms,so that they are better suited to scare away boys who want to have sex with girls!
I mean sure,all cavemen would agree!His 'views' are so out of date,it makes me laugh why is this guy being tauted as the 'voice of reason' in marriage debate!Esp on conservative side lol, the side that endorses creationism but conveniently cites DNA to claim that Trans-people can not change their biological gender and biological reality remains the same no matter how one tries to surgically alter her gender!Ryan does it too!His anti Transgender arguments are as heartless as those ugly ogres like Bryan Fischer,just in 'acceptable language' his ideas are just as sinister and heartless ,when it comes to Transgender part and on gender identity, Anderson is as transphobic as Fischer or Barber or anyone who writes for WND!
Typical straw-man arguments about how women freak out when they see a trans woman using ladies' rooms and how men might misuse the SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) LAWS to use ladies' bathrooms are used multiple time in the book!How many trans identifying persons have raped or harassed women in real life?Can Anderson name ANY?He can't!Trans-women genuinely ARE women and when they use ladies bathrooms they intend to do the same stuff cisgender women want to do!But Anderson whips up transphobia by dedicating a significant part promoting sentiments against an unfortunate minority with 41% suicide rates!To the extent that he dedicates almost ONE chapter out of 9 opposing LAWS dedicated to minimize gender id based or sexual orientation based anti discrimination laws!(That would be the chapter dedicated to opposing SOGI Laws)
What kind of sick person writes a book to deny acceptance to one of the most suicide prone and vulnerable minority?Where does this irrational contempt and hatred comes from?Of course it is religion based!Christianity remains the biggest scourge haunting LGBT people worldwide today,although Jewish texts might echo these idiotic Anti LGBT concepts and ideology,Jews have been very accepting of LGBT esp in last 20 years!Christians like Anderson remain money,muscle and brains behind festering hatred that has very real life consequences,thats why countering these monsters here in America matters!If America changes,world moves in the right directions too!For example,America based Christian orgs remain the driving force behind African Homophobia,making Uganda so toxic for LGBT people!
And when America moves the right way,world does too,for example India seems to follow the lead and is thinking about anti LGBT laws that ar on paper(Law 377) but never applied!So its significant that anti LGBT voices are marginalized and shunned in America so that this world becomes a better and more accepting place for the LGBT people!
Coming back to the book,main part ends at 76% mark!It has 9 chapters in which Anderson makes his case on why Gay marriages should not be legal,he tries to
1-Put Straight one man one woman marriages on a pedestal by lionizing its role in the society
2-Demonizing gay/lesbian relationships as adult lust or a glorified friendship!He sincerely believes that!I saw the same on his controversial iview with Piers Morgan too!
3-Making a case on keeping marriages 'traditional'
The problem is,
If you accept the greatness of marriage and is role in the society,how can you deny the same to gay couples?You have to harbor such prejudice to promote this denial of true happiness to the others!Thats the problem with Christian right,these are haters,some are crude like westboro Baptist Church,some are belligerent and psychotic like Bryan Fischer,others are sophisticated and although at heart similarly hateful to the homogheys,they use polished language to express the same resentment against LGBT equality!Why do these creatures oppose laws dedicated to stop harassment and discrimination based on a person's sexual orientation or gender identity?Only a person who feels a need to actually discriminate would promote that idea! How would a gay person getting married affect a straight marriage?Their arguments about gay marriages causing collapse of marriage is ridiculous and so is the idea that xtians are being persecuted in America!
Hey bigots,wanna know how the real persecution feels like?Lets take a look at these numbers-
1-32 states allow bosses and corporations to fire employees if they are gay or transgender!
2-of all homeless youth,70% of them are LGBT,Christian parents are the ones who kick them out of home coz Jebus!This is astonishing!Same #TCOT parents go to pro life rallies and when they realize that the 'life' they created is Homosexual or transgender they kick them out of home!
3-41% is the suicide rate in transgender community vs 1.6% overall!
That is persecution and it is because of the nonsense that 'GHOWD created a man and a woman'
The fact is,if gawd exists at all:
1-He created LGBT people just the way he created xtian bigots and as a merciful creator he would be fine with LGBT ppl as much as he is with others!
2-He created them and hated the creation the way xtian right does,in which case gawd seems egoistic and pathetic!If we all are his creation and are loved by him,why not he LGBT people too?What kind of parent hates her own creation?
All of this hatred emanates from ego of the christian right,who think very negatively of the LGBT people and hate the so much that they cant even fathom that god created them too!
In the 1st chapter Anderson bored the daylights out of me!He goes into the philosophy and explained why marriage is important but in an astonishingly boring prose!1st 10% in the book is very boring,but at 12% he says fathers produce chemicals that slow down rate of sexual maturity in young women almost by a year and it gave me hope that I will be able to laugh my way thru this supposedly 'intellectual' case for marriage bwn men and women (and not those damn gheys!)
In the 1st chapter he also makes a marriage all about kids!How gays cant make babies and how gay parents will never be equal to straight parents etc
These arguments are well debunked already!Gay households make more money in the US compared to straight couples and the desire to have kids which is something denied to them by biology only makes gay parents even better!There are studies showing this for a fact and consensus is on our side on the issue!
Think of it: Not ALL of the kids who are in the American orphanage systems find parents,bigots would rather them live in infamy not allowing gay parents to adopt children!This hardly would be considered having an orphan's interests at heart!The case by bigots like Anderson against adopting gay parents in nothing but pure prejudice!
Having parents would make a big difference in an orphan's life,education,expenses and other needs esp emotional needs etc,gay parents are as fine and even better in cases of 2 lesbian parents (even he admits this in the book) so you have to have a massive prejudice against them to go at THIS length to deny them happiness!
He basically doesn't understand gay/lesbian relationships!Which tend to be as romantic and intense as straight relationships,even more at times!He may suggest otherwise but its a ploy!He's good at spinning words,for example in Piers Morgan interview,he likened a lesbian relationship to a relationship bwn 2 sisters who grew up old in a same household!He calls gay relationships 'very good friendships' and claims that by elevating gay relationships the governments are denigrating 'friendships'!!
HUH?
How out of touch is this guy?Why do cons call him the voice of reason or doctor or scholar?Wtf is wrong with these people?
Its so dehumanizing,this notion that gay relationships are very good friendships but not equivalent to marriages!
This is precisely why the gay movement focused on marriage equality and guess what?We won,bigots!And we must be relentless in our attempts to further the cause of equality as for the 1st time in 2000 years christian right and religious bigots are on the back-foot!They'll cry foul,persecution but its a habit and basically a fetish of the church!Christianity has always been and still remains that one force that permeates prejudice and homophobia that leads to ACTUAL persecution of the LGBT youth,for example,90% of Hispanic transgender youth is UNEMPLOYED!How is THAT not persecution?There's absolutely nothing wrong in legislatively forcing religious institutions in accepting marriage equality!And revoking their tax exempt statuses if they failed to comply!After the #SCOTUSMarriage decision and #LoveWIns reality,SSM are the law of the land,and if any1 refuses to treat them as such due to whatever christ-y reason is breaking the law!He or she is a felon and should be ostracized as a felon!Its that simple!Go home bigots!
Consider this: in the 4th Chapter titled 'Bake us the damn cake,bigots' Anderson covers the 'plight' of 4 Catholic adoption agencies as they had to hold their noses and allow those yucky gheys to adopt orphans under their care,he builds up their cases as how special and better these agencies are and how they work with compassion for kids with top-notch orphanages yada yada..
The problem with the xtian right is,they are so transparent!If Catholic adoption agencies are sooo compassionate and indeed work for the kids and their future,if they indeed put orphans above all,they'd be happy to help ANY couple qualified to adopt the orphans,Gays or straight!Thats how anybody who TRULY works fr the future or orphans do,no?But These bigoted agencies instead chose to shut down rather than allowing gay couples to adopt cause they had 'sincerely held religious beliefs' (aka yucky homos)
Lets go back in time,the same book (Bible/Qur'an/Other 'holy' screeds but the BIBLE esp in our case for America and this book) and same 'sincerely held religious beliefs' are used to defend slavery,Antisemitism,misogyny and segregation not too long ago!If allowed as exemptions,these 'pious people of faith' (ewww) would have continued holding those same sinister 'beliefs' even today!But we don't allow THAT!Why should one allow homophobia?Homophobia is not some abstract fancy word or concept!It has very real life consequences often fatal to LGBT identifying individuals!
Thats the thing with the religious right,they are so out of touch,its funny but with terrible consequences,lets take Ryan's 'views' as a 'doctor' and a 'scholar' on marriage (aka a soft spoken anti gay troll in other words!) he repeatedly claims that straights are the ones primarily responsible for the demise of marriage with the concept of permanency being lost in the early 60s as the US allowed no fault divorces,so in his ideal vision he would want to take us back in the 60s..A marriage culture of barefoot pregnant women in the kitchens and when interracial marriages weren't allowed by a holy f-ck racist law!If you take off the sophisticated mask from his face,you see a person whose ideal worldview is so backward(not the racist part of course but the overall time-frame and the era he advocates for marriage!) !Thats the tragedy of the conservatives!They are awfully out of touch in culture wars and they keep losing on a horde of issues clutching their pearls in upcoming end of the world!
