Weak argument against gay marriage

I am writing in response to David Smith’s July 1 letter written on behalf of the Illinois Family Institute. His letter claims the unique purpose of marriage “is to create the best environment for raising children” and that it is the responsibility of the government not to undermine it. How would recognizing the 44-year relationship between Edith Windsor and her partner for legal purposes undermine the ability of the U.S. to make sure children are best cared for? The short answer is it that it does not undermine it at all.

No legitimate academic study has found any differences between children raised in heterosexual households and children raised in homosexual ones. Massachusetts has had both same-sex marriage and the lowest divorce rate in the country for nearly a decade while Nevada with the highest divorce rate has a constitutional amendment prohibiting same sex marriage, so there is no evidence that same sex marriage erodes that best environment.

Why does the IFI insist that marriage is an institution designed for raising children? It is because they can no longer send in letters that say that gay people are deviants. The IFI is just grasping at straws to avoid acknowledging the inevitable realization that they are wrong.

Michael Penicnak

Wood Dale