Focus on process that's worked for eons

A letter was published in the Daily Bee on May 2, discussing marriage from a rights and equality point of view, specifically referring to gay rights. If it were simply a matter of fairness for homosexuals to be legally recognized in marriage, I suspect there would be little, if any objection. However, the law that in most places applies to one man and one woman involves considerations that go well beyond simply being fair.

The state has multiple interests at stake in the legal definition of marriage, most of them centering on the well-being of children. While not all traditional marriages produce children, the fact remains that all children have a mother and a father and marriage is the only institution that unites children with their moms and dads.

Traditionally, the mom, dad, kids family has been a long term and stabilizing influence on society and when the family comes undone, the state finds itself taking responsibility — and the cost of — providing for and protection, rehabilitation, and incarceration of the children of a destabilized society * (I have 10 professional reference studies available on request.) With a divorce rate of more than 50 percent and an increasing number of people having children outside of marriage, the state can expect the costs to increase.

While some may point to this situation as a good time to legally redefine marriage, a more thoughtful analysis enables us to see that previous changes to marriage law, no-fault divorce for example, have contributed powerfully to the state’s problems.

And so, isn’t it fair to suggest that rather than again change marriage law to meet the desires of adults, that we focus on the well being of our kids and our communities by strengthening and promoting the man/woman, bride/groom, mom/dad sequence that proved itself so well for millennia?

It may be helpful to point out that whether one is good with kids or not, the state makes no such inquiry when applying for a marriage license.

LARRY WELCH

Sandpoint