Look at the major Christian denominations at the forefront of anti LGBT equality movement,Mormons funded Prop8 in California,they allowed Black people into their congregations in 1976!!Southern Baptists are probably the most coarse and horribly homophobic people as a group based on their words and actions,who themselves admitted on being the wrong side of history on racism!Catholics who are most famous for their pedophilia scandals and complacency in the Holocaust are the major anti LGBT marriage trolls even today!Why should normal people listen to ideologies like this from these same people when they're proven wrong time and time again over and over on a litany of social issues?These are the sinister groups (groups,not individuals,as there are many LGBT friendly nice people in all of the 3 major denominations as we see by opinion polls and support for LGBT in America) they are slow to pick up on issues and they should therefore be disregarded in policy matters!
In the 4th chapter he describes a few cases where individuals and groups were ordered by the courts to pay fine and mend their ways for their refusal to serve gay weddings,all of which are so funny and so much talked about,you already know,that bigoted memories Pizza of Indiana,Colorado and Oregon cake bakes,Sweet Cakes by Melissa,florist old lady who was ordered to pay fine etc..
in chapter 5 'religious freedom' (To refuse services to gay couples and bathrooms to transgenders) its the same old cries of 'xtian persecution' and how mean homogheys won't let pious people of faith (massive eyeroll w a cringe) get them away with it!And how Jesus wrote the constitution with a pen Moses gave him so as to allow such 'religious liberty' in the 1st place,he actively suggests 'the right to refuse services' as the most important right(I'm not kidding,these are his words!) That's the thing!Conservatives and other religious or not so religious 'champions' of traditions fail to see the human sides of these seemingly abstract concepts!They hold their cultural norms and traditions to be god given and eternal,but almost ALL social evils ranging from Casteism of Hindu India,Slavery in Christianity and Islam,racism and misogyny canonized by all holy texts,if those traditions were still treated as supreme and eternal all of these were still in practice today,but they are not because we have evolved (that's another one of those,I mean these creationist weirdos refuse to evolve coz they reject evolution in favor of creationism lol) some other examples being voting rights for women and ability of a woman to choose what to do with her body!Both of these issues and the misogyny associate with it was justified by 'proud and god given' traditions!Hindus used to burn widows alive when their husbands died in the name of the perhaps most terrorist-y 'tradition' called 'Sati Pratha' ,honor killings,FGM and Burqa all misogynistic customs are justified w 'traditions' fueled by religious entities!
But we aren't the same as we were in 1662,1919 or 1960!We have collectively evolved on issues,outlawed racism -slavery,gave rights to women to decide what to do w their bodies and voting rights,Indians stopped burning women alive when their husbands died!A combination of a pro-active govt,courts and most importantly public opinions played parts in this evolution,same sinister forces have opposed EACH AND EVERYONE of these evolutions on issues!Thats why they need to be shown their place aggressively by laws and actions by pro LGBT people!This is not the time to stop pursuing the pro LGBT activism!Its the time to double down on it!
Thats where the courts come in,in the book Ryan argues that courts and govt have no business redefining marriages to accommodate gay couples,but courts need to settle these issues coz spoiled religious brats like him would continue to deny equality to world's most persecuted minority aka LGBT otherwise!His argument to leave the issue on people also misses the point of how almost a generation would be deprived of their right to happiness by this seemingly tempting option of democratically settling this issue,by votes!
He's good at word play,many things he says in this book are opinions of others,fake biased religion fueled researchers and 'studies' court decisions etc,so he can shrug his shoulders and say I dont say this,I'm just citing others,but the book is written in such a way that he openly endorses what he cites in the book!
So to sum it all up,he builds up the case for marriage-why its important as an institution,how gays will spoil things if included and how we should continue to deny them marriage equality!
Problem is,there's no valid excuse to deny these rights to gays unless U feel them to be inadequate to have these rights!If U feel marriage is so divine and good for the society,U should be happy that many more couples will get this happiness too!Feeling otherwise purely shows animus in ur heart vs them!
The 1st kind is the likes of Bryan J. Fischer of the Amer Family Association and Todd Starnes of Fox News,these ghouls would scare the bejesus out of U with their anti LGBT bigotry and the 2nd kind is younger 'cool dudes' who give exactly the same bigoted homophobic msg in a civil and polite language,Ryan T.Anderson belongs to this category!He poses as the 'intellectual face' of the conservative movement in media,online and in debates,essentially giving exactly the same homophobic assertions in a palatable language..
If you follow him on twitter (I do) you'd see a slew of anti #LoveWins tweets and articles,many of them denying equal rights to LGBT,esp very harsh on transgender people seeking corrective surgeries as their 'gawd ' messed up and gave them a horribly wrong body!While ogre like Starnes and Fischer indulge in crass crude homophobic language and memes and thus open themselves up to mockery by every1 w 2 brain cells and above,Ryan and people like him spread the same msg without much scrutiny!But the essential bigotry remains the same!
No arguments against marriage equality hold up,just because your gawd spewed nonsense on LGBT,the world doesnt need to ostracize them and deny them basic rights!Reproduction is ONE component out of many in marriage,LGBT couples make better parents than heterosexual couples!World won't end if LGBT couples get to marry and adopt children!Marriage equality doesn't impact you more than it does to your dog and cat,unless you belong to the LGBT community,in which case we won!Yay :-)
Ryan's 'book' repeats same all diatribe of how marriage is bwn 1 man,1 woman for millennia,how xtians are the persecuted minority due to their anti LGBT bigotry (Massive eyeroll!) and how mean gays are elitist and enjoy persecuting 'pious people of faith(BS)' its the same old tripe,recycled hatred packed in acceptable language!
So I am done reading the book,it took me just like 6 hours to go thru the book coz the actual book isn't 256 pages long,main part ends at 76% mark so its actually less than 200 pages long!
And boy,this 'book' aside from being terrible,is actually a very dull reading!Typical incessant whining and 'Christian Persecution' nonsense,however the most appalling aspect of the 'book' is Ryan's shameless self promotion and narcissism..
He claims to have rcvd 1000s of notes telling him that after watching his debates on the issue,many have turned pro-'traditional marriage' even at the liberal kingdoms of Harvard and Yale he found tremendous success in converting the fence sitters etc.
But the shameless part is how he promotes his personal teachers (3 of them separately over 3 pages of the book!) as the voices conservatives should listen to!He also promotes Heritage foundation and basically everyone that is related to him professionally!This smacks of opportunism and ridiculous self promotion!
There are many bizarre pearls in this tome,he has very peculiar ideas about a dad's role in children's lives and in particular in a girl's life!For example:
At 12% mark of the book,Anderson claims that
"BIOLOGICAL fathers produce pheromones-chemicals secreted by men and women that actually slows down the rate of sexual maturity in a young girl!!"
DID YOUR JAW Drop down?His ideas about fathers and daughters would appeal to the Duggar Family and that family in the 1972 movie Deliverance!Or those 'dads' who parade around their virgin daughters in purity balls for sure!But any1 normal would feel sick in their stomach upon reading Anderson's 'Science'.
Also at the same mark (12%) he says Dads tend to be bigger and have deeper voices compared to moms,so that they are better suited to scare away boys who want to have sex with girls!
I mean sure,all cavemen would agree!His 'views' are so out of date,it makes me laugh why is this guy being tauted as the 'voice of reason' in marriage debate!Esp on conservative side lol, the side that endorses creationism but conveniently cites DNA to claim that Trans-people can not change their biological gender and biological reality remains the same no matter how one tries to surgically alter her gender!Ryan does it too!His anti Transgender arguments are as heartless as those ugly ogres like Bryan Fischer,just in 'acceptable language' his ideas are just as sinister and heartless ,when it comes to Transgender part and on gender identity, Anderson is as transphobic as Fischer or Barber or anyone who writes for WND!
Typical straw-man arguments about how women freak out when they see a trans woman using ladies' rooms and how men might misuse the SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) LAWS to use ladies' bathrooms are used multiple time in the book!How many trans identifying persons have raped or harassed women in real life?Can Anderson name ANY?He can't!Trans-women genuinely ARE women and when they use ladies bathrooms they intend to do the same stuff cisgender women want to do!But Anderson whips up transphobia by dedicating a significant part promoting sentiments against an unfortunate minority with 41% suicide rates!To the extent that he dedicates almost ONE chapter out of 9 opposing LAWS dedicated to minimize gender id based or sexual orientation based anti discrimination laws!(That would be the chapter dedicated to opposing SOGI Laws)
What kind of sick person writes a book to deny acceptance to one of the most suicide prone and vulnerable minority?Where does this irrational contempt and hatred comes from?Of course it is religion based!Christianity remains the biggest scourge haunting LGBT people worldwide today,although Jewish texts might echo these idiotic Anti LGBT concepts and ideology,Jews have been very accepting of LGBT esp in last 20 years!Christians like Anderson remain money,muscle and brains behind festering hatred that has very real life consequences,thats why countering these monsters here in America matters!If America changes,world moves in the right directions too!For example,America based Christian orgs remain the driving force behind African Homophobia,making Uganda so toxic for LGBT people!
