My letter-to-the-editor (via Columbus Dispatch) in response to another letter-to-the-editor regarding same-sex marriage

This letter-to-the-editor was published in The Columbus Dispatch on February 8th, written by one Peggy Wolock:

"Same-sex marriage 

Lane Halterman is apparently curious about my opinion on laws prohibiting so-called same sex marriage.  He states that “the only reason to ban same-sex marriage is because of religious beliefs.” 

The only reason?  Although there are religious arguments against re-defining marriage (i.e. God created the institution so it’s not ours to change),  the state does have an interest in protecting traditional marriage.  Social science studies show us time and again what happens to children when traditional marriage falls apart.   More children live in poverty.  Crime rates rise.  Unwed pregnancies go up.  There are always exceptions, but children that grow up in a single parent household are more apt to face these kinds of issues. 

The truth is we are conducting a social experiment when we place children with a same sex couple.  We are necessarily removing either a Mom or a Dad.  If it causes problems with single parent families, what will the result be if we place children in same sex households? 

The children of today are the citizens of tomorrow.  A society with healthy families will have a healthier citizenry and the state has an interest in a healthy citzenry.  I’m sorry if that offends people but we have forgotten that marriage is not just about loving another person and staying together for life.   One of the purposes of marriage is to procreate, rear, and educate children.  Two individuals of the same sex cannot procreate and therefore cannot enter into a valid marriage with each other – it’s just the natural law.  Not religion. 

Peggy M. Wolock, Columbus"

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2012/02/08/0208-web-only-letters-to-the-editor.html

 ...and here is my response, published on Feburary 11th:

"Same-sex marriage 

I was baffled upon reading a recent letter-to-the-editor regarding same-sex marriage (Wolock, 2/8/12). While the writer is largely accurate on the fact that most social science studies showcase that when marriages fall apart (traditional ones, she specifies), children become more apt to living in poverty and both crime rates and unwed pregnancies increase, how is this bit of information at all relevant to same-sex couples and their parenting of children? Social science studies may indicate that children of broken marriages, residing in single-parent households may face more short- and long-term problems than those residing in a home with both a mother and a father. These same studies don't mention how the children's health and well-being would be affected when raised by a gay couple, which makes these studies irrelevant to her argument. 

She then attempts to induce fear by asking the question, "If it causes problems with single parent families, what will the result be if we place children in same sex households?" 

She refers to this possibility as a "social experiment." Well, many studies have been conducted in recent years with regard to same-sex couples and their parenting of children and the results are quite interesting. 

Extensive research was done on the matter and the study results were revealed by Ellen C. Perrin, MD, professor of pediatrics at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston, at the American Academy of Pediatrics Conference and Exhibition in 2005. 

One finding she noted was that, "The vast consensus of all the studies shows that children of same-sex parents do as well as children whose parents are heterosexual in every way. In some ways children of same-sex parents actually may have advantages over other family structures." 

She continued with, "Lesbian couples share household responsibilities and chores more equitably. And, the children of lesbian couples are less aggressive, more nurturing to peers, more tolerant of diversity, and more inclined to play with both boy's and girl's toys." 

These findings were not isolated. Researchers Nanette Gartrell and Henry Bos released a study in the journal Pediatrics in 2010. 

When talking about the findings regarding the children of same-sex couples, Gartrell stated, "We simply expected to find no difference in psychological adjustment between adolescents reared in lesbian families and the normative sample of age-matched controls. I was suprised to find that on some measures we found higher levels of [psychological] competency and lower levels of behavioral problems. It wasn't something I anticipated." 

Stanford sociologist, Michael Rosenfeld, commented on a 2010 study released by the journal Demography, saying, "The census data show that having parents who are the same gender is not in itself any disadvantage to children. Parents' income and education are the biggest indicators of a child's success. Family structure is a minor determinant." 

He also noted, "One of the fundamental issues in modern family law that differs from state to state is whether same-sex couples can adopt. My research makes clear that there's a huge advantage to kids to be out of the care of the state and into the care of any family, even if the family is not perfectly normal." 

Researchers at the Universities of Virginia and George Washington released a study in 2010, which found that, "Research suggests that family processes, such as parenting quality and attachment, are more important predictors of child outcomes than is family structure. These associations have been found both in biological and adoptive families, and among families with lesbian, gay and heterosexual parents." 

Almost identical findings were displayed in a 2010 study released by the Journal of Marriage and Family. In light of the findings of this study and others like it, fatherhood expert, Michael Lamb, psychology professor at the University of Cambridge in Cambridge, England, changed his views about same-sex couples raising children, when he said, "Nothing about a person's sex determines the capacity to be a good parent. It is well-established that children do not need parents of each gender to adjust healthily." 

Lastly, I'm growing a little tired of the argument against same-sex couples being given the right to marry due to their inability to procreate. 

As this writer states, "One of the purposes of marriage is to procreate, rear, and educate children. Two individuals of the same sex cannot procreate and therefore cannot enter into a valid marriage with each other - it's just the natural law." 

The flaw in her argument is the fact that, according to the National Survey of Family Growth, 7.3 million reproductive-age couples in this country are infertile. They can't procreate. Does this then mean they cannot enter into a valid marriage with one another? If she responds with a yes, then her views will be consistent, but I'm not thinking that's likely. 

The "social experiment" of same-sex couples parenting children has been proven time and again to not limit nor disadvantage the children on any level, as the five before-mentioned studies and others like them have indicated. So, as Lane Halterman stated, it does appear, "the only reason to ban same-sex marriage is because of religious beliefs. Science and logic dictate otherwise. "

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20051012/study-same-sex-parents-raise-well-adjusted-kids

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.html 

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/gay-study-083010.html 

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/college-inc/2010/07/study_lesbian_gay_couples_thri.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-01-21-parentgender21_ST_N.htm

http://pregnancy.lovetoknow.com/wiki/Statistics_on_Infertile_Couples

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-fear.html 

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html 

http://fallacies.findthedata.org/l/59/Incomplete-comparison 

Craig M. Rozniecki, Delaware"

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2012/02/11/0211-web-only-letters-to-the-editor.html