And when America moves the right way,world does too,for example India seems to follow the lead and is thinking about anti LGBT laws that ar on paper(Law 377) but never applied!So its significant that anti LGBT voices are marginalized and shunned in America so that this world becomes a better and more accepting place for the LGBT people!
Coming back to the book,main part ends at 76% mark!It has 9 chapters in which Anderson makes his case on why Gay marriages should not be legal,he tries to
1-Put Straight one man one woman marriages on a pedestal by lionizing its role in the society
2-Demonizing gay/lesbian relationships as adult lust or a glorified friendship!He sincerely believes that!I saw the same on his controversial iview with Piers Morgan too!
3-Making a case on keeping marriages 'traditional'
The problem is,
If you accept the greatness of marriage and is role in the society,how can you deny the same to gay couples?You have to harbor such prejudice to promote this denial of true happiness to the others!Thats the problem with Christian right,these are haters,some are crude like westboro Baptist Church,some are belligerent and psychotic like Bryan Fischer,others are sophisticated and although at heart similarly hateful to the homogheys,they use polished language to express the same resentment against LGBT equality!Why do these creatures oppose laws dedicated to stop harassment and discrimination based on a person's sexual orientation or gender identity?Only a person who feels a need to actually discriminate would promote that idea! How would a gay person getting married affect a straight marriage?Their arguments about gay marriages causing collapse of marriage is ridiculous and so is the idea that xtians are being persecuted in America!
Hey bigots,wanna know how the real persecution feels like?Lets take a look at these numbers-
1-32 states allow bosses and corporations to fire employees if they are gay or transgender!
2-of all homeless youth,70% of them are LGBT,Christian parents are the ones who kick them out of home coz Jebus!This is astonishing!Same #TCOT parents go to pro life rallies and when they realize that the 'life' they created is Homosexual or transgender they kick them out of home!
3-41% is the suicide rate in transgender community vs 1.6% overall!
That is persecution and it is because of the nonsense that 'GHOWD created a man and a woman'
The fact is,if gawd exists at all:
1-He created LGBT people just the way he created xtian bigots and as a merciful creator he would be fine with LGBT ppl as much as he is with others!
2-He created them and hated the creation the way xtian right does,in which case gawd seems egoistic and pathetic!If we all are his creation and are loved by him,why not he LGBT people too?What kind of parent hates her own creation?
All of this hatred emanates from ego of the christian right,who think very negatively of the LGBT people and hate the so much that they cant even fathom that god created them too!
In the 1st chapter Anderson bored the daylights out of me!He goes into the philosophy and explained why marriage is important but in an astonishingly boring prose!1st 10% in the book is very boring,but at 12% he says fathers produce chemicals that slow down rate of sexual maturity in young women almost by a year and it gave me hope that I will be able to laugh my way thru this supposedly 'intellectual' case for marriage bwn men and women (and not those damn gheys!)
In the 1st chapter he also makes a marriage all about kids!How gays cant make babies and how gay parents will never be equal to straight parents etc
These arguments are well debunked already!Gay households make more money in the US compared to straight couples and the desire to have kids which is something denied to them by biology only makes gay parents even better!There are studies showing this for a fact and consensus is on our side on the issue!
Think of it: Not ALL of the kids who are in the American orphanage systems find parents,bigots would rather them live in infamy not allowing gay parents to adopt children!This hardly would be considered having an orphan's interests at heart!The case by bigots like Anderson against adopting gay parents in nothing but pure prejudice!
Having parents would make a big difference in an orphan's life,education,expenses and other needs esp emotional needs etc,gay parents are as fine and even better in cases of 2 lesbian parents (even he admits this in the book) so you have to have a massive prejudice against them to go at THIS length to deny them happiness!
He basically doesn't understand gay/lesbian relationships!Which tend to be as romantic and intense as straight relationships,even more at times!He may suggest otherwise but its a ploy!He's good at spinning words,for example in Piers Morgan interview,he likened a lesbian relationship to a relationship bwn 2 sisters who grew up old in a same household!He calls gay relationships 'very good friendships' and claims that by elevating gay relationships the governments are denigrating 'friendships'!!
HUH?
How out of touch is this guy?Why do cons call him the voice of reason or doctor or scholar?Wtf is wrong with these people?
Its so dehumanizing,this notion that gay relationships are very good friendships but not equivalent to marriages!
This is precisely why the gay movement focused on marriage equality and guess what?We won,bigots!And we must be relentless in our attempts to further the cause of equality as for the 1st time in 2000 years christian right and religious bigots are on the back-foot!They'll cry foul,persecution but its a habit and basically a fetish of the church!Christianity has always been and still remains that one force that permeates prejudice and homophobia that leads to ACTUAL persecution of the LGBT youth,for example,90% of Hispanic transgender youth is UNEMPLOYED!How is THAT not persecution?There's absolutely nothing wrong in legislatively forcing religious institutions in accepting marriage equality!And revoking their tax exempt statuses if they failed to comply!After the #SCOTUSMarriage decision and #LoveWIns reality,SSM are the law of the land,and if any1 refuses to treat them as such due to whatever christ-y reason is breaking the law!He or she is a felon and should be ostracized as a felon!Its that simple!Go home bigots!
Consider this: in the 4th Chapter titled 'Bake us the damn cake,bigots' Anderson covers the 'plight' of 4 Catholic adoption agencies as they had to hold their noses and allow those yucky gheys to adopt orphans under their care,he builds up their cases as how special and better these agencies are and how they work with compassion for kids with top-notch orphanages yada yada..
The problem with the xtian right is,they are so transparent!If Catholic adoption agencies are sooo compassionate and indeed work for the kids and their future,if they indeed put orphans above all,they'd be happy to help ANY couple qualified to adopt the orphans,Gays or straight!Thats how anybody who TRULY works fr the future or orphans do,no?But These bigoted agencies instead chose to shut down rather than allowing gay couples to adopt cause they had 'sincerely held religious beliefs' (aka yucky homos)
Lets go back in time,the same book (Bible/Qur'an/Other 'holy' screeds but the BIBLE esp in our case for America and this book) and same 'sincerely held religious beliefs' are used to defend slavery,Antisemitism,misogyny and segregation not too long ago!If allowed as exemptions,these 'pious people of faith' (ewww) would have continued holding those same sinister 'beliefs' even today!But we don't allow THAT!Why should one allow homophobia?Homophobia is not some abstract fancy word or concept!It has very real life consequences often fatal to LGBT identifying individuals!
Thats the thing with the religious right,they are so out of touch,its funny but with terrible consequences,lets take Ryan's 'views' as a 'doctor' and a 'scholar' on marriage (aka a soft spoken anti gay troll in other words!) he repeatedly claims that straights are the ones primarily responsible for the demise of marriage with the concept of permanency being lost in the early 60s as the US allowed no fault divorces,so in his ideal vision he would want to take us back in the 60s..A marriage culture of barefoot pregnant women in the kitchens and when interracial marriages weren't allowed by a holy f-ck racist law!If you take off the sophisticated mask from his face,you see a person whose ideal worldview is so backward(not the racist part of course but the overall time-frame and the era he advocates for marriage!) !Thats the tragedy of the conservatives!They are awfully out of touch in culture wars and they keep losing on a horde of issues clutching their pearls in upcoming end of the world!
Look at the major Christian denominations at the forefront of anti LGBT equality movement,Mormons funded Prop8 in California,they allowed Black people into their congregations in 1976!!Southern Baptists are probably the most coarse and horribly homophobic people as a group based on their words and actions,who themselves admitted on being the wrong side of history on racism!Catholics who are most famous for their pedophilia scandals and complacency in the Holocaust are the major anti LGBT marriage trolls even today!Why should normal people listen to ideologies like this from these same people when they're proven wrong time and time again over and over on a litany of social issues?These are the sinister groups (groups,not individuals,as there are many LGBT friendly nice people in all of the 3 major denominations as we see by opinion polls and support for LGBT in America) they are slow to pick up on issues and they should therefore be disregarded in policy matters!
In the 4th chapter he describes a few cases where individuals and groups were ordered by the courts to pay fine and mend their ways for their refusal to serve gay weddings,all of which are so funny and so much talked about,you already know,that bigoted memories Pizza of Indiana,Colorado and Oregon cake bakes,Sweet Cakes by Melissa,florist old lady who was ordered to pay fine etc..
in chapter 5 'religious freedom' (To refuse services to gay couples and bathrooms to transgenders) its the same old cries of 'xtian persecution' and how mean homogheys won't let pious people of faith (massive eyeroll w a cringe) get them away with it!And how Jesus wrote the constitution with a pen Moses gave him so as to allow such 'religious liberty' in the 1st place,he actively suggests 'the right to refuse services' as the most important right(I'm not kidding,these are his words!) That's the thing!Conservatives and other religious or not so religious 'champions' of traditions fail to see the human sides of these seemingly abstract concepts!They hold their cultural norms and traditions to be god given and eternal,but almost ALL social evils ranging from Casteism of Hindu India,Slavery in Christianity and Islam,racism and misogyny canonized by all holy texts,if those traditions were still treated as supreme and eternal all of these were still in practice today,but they are not because we have evolved (that's another one of those,I mean these creationist weirdos refuse to evolve coz they reject evolution in favor of creationism lol) some other examples being voting rights for women and ability of a woman to choose what to do with her body!Both of these issues and the misogyny associate with it was justified by 'proud and god given' traditions!Hindus used to burn widows alive when their husbands died in the name of the perhaps most terrorist-y 'tradition' called 'Sati Pratha' ,honor killings,FGM and Burqa all misogynistic customs are justified w 'traditions' fueled by religious entities!
But we aren't the same as we were in 1662,1919 or 1960!We have collectively evolved on issues,outlawed racism -slavery,gave rights to women to decide what to do w their bodies and voting rights,Indians stopped burning women alive when their husbands died!A combination of a pro-active govt,courts and most importantly public opinions played parts in this evolution,same sinister forces have opposed EACH AND EVERYONE of these evolutions on issues!Thats why they need to be shown their place aggressively by laws and actions by pro LGBT people!This is not the time to stop pursuing the pro LGBT activism!Its the time to double down on it!
Thats where the courts come in,in the book Ryan argues that courts and govt have no business redefining marriages to accommodate gay couples,but courts need to settle these issues coz spoiled religious brats like him would continue to deny equality to world's most persecuted minority aka LGBT otherwise!His argument to leave the issue on people also misses the point of how almost a generation would be deprived of their right to happiness by this seemingly tempting option of democratically settling this issue,by votes!
He's good at word play,many things he says in this book are opinions of others,fake biased religion fueled researchers and 'studies' court decisions etc,so he can shrug his shoulders and say I dont say this,I'm just citing others,but the book is written in such a way that he openly endorses what he cites in the book!
So to sum it all up,he builds up the case for marriage-why its important as an institution,how gays will spoil things if included and how we should continue to deny them marriage equality!
Problem is,there's no valid excuse to deny these rights to gays unless U feel them to be inadequate to have these rights!If U feel marriage is so divine and good for the society,U should be happy that many more couples will get this happiness too!Feeling otherwise purely shows animus in ur heart vs them!
Read
October 19, 2015Ryan T. Anderson has written what will become the standard argument for traditional marriage. Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom is his rational explanation of what marriage is, why it is essential to society, and why it is necessary to enshrine the traditional position in law.
His most important contribution is to identify the two fundamentally competing views of marriage that uncomfortably co-exist in America today. The first is the traditional view of the permanent, exclusive union of one man and one woman inherently aimed at the rearing of children. The competing “consent� version of marriage, in contrast, does not require monogamy, exclusivity, or permanence—only deep consensual romantic attachment.
His most important contribution is to identify the two fundamentally competing views of marriage that uncomfortably co-exist in America today. The first is the traditional view of the permanent, exclusive union of one man and one woman inherently aimed at the rearing of children. The competing “consent� version of marriage, in contrast, does not require monogamy, exclusivity, or permanence—only deep consensual romantic attachment.
July 30, 2015
Inspirational
This is an excellent collection of resources for the ongoing work of promoting the culture of life and marriage. Chapter 8 was particularly inspiring. The author's ability to demonstrate love and human empathy for the people with whom he disagrees is admirable.
This is an excellent collection of resources for the ongoing work of promoting the culture of life and marriage. Chapter 8 was particularly inspiring. The author's ability to demonstrate love and human empathy for the people with whom he disagrees is admirable.
February 19, 2016
Amazing book. Ryan Anderson explains what marriage is, why it matters for public policy, and consequences of its legal redefinition. I am very saddened at the moral decay we are seeing in our country, including the illegitimate SCOTUS decision to legalize same-sex marriage. (I say "illegitimate" because courts are to interpret and apply the law, not MAKE the law. Because marriage isn’t even mentioned in the Constitution, each state should have the right to decide on same-sex marriage.) Gay people in the USA were already free to enter into any romantic relationship they chose; they were not being arrested for being gay. The only reason the government should be involved in marriage is because of the procreative power of male-female marriage; ensuring that children are being raised by both their mother and father is a foundation of a strong society. The government should protect children, but the government's purpose is NOT to affirm the sexual choices of adults. This just opens the floodgates to all sexual choices being normalized: pedophilia is now labeled a "sexual preference" instead of a horrible sexual perversion, and transgender confusion is being encouraged (resulting in transgender treatments being paid for with taxpayer dollars and endangering girls and women by allowing men into their restrooms and locker rooms). It’s very sad to hear of people losing their jobs and/or receiving large fines because they do not want to take part in a same-sex wedding ceremony. Anderson’s well-researched book is invaluable to those who want to understand the traditional male-female definition of marriage, why it's important for children and for society (just look at Detroit to see how well it's working out for children to be raised by only one of their biological parents), what caused the erosion of marriage and sexual morality, and what we can do now to stand up for the truth of marriage.
Quotes:
“In the realm of sex and marriage, we have seen the unfettered desire of the strong-- adults, the affluent-- pursued at the expense of the vulnerable-- children, the poor. To avoid the tyranny of sexual desire, which in the name of freedom and dignity breaks hearts and homes and spawns loneliness, we must commit to witnessing to the truth of human nature.� -p. 203
“Many scholars and policymakers have concluded, unsurprisingly, that America’s most pressing social problem is absentee fathers...But how will we insist that fathers are essential when the law has redefined marriage to make fathers optional?� -p. 41
Quoted from a liberal publication (The Atlantic): “The social-science evidence is in: though it may benefit the adults involved, the dissolution of intact two-parent families is harmful to large numbers of children. Moreover, the author argues, family diversity in the form of increasing numbers of single-parent and stepparent families does not strengthen the social fabric but, rather, dramatically weakens and undermines society.� -p. 150
“Because of human frailty, it isn’t always possible for a child to be raised in his natural family, but that should be the ideal to which our policy aspires. And we should never intentionally deprive a child of such an upbringing. And yet redefining marriage does precisely that.� -p. 53
“But the court’s redefinition of marriage makes it about the romantic desires of consenting adults rather than about the needs of children and their right to a relationship with their mother and father.� -p. 76
“Religious liberty is one of the natural rights that governments are instituted to secure. While Americans are free to live as they wish, they should not use the force of government to impose their sexual values on others.� -p. 122
A 1952 court case decided that “‘the institution of marriage� serves ‘the public interest� because it ‘channels biological drives that might otherwise become socially destructive� and ‘ensures the care and education of children in a stable environment.’� -p. 139
Why gay marriage is not the same issue as interracial marriage: “Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed that his children would be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. A person’s character is expressed in his voluntary actions, and it is reasonable to make judgments about actions. Race implies nothing about one’s actions.� -p. 141
“While marriage offers the advantages of biological ties, sexual complementarity, and stability, the households of same-sex couples share the deficiencies in these areas of single or divorced family structures...Good social science could do for the same-sex marriage debate what ultrasound did for the abortion debate by revealing truths that people prefer to ignore.� -p. 155, 162
“‘There is no difference between the value and worth of heterosexual and homosexual persons...because we are all humans created in the image of God.� But not all RELATIONSHIPS are equal; ‘When it comes to procreation and child-rearing, same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples are wholly unequal and should be treated differently for the sake of the children.� -p. 166
From a letter to the Supreme Court written by a woman raised by 2 lesbian mothers: “‘Does being raised under the rainbow miraculously wipe away all the negative effects and pain surrounding the loss and daily deprivation of one or both parents?...I unequivocally oppose criminalizing gay relationships. But defining marriage correctly criminalizes nothing...The bonds with one’s parents deserve to be protected. Do not fall prey to the false narrative that adult feelings should trump children’s rights. The onus must be on adults to conform to the needs of children, not the other way around.’�
A review of the book:
I love listening to speeches (and debates) by Ryan T. Anderson, such as:
Quotes:
“In the realm of sex and marriage, we have seen the unfettered desire of the strong-- adults, the affluent-- pursued at the expense of the vulnerable-- children, the poor. To avoid the tyranny of sexual desire, which in the name of freedom and dignity breaks hearts and homes and spawns loneliness, we must commit to witnessing to the truth of human nature.� -p. 203
“Many scholars and policymakers have concluded, unsurprisingly, that America’s most pressing social problem is absentee fathers...But how will we insist that fathers are essential when the law has redefined marriage to make fathers optional?� -p. 41
Quoted from a liberal publication (The Atlantic): “The social-science evidence is in: though it may benefit the adults involved, the dissolution of intact two-parent families is harmful to large numbers of children. Moreover, the author argues, family diversity in the form of increasing numbers of single-parent and stepparent families does not strengthen the social fabric but, rather, dramatically weakens and undermines society.� -p. 150
“Because of human frailty, it isn’t always possible for a child to be raised in his natural family, but that should be the ideal to which our policy aspires. And we should never intentionally deprive a child of such an upbringing. And yet redefining marriage does precisely that.� -p. 53
“But the court’s redefinition of marriage makes it about the romantic desires of consenting adults rather than about the needs of children and their right to a relationship with their mother and father.� -p. 76
“Religious liberty is one of the natural rights that governments are instituted to secure. While Americans are free to live as they wish, they should not use the force of government to impose their sexual values on others.� -p. 122
A 1952 court case decided that “‘the institution of marriage� serves ‘the public interest� because it ‘channels biological drives that might otherwise become socially destructive� and ‘ensures the care and education of children in a stable environment.’� -p. 139
Why gay marriage is not the same issue as interracial marriage: “Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed that his children would be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. A person’s character is expressed in his voluntary actions, and it is reasonable to make judgments about actions. Race implies nothing about one’s actions.� -p. 141
“While marriage offers the advantages of biological ties, sexual complementarity, and stability, the households of same-sex couples share the deficiencies in these areas of single or divorced family structures...Good social science could do for the same-sex marriage debate what ultrasound did for the abortion debate by revealing truths that people prefer to ignore.� -p. 155, 162
“‘There is no difference between the value and worth of heterosexual and homosexual persons...because we are all humans created in the image of God.� But not all RELATIONSHIPS are equal; ‘When it comes to procreation and child-rearing, same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples are wholly unequal and should be treated differently for the sake of the children.� -p. 166
From a letter to the Supreme Court written by a woman raised by 2 lesbian mothers: “‘Does being raised under the rainbow miraculously wipe away all the negative effects and pain surrounding the loss and daily deprivation of one or both parents?...I unequivocally oppose criminalizing gay relationships. But defining marriage correctly criminalizes nothing...The bonds with one’s parents deserve to be protected. Do not fall prey to the false narrative that adult feelings should trump children’s rights. The onus must be on adults to conform to the needs of children, not the other way around.’�
A review of the book:
I love listening to speeches (and debates) by Ryan T. Anderson, such as:
July 25, 2016
This is a great book. I really got a deeper understanding of the LGBT, etc. agenda and the ground it let to future problems.
If you don't understand what is the big deal about same sex marriage and heterosexual marriage discusion. THIS BOOK IS FOR YOU!
If you are interested in learning more about how to defend your view about marriage between a man and woman. THIS BOOK IS FOR YOU!
If you want to know the consequences of the same sex marriage. THIS BOOK IS FOR YOU!
NOTE: If you are not living in USA or you are not a lawyer. There a going to be some very boring chapters. Anyway the first four chapters are very easy to read and understand. But every chapters can be read with x-ray reading technique.
Enjoy it!
If you don't understand what is the big deal about same sex marriage and heterosexual marriage discusion. THIS BOOK IS FOR YOU!
If you are interested in learning more about how to defend your view about marriage between a man and woman. THIS BOOK IS FOR YOU!
If you want to know the consequences of the same sex marriage. THIS BOOK IS FOR YOU!
NOTE: If you are not living in USA or you are not a lawyer. There a going to be some very boring chapters. Anyway the first four chapters are very easy to read and understand. But every chapters can be read with x-ray reading technique.
Enjoy it!
October 24, 2016
EXCELLENT - well-researched and well-explained in layman's terms for the reader. Definitely worth reading.
June 14, 2018
Obviously rushed for publication, as Anderson spends half the book just providing block quotations of the Supreme Court dissenting opinions. Still, I'd say this is probably the best single book in terms of presenting conservative arguments against the Supreme Court decision to legalize same-sex marriage; I think it's reasonably convincing overall (particularly the social science sections), though hopefully a longer and more scholarly book on this topic will be released in the future, as there were quite a few shortcomings in Truth Overruled.
For example, Anderson would constantly quote a single fringe op-ed column or radical trans group at Wellesley or whatever, and then act as if these figures were typical representations of "the Left" or of "gay activists"; this is just sloppy sensationalism, Fox News culture war stuff. I was also surprised that Anderson was so naive about assuming the truth (often simply referring to it as "reason") of various normative claims regarding Aristotelian-Thomist natural law, a position that isn't universally held even among Christian philosophers, let alone all rational agents. He also allows various assumptions -- e.g., that "less government" is inherently good or that "assisted reproductive technologies" are inherently bad, etc. -- to do a lot of the heavy lifting in his arguments, apparently not realizing or not caring that the average reader will not agree with these assumptions. In short I don't think he really understands how much he's taking his own background (the tiny academic world of Catholic/Burkean conservatism) for granted.
Another annoying thing was that he kept comparing same-sex parenting to birth-parent parenting, and noting that the former ultimately leads to worse outcomes than the latter (the social science is quite clear on this), yet somehow not realizing that the average same-sex couple is not kidnapping a baby from its birth parents but often adopting a child who would have been in an even worse situation. There's also a curiously un-self-aware passage where he writes, "Americans should not use the force of government to impose their sexual values on others," I guess not understanding that the average progressive obviously feels as if Judeo-Christian culture has been imposing its sexual values on them.
What's hilarious is that I basically agree with Anderson on most points, but I just wish he hadn't used such sloppy argumentation; he's obviously a smart guy so I'll just assume that Regnery was pressuring him to finish a book as quickly as humanly possible.
For example, Anderson would constantly quote a single fringe op-ed column or radical trans group at Wellesley or whatever, and then act as if these figures were typical representations of "the Left" or of "gay activists"; this is just sloppy sensationalism, Fox News culture war stuff. I was also surprised that Anderson was so naive about assuming the truth (often simply referring to it as "reason") of various normative claims regarding Aristotelian-Thomist natural law, a position that isn't universally held even among Christian philosophers, let alone all rational agents. He also allows various assumptions -- e.g., that "less government" is inherently good or that "assisted reproductive technologies" are inherently bad, etc. -- to do a lot of the heavy lifting in his arguments, apparently not realizing or not caring that the average reader will not agree with these assumptions. In short I don't think he really understands how much he's taking his own background (the tiny academic world of Catholic/Burkean conservatism) for granted.
Another annoying thing was that he kept comparing same-sex parenting to birth-parent parenting, and noting that the former ultimately leads to worse outcomes than the latter (the social science is quite clear on this), yet somehow not realizing that the average same-sex couple is not kidnapping a baby from its birth parents but often adopting a child who would have been in an even worse situation. There's also a curiously un-self-aware passage where he writes, "Americans should not use the force of government to impose their sexual values on others," I guess not understanding that the average progressive obviously feels as if Judeo-Christian culture has been imposing its sexual values on them.
What's hilarious is that I basically agree with Anderson on most points, but I just wish he hadn't used such sloppy argumentation; he's obviously a smart guy so I'll just assume that Regnery was pressuring him to finish a book as quickly as humanly possible.
April 25, 2016
Truth speaks to the honest in heart through clear and unmistakable terms, and it rings sweet and pure. I wish everyone would read Ryan T. Anderson's wise and reasoned conclusions about the truth of what marriage is, and about the future fight for that truth which, until just a few short years ago, was universally accepted throughout all time and in every society. Instead, the public has willingly plunged over the cliff in a grand experiment that sacrifices the wants and needs of children - who fare best with mothers and fathers - to the whims of consenting adult pairs based on nothing more than their emotional love.
“[T]he Supreme Court’s ruling didn’t expand marriage; it redefined marriage.�
The concerted efforts of a determined agenda intent not just on expanding the definition of marriage, but on destroying it all together, have convinced even the highest court of the land to bend to the impulses of a public informed not by the Constitution, but by a generation of lies taught portrayed by such authorities as Will and Grace, Glee, and Modern Family. “Nothing in the Constitution justifies the redefinition of marriage by judges.�
“Only ideologues think their side has all the arguments and the other side has none.� These ideologues demagogue anyone who dares to disagree, and label them as "hateful bigots" for having a different, reasonable opinion.
“Sloganeering aside, appeals to “marriage equality� betray sloppy reasoning.�
“Law teaches. It shapes ideas, which shape what people do. A radical change in the law of marriage will have at least four harmful consequences that we can foresee. The needs and rights of children will be subordinated to the desires of adults. The marital norms of monogamy, exclusivity, and permanence will be weakened. Unborn children will be put at even more risk than they already are. And religious liberty—Americans� “first freedom”—will be threatened.�
Anderson rightly likens the cause to Roe v. Wade, the circumstances of which are remarkably similar: little developed scientific data about the potential consequences, a young electorate insisting on being on the "right side of history," (much like Hitler Youth claimed to be), and politicians who "evolved" to preserve their own power. Only now, a generation later, science has proven the viability of life much earlier than was once thought. What mother or father who has seen the ultrasound of their expected child with its heart beating and organs and limbs developing into recognition can deny the life of that unborn human?
Similarly, with gay marriage the "right side of history!" is the wrong side of the best interests of children. “Redefining marriage redefines parenthood.”A generation from now children produced who were in industries created to manufacture children for resale to wealthy couples for whom procreation is a biological impossibility will speak out against a society who enlarged the probabilities of denying real parents to them. Only then it will be too late for them.
“How can the law teach that fathers are essential, for instance, when it has officially made them optional?�
Anderson includes a poignant quote from George Weigel, the biographer of Pope John Paul II, about what we are seeing today, including in the aftermath of the Obergefell decision reinventing marriage:
I believe the ideas in this book are not only prescient, they will also prove prophetic. I only wish the public was more interested in prophets rooted in wisdom than it is in the fragmented "truths" entrenched in current notions of individualism and, indeed, large-scale self-interest at the expense of children and of the fabric of society in general.
“[T]he Supreme Court’s ruling didn’t expand marriage; it redefined marriage.�
The concerted efforts of a determined agenda intent not just on expanding the definition of marriage, but on destroying it all together, have convinced even the highest court of the land to bend to the impulses of a public informed not by the Constitution, but by a generation of lies taught portrayed by such authorities as Will and Grace, Glee, and Modern Family. “Nothing in the Constitution justifies the redefinition of marriage by judges.�
“Only ideologues think their side has all the arguments and the other side has none.� These ideologues demagogue anyone who dares to disagree, and label them as "hateful bigots" for having a different, reasonable opinion.
“Sloganeering aside, appeals to “marriage equality� betray sloppy reasoning.�
Pretending as a matter of law that men and women are interchangeable, that “monogamish� relationships work just as well as monogamous relationships, that “throuples� are the same as couples, and that “wedlease� is preferable to wedlock will only lead to more broken homes, more broken hearts, and more intrusive government. Americans should reject such revisionism and work to restore the essentials that make marriage so important for societal welfare: sexual complementarity, monogamy, exclusivity, and permanence.
“Law teaches. It shapes ideas, which shape what people do. A radical change in the law of marriage will have at least four harmful consequences that we can foresee. The needs and rights of children will be subordinated to the desires of adults. The marital norms of monogamy, exclusivity, and permanence will be weakened. Unborn children will be put at even more risk than they already are. And religious liberty—Americans� “first freedom”—will be threatened.�
Anderson rightly likens the cause to Roe v. Wade, the circumstances of which are remarkably similar: little developed scientific data about the potential consequences, a young electorate insisting on being on the "right side of history," (much like Hitler Youth claimed to be), and politicians who "evolved" to preserve their own power. Only now, a generation later, science has proven the viability of life much earlier than was once thought. What mother or father who has seen the ultrasound of their expected child with its heart beating and organs and limbs developing into recognition can deny the life of that unborn human?
Similarly, with gay marriage the "right side of history!" is the wrong side of the best interests of children. “Redefining marriage redefines parenthood.”A generation from now children produced who were in industries created to manufacture children for resale to wealthy couples for whom procreation is a biological impossibility will speak out against a society who enlarged the probabilities of denying real parents to them. Only then it will be too late for them.
“How can the law teach that fathers are essential, for instance, when it has officially made them optional?�
Anderson includes a poignant quote from George Weigel, the biographer of Pope John Paul II, about what we are seeing today, including in the aftermath of the Obergefell decision reinventing marriage:
Freedom untethered from truth is freedom's worst enemy. For if there is only your truth and my truth, and neither one of us recognizes a transcendent moral standard (call it "the truth") by which to adjudicate our differences, then the only way to settle the argument is for you to impose your power on me, or for me to impose my power on you. Freedom untethered from truth leads to chaos; chaos leads to anarchy; and since human beings cannot tolerate anarchy, tyranny as the answer to the human imperative of order is just around the corner. The false humanism of the freedom of indifference leads first to freedom's decay, and then to freedom's demise.
I believe the ideas in this book are not only prescient, they will also prove prophetic. I only wish the public was more interested in prophets rooted in wisdom than it is in the fragmented "truths" entrenched in current notions of individualism and, indeed, large-scale self-interest at the expense of children and of the fabric of society in general.
November 5, 2015
When questioned about why they are against same sex marriage, many people of faith cite only their religious texts or creeds. Here in this book, Ryan T. Anderson makes a thoughtful and substantial case on why same sex marriage is bad for society without quoting the Bible. It's an apologetic for traditional marriage.
He addresses the several negative effects S.S. M. (same sex marriage) has on societies from the substantial, negative effect it has on children, to how S.S.M. undermines traditional marriage, and how legalizing S.S.M. threatens religious freedom.
Besides doing a great job of explaining the two different definitions of marriage, he also explains why equating the right to marry someone of the same gender with the right of marrying someone of a different race is a false equation that doesn't add up.
This is a must read for supporters of religious freedom and especially for those who care about the well being of children. This book promotes social justice for some of the most vulnerable among us - our children.
The reality of same sex marriages and relationships is SO different from how they're portrayed in the media and by the political Left.
A few quotes -
"America is in a time of transition. The court has redefined marriage, and beliefs about human sexuality are changing. Will the right to dissent be protected? Will our right to speak and act in accord with what Americans had always believed about marriage—that it’s a union of husband and wife—be tolerated? Most Americans say yes, they want to be a tolerant, pluralistic nation. They want peaceful coexistence. I agree with them. It’s only ideologues and activists who want to sow the seeds of disharmony by having the government coerce those with whom they disagree. We must work together to protect these cherished American values."
"No principle limits what will be classified as a sexual orientation or gender identity in the future. Indeed, Wesleyan College has extended the LGBT acronym and created a “safe space� for LGBTTQQFAGPBDSM: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Transsexual, Queer, Questioning, Flexual, Asexual, Genderf—k, Polyamorous, Bondage/Disciple, Dominance/Submission, Sadism/Masochism.49 Will SOGI laws be used to protect these orientations and identities as well? If not, why not? SOGI, (Sexual Orientation / Gender Identity laws) McHugh and Bradley conclude, would “lead to insurmountable enforcement difficulties, arbitrary and even whimsical results in many cases, and it would have an unjustified chilling effect upon all too many employers� decisions."
"In closing her letter to Justice Kennedy, (Katy) Faust, notes that the court has a duty to protect the freedoms of adults but also to provide equal protection to the most vulnerable among us. Her solution? Freedom for gays and lesbians and the truth about marriage: 'I unequivocally oppose criminalizing gay relationships. But defining marriage correctly criminalizes nothing.' So she urges Justice Kennedy, 'The bonds with one’s natural parents deserve to be protected. Do not fall prey to the false narrative that adult feelings should trump children’s rights. The onus must be on adults to conform to the needs of children, not the other way around.'" - Quoting Katy Faust who was raised by a same sex couple.
He addresses the several negative effects S.S. M. (same sex marriage) has on societies from the substantial, negative effect it has on children, to how S.S.M. undermines traditional marriage, and how legalizing S.S.M. threatens religious freedom.
Besides doing a great job of explaining the two different definitions of marriage, he also explains why equating the right to marry someone of the same gender with the right of marrying someone of a different race is a false equation that doesn't add up.
This is a must read for supporters of religious freedom and especially for those who care about the well being of children. This book promotes social justice for some of the most vulnerable among us - our children.
The reality of same sex marriages and relationships is SO different from how they're portrayed in the media and by the political Left.
A few quotes -
"America is in a time of transition. The court has redefined marriage, and beliefs about human sexuality are changing. Will the right to dissent be protected? Will our right to speak and act in accord with what Americans had always believed about marriage—that it’s a union of husband and wife—be tolerated? Most Americans say yes, they want to be a tolerant, pluralistic nation. They want peaceful coexistence. I agree with them. It’s only ideologues and activists who want to sow the seeds of disharmony by having the government coerce those with whom they disagree. We must work together to protect these cherished American values."
"No principle limits what will be classified as a sexual orientation or gender identity in the future. Indeed, Wesleyan College has extended the LGBT acronym and created a “safe space� for LGBTTQQFAGPBDSM: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Transsexual, Queer, Questioning, Flexual, Asexual, Genderf—k, Polyamorous, Bondage/Disciple, Dominance/Submission, Sadism/Masochism.49 Will SOGI laws be used to protect these orientations and identities as well? If not, why not? SOGI, (Sexual Orientation / Gender Identity laws) McHugh and Bradley conclude, would “lead to insurmountable enforcement difficulties, arbitrary and even whimsical results in many cases, and it would have an unjustified chilling effect upon all too many employers� decisions."
"In closing her letter to Justice Kennedy, (Katy) Faust, notes that the court has a duty to protect the freedoms of adults but also to provide equal protection to the most vulnerable among us. Her solution? Freedom for gays and lesbians and the truth about marriage: 'I unequivocally oppose criminalizing gay relationships. But defining marriage correctly criminalizes nothing.' So she urges Justice Kennedy, 'The bonds with one’s natural parents deserve to be protected. Do not fall prey to the false narrative that adult feelings should trump children’s rights. The onus must be on adults to conform to the needs of children, not the other way around.'" - Quoting Katy Faust who was raised by a same sex couple.
October 27, 2016
I believe this is a great summary of the current situation regarding same-sex marriage and the consequences for religious liberty, regardless if you are for or against the issue. But the scope of the book is too broad, every chapter deserves its own book and I don´t think Anderson manages to exhaust in any way each of the subjects. If you´re not exposed to the current situation and its latest development (as of today) this book is perfect to understand the arguments for traditional marriage, against legal activism in court, and the real consequences of the Obergefell decision for religious liberties in USA.
It is worth noting that his treatment of the definition and purpose of marriage is not developed (not even close) as it was in his short book with Sherif Girgis “What is Marriage? Man and Woman: a Defense�. For a better understanding of his core idea presented in chapter one I´ll really recommend looking at that book first (or later). And this was my “problem� with the book; most of what it presents is not new. There are no new arguments and, unless you don´t follow up on news on the subject, and it doesn’t provide new information. However, as I said before, it is a great summary, and I really found usefull the references that the author provides of studies of the effects of different family structures on the development of children (“hard data� that goes beyond simple gut-disagreement).
The outlook presented here is quite grim, and surely most of this is completely neglected on the news. Anderson suggests the creation of a community (or a movement) that can articulate a coherent defense of traditional marriage, and I think this book does great to provide information sources and an overview of many of the aspect that need to be taken into account. There is, however, a huge omission in the book and that is a treatment of Civil Unions or what solutions could be given to the legal vacuum that same-sex couples had (if we were, for example, to go back to the situation before the Obergefell decision), or exactly what sort of benefits or incentives traditional marriages should get from the government that differentiates them from other sorts of unions (like same-sex marriage). Overall this is a good book, not one that will change your perspective if you already know the content, but it´s worth the time.
It is worth noting that his treatment of the definition and purpose of marriage is not developed (not even close) as it was in his short book with Sherif Girgis “What is Marriage? Man and Woman: a Defense�. For a better understanding of his core idea presented in chapter one I´ll really recommend looking at that book first (or later). And this was my “problem� with the book; most of what it presents is not new. There are no new arguments and, unless you don´t follow up on news on the subject, and it doesn’t provide new information. However, as I said before, it is a great summary, and I really found usefull the references that the author provides of studies of the effects of different family structures on the development of children (“hard data� that goes beyond simple gut-disagreement).
The outlook presented here is quite grim, and surely most of this is completely neglected on the news. Anderson suggests the creation of a community (or a movement) that can articulate a coherent defense of traditional marriage, and I think this book does great to provide information sources and an overview of many of the aspect that need to be taken into account. There is, however, a huge omission in the book and that is a treatment of Civil Unions or what solutions could be given to the legal vacuum that same-sex couples had (if we were, for example, to go back to the situation before the Obergefell decision), or exactly what sort of benefits or incentives traditional marriages should get from the government that differentiates them from other sorts of unions (like same-sex marriage). Overall this is a good book, not one that will change your perspective if you already know the content, but it´s worth the time.
June 30, 2017
Dr Anderson is the best I've come across at trying to find non-religious arguments for supporting heterosexual monogamous marriage (I refuse to use the term "traditional marriage") and nor legally recognising same-sex marriage. And yet, his main argument (that kids grow up better on average in households with their biological, married parents, and so government should only recognise heterosexual, monogamous marriages to support child development) strikes me as rather authoritarian and also as proving too much.
If we are to give special civil privileges for heteosexual, monogamous marriages, or otherwise restrict same-sex marriage because children do better in such an environment, then taking Dr Anderson's argument to its conclusion we would have to ban or restrict divorce, adoption and IVF as these result to similar harms to children. Dr Anderson may well want to restrict all of these, but society has clearly decided not to. Nor, in my opinion, should it - the test should not be what's "best" in some cosmic way (and certainly not what I, Dr Anderson, the Pope or anyone else thinks is "best") but what's not unacceptably bad. Same-sex marriage may not be the best environment to bring up kids, but neither Dr Anderson nor anyone else has proved it's so objectively bad that it should be banned.
I also don't buy the point that "same-sex marriage" as such was never banned. It was - such marriages were illegal in the same way that bigamous marriages were (and are) illegal, or marriages of close relations were (and are) illegal - in all of these cases the couple, if caught, get prosecuted. It is true that same-sex couples could live together, and perhaps have a commitment ceremony, but they could not obtain the legal benefits of marriage and were liable to prosecution if they tried.
Nonetheless I do have to give Dr Anderson credit for making his case in an engaging style and based on evidence (even if I'm not necessarily equipped to check his evidence). I must also acknowledge that Dr Anderson does pointedly make the case for why, if same-sex marriage should be recognised, then why not polygamy (which has more historical precedent than same-sex marriage) or temporary marriage (though easy divorce has reduced the permanence of marriage).
Edit: I'm a softie. I did give Dr Anderson only three stars. I've added an extra for powerfulness.
If we are to give special civil privileges for heteosexual, monogamous marriages, or otherwise restrict same-sex marriage because children do better in such an environment, then taking Dr Anderson's argument to its conclusion we would have to ban or restrict divorce, adoption and IVF as these result to similar harms to children. Dr Anderson may well want to restrict all of these, but society has clearly decided not to. Nor, in my opinion, should it - the test should not be what's "best" in some cosmic way (and certainly not what I, Dr Anderson, the Pope or anyone else thinks is "best") but what's not unacceptably bad. Same-sex marriage may not be the best environment to bring up kids, but neither Dr Anderson nor anyone else has proved it's so objectively bad that it should be banned.
I also don't buy the point that "same-sex marriage" as such was never banned. It was - such marriages were illegal in the same way that bigamous marriages were (and are) illegal, or marriages of close relations were (and are) illegal - in all of these cases the couple, if caught, get prosecuted. It is true that same-sex couples could live together, and perhaps have a commitment ceremony, but they could not obtain the legal benefits of marriage and were liable to prosecution if they tried.
Nonetheless I do have to give Dr Anderson credit for making his case in an engaging style and based on evidence (even if I'm not necessarily equipped to check his evidence). I must also acknowledge that Dr Anderson does pointedly make the case for why, if same-sex marriage should be recognised, then why not polygamy (which has more historical precedent than same-sex marriage) or temporary marriage (though easy divorce has reduced the permanence of marriage).
Edit: I'm a softie. I did give Dr Anderson only three stars. I've added an extra for powerfulness.
June 19, 2017
Ryan Anderson is perhaps the most hated innocuous man in America. I know him personally a little. I actually own one of his former pieces of furniture. But this unassuming Notre Dame PhD still in his 30's decided to become the defender of the idea that the only real definition, and the only legitimate, purpose of Marriage, exists in the context of one man and one woman.
He has one major arrow in his quiver: his opponents haven't bothered to debate the issue meaningfully, and he's the first one to the party actually discussing the fundamental issues. His opponents can, and do, vehemently disagree with him on fundamentals, but, as he points out, that hasn't really been discussed. The real disagreement isn't over "equality," it's about the very meaning and purpose of marriage. He points out, irrefutably in my view, that the modern view of marriage has simply sidestepped the issue and made a broad claim of equality, to great effect he'll readily admit, but nonetheless, without having grappled with the fundamentals. It's not that they don't have a case, and he makes that clear. They do, and it largely comes down to very fundamental questions that cannot really be compromised. He merely points out, they skipped over that debate because they found it inconvenient and it was politically easier to skip steps.
He then goes through the implications of his fundamental premise being rejected. The past year and a half have shown him to be spectacularly right and I think the pattern is likely to continue. Of course, his opponents don't much care about any of this, but other people are likely to find some of the implications troubling.
Either way, even fair-minded opponents ought to pay him the complement of being the first one to actually dig into this issue in a meaningful way. The purpose and meaning of marriage was assumed for so long that nobody had bothered to write a meaningful defense of it before it was too late for a generation. Anderson will remain a lonely warrior for some time, most likely. But that doesn't make him wrong.
He has one major arrow in his quiver: his opponents haven't bothered to debate the issue meaningfully, and he's the first one to the party actually discussing the fundamental issues. His opponents can, and do, vehemently disagree with him on fundamentals, but, as he points out, that hasn't really been discussed. The real disagreement isn't over "equality," it's about the very meaning and purpose of marriage. He points out, irrefutably in my view, that the modern view of marriage has simply sidestepped the issue and made a broad claim of equality, to great effect he'll readily admit, but nonetheless, without having grappled with the fundamentals. It's not that they don't have a case, and he makes that clear. They do, and it largely comes down to very fundamental questions that cannot really be compromised. He merely points out, they skipped over that debate because they found it inconvenient and it was politically easier to skip steps.
He then goes through the implications of his fundamental premise being rejected. The past year and a half have shown him to be spectacularly right and I think the pattern is likely to continue. Of course, his opponents don't much care about any of this, but other people are likely to find some of the implications troubling.
Either way, even fair-minded opponents ought to pay him the complement of being the first one to actually dig into this issue in a meaningful way. The purpose and meaning of marriage was assumed for so long that nobody had bothered to write a meaningful defense of it before it was too late for a generation. Anderson will remain a lonely warrior for some time, most likely. But that doesn't make him wrong.
August 14, 2016
Truth Overruled is a clear, well-reasoned, comprehensive response to the redefinition of marriage--currently to include homosexual relationships, potentially to include any deeply committed pairing or group of adults. Ryan Anderson lays out historical, judicial, philosophical, logical, biological, and sociological evidence to support the view of marriage as the monogamous, exclusive, permanent union of a man and woman. Only after the case has clearly been made from these humanistic sources does he add religious support to the case as an additional witness in favor of this traditional view, thus emphasizing that religious beliefs in support of one man/one woman marriage are by no means isolated, irrational, or potentially bigoted. Moreover, he explicitly and repeatedly points out that the legal solemnization of homosexual relationships is not the cause of our social problems with marriage, but simply the next logical step in the redefinition that began within the heterosexual attitudes of the sexual revolution--sex outside of marriage, no-fault divorce, the rise in single-parent households, and the like. He leaves no room for the Christian community to pat itself on the back as having no fault in the current deplorable understanding of marriage.
In addition to being a tremendous resource for those concerned about the defense of traditional marriage, this book provides many insights about the very nature of marriage itself. It is profitable reading for those who simply want a deeper understanding of the essence of marriage, the nature of male and female, and the duty of adults and society toward children.
In addition to being a tremendous resource for those concerned about the defense of traditional marriage, this book provides many insights about the very nature of marriage itself. It is profitable reading for those who simply want a deeper understanding of the essence of marriage, the nature of male and female, and the duty of adults and society toward children.
July 21, 2016
Lots of good information in here, and a strong rebuttal to the left's claims -- always look at the other side of things, folks.
Backed by a huge amount of research, Anderson refutes popular theories and goes to bat for religious believers' rights. He does get a bit repetitive from time to time, but I attribute a lot of that to the simple likelihood that many people would only read through a couple of chapters depending on what they might be looking for.
He also does this with mainly secular arguments, not really dwelling on his own personal religious beliefs until later in the book, and that mainly for context. He tackles his arguments without quoting biblical verse or spouting religious dogma of any kind. All information is set forth clearly in a way that is not overly academic but instead easily understood by any reader.
Well done, easy to get through, and intelligently handled.
Backed by a huge amount of research, Anderson refutes popular theories and goes to bat for religious believers' rights. He does get a bit repetitive from time to time, but I attribute a lot of that to the simple likelihood that many people would only read through a couple of chapters depending on what they might be looking for.
He also does this with mainly secular arguments, not really dwelling on his own personal religious beliefs until later in the book, and that mainly for context. He tackles his arguments without quoting biblical verse or spouting religious dogma of any kind. All information is set forth clearly in a way that is not overly academic but instead easily understood by any reader.
Well done, easy to get through, and intelligently handled.
September 19, 2015
I really enjoyed Ryan Anderson's new book. I found it to be so thoroughly researched, his logic to be well-thought out, and his passion to be visible.
A couple of the middle chapters dealing more with "policy" issues felt heavy to me, but likely because I'm not too knowledgeable in that area. That isn't to say I didn't understand them. I thought his reasoning was convincing and it would be interesting to hear counterpoints to it.
I have personally benefited much from Anderson's previous book and found this to be an exceptional follow-up. I wouldn't be surprised if, looking back after 20 years or so, Truth Overruled will have served as a key discussion point in the ongoing marriage debate.
A couple of the middle chapters dealing more with "policy" issues felt heavy to me, but likely because I'm not too knowledgeable in that area. That isn't to say I didn't understand them. I thought his reasoning was convincing and it would be interesting to hear counterpoints to it.
I have personally benefited much from Anderson's previous book and found this to be an exceptional follow-up. I wouldn't be surprised if, looking back after 20 years or so, Truth Overruled will have served as a key discussion point in the ongoing marriage debate.
November 19, 2016
Excellent
A winsome and erudite presentation of a view that takes no little share of bravery to express publicly nowadays, this book is an exemplary witness of how to "speak the truth with love." Ultimately, in reading it, one is inspired to hope that, though for the time being the truth about marriage and sexuality has been "overruled," the final victory of Truth - of which we are assured by Faith - shall not be long delayed. It will simply take people taking Dr. Anderson's arguments to heart, learning them well and repeating them often, and displaying the same cool sanity and charitable concern in expressing them that he models on every page.
A winsome and erudite presentation of a view that takes no little share of bravery to express publicly nowadays, this book is an exemplary witness of how to "speak the truth with love." Ultimately, in reading it, one is inspired to hope that, though for the time being the truth about marriage and sexuality has been "overruled," the final victory of Truth - of which we are assured by Faith - shall not be long delayed. It will simply take people taking Dr. Anderson's arguments to heart, learning them well and repeating them often, and displaying the same cool sanity and charitable concern in expressing them that he models on every page.
August 11, 2015
Mr. Anderson presents the issue of re-defining marriage in a clear and thoughtful manner. He presents the strong reasons why the definition should remain as it has for thousands of years without demonizing those who have a different view. He also clearly describes what the consequences will be of this SOTUS decisions, consequences that will challenge the very existence of this nation.
If the issue had been framed as Mr. Anderson has framed it in this book the out come may have been different.
If the issue had been framed as Mr. Anderson has framed it in this book the out come may have been different.
November 7, 2015
Excellent overview of the challenges facing those who believe "traditional" marriage is essential to a well functioning civil society.
His arguments are clear, well-supported and helpful to all who would see marriage remain as it has for all human history - between a man and a woman.
He calls the reader to act in defense of marriage in order to save society and most importantly the family and children.
If you want to be able to clearly articulate your belief about marriage as being between one man and one woman for life with reason and present a clear argument get this book now.
His arguments are clear, well-supported and helpful to all who would see marriage remain as it has for all human history - between a man and a woman.
He calls the reader to act in defense of marriage in order to save society and most importantly the family and children.
If you want to be able to clearly articulate your belief about marriage as being between one man and one woman for life with reason and present a clear argument get this book now.
June 30, 2016
Muy buen libro. Con una serie de argumentos sensatos y de sentido común muestra por qué el matrimonio debe ser el enlace integral, estable y duradero entre un hombre y una mujer. Lejos de todo fanatismo religioso, actitud intolerante o discriminación, el autor fundamenta de manera sencilla y convincente cómo la "redefinición" del matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo socava el bien común y compromete el futuro de la sociedad, atentando especialmente contra los derechos y el bienestar de los niños.
Read
January 20, 2016Thought provoking and well research analysis of the gay marriage movement. The book does have a Catholic church perspective so the premise of the book is to show how the redefinition of marriage impacts families, especially children, and how the gay movement "bullies" those opposed to their point of view.
It highlights points of consideration in order to try to combat this redefinition of marriage to included "unnatural" marriages.
It highlights points of consideration in order to try to combat this redefinition of marriage to included "unnatural" marriages.
May 30, 2016
Anderson has laid out relatively clearly, almost overwhelming, how the Obergefehl decision of the Supreme Court has placed the North American piece of Western Civilization and certainly most of American Christendom in the sites of progressive elites and made them the target that they cannot allow to live in their plunge into the depravity of self. He closes with some small encouragement, but it is daunting to contemplate the hole out of which we must dig.
September 4, 2015
Excellent book. Ryan Anderson is part of the new generation of conservative intellectuals. In this book he provides a rationale argument against the recent marriage ruling and its impact on our society. A good read for both those who agree with or disagree with the Supreme Court's ruling. Mr Anderson offers perspectives not heard through all of the noise surrounding this issue.
October 29, 2015
Natural law based critique of the Obergefell decision. Useful crib notes to some amicus briefs. Rightly locates the decision not in the strengths of any particular argument, but in the sexual revolution's cultural fallout -- the radical displacement of responsibilities with individual emotional gratification.
January 6, 2016
I really enjoyed this. Much like the pro-life argument didn't die after Roe Vs Wade, and main stream society respects the debate on that issue, I feel hopeful that the debate will resume regarding marriage as well. Anderson convinced me how necessary it is for a civilized discourse to continue. A great read for all.
June 21, 2016
Great book. Well reasoned, and even better argued. It outlines the exact response that the pro-traditional marriage crowd should have. It also outlines the attacks that have already begun on religious liberty, and why they matter. I encourage everyone to read this book, even if you are pro-gay marriage.
July 31, 2016
Really fantastic. Anderson writes clearly and winsomely. I am not optimistic that the arguments he makes here will prevail in our culture over the next few decades--but that doesn't mean they are wrong. The center cannot hold with the new sexual orthodoxy, and I'm not sure Western Civ will survive intact short of a monumental moral and philosophical revolution back toward the truth.
September 19, 2015
Excellent apologetic for traditional marriage and religious liberty. In a world where these things are considered archaic values, this book brings a refreshingly simple and intellectually sound defense for two traditional values that strengthen society at its core. Highly recommend.
November 18, 2015
Anderson's logic is clear and compelling, and I was particularly struck by his presentation of the right of the child to his biological mother and father. This was a really key piece of the argument for me that shaped how I will discuss this issue in the future.
December 6, 2015
This book was fantastic and presented very logical arguments for the traditional and historical view of marriage as well as sobering statistics and testimonies. It also presented helpful ideas and advice on how to move forward. I highly recommend it.
April 18, 2017
This is THE handbook for anyone troubled by the Supreme Court's decision on gay marriage and concerned about its effects. Anderson has an urgent message and he communicates in it the most concise, clear and accessible way possible. This is a must read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.