Marriage?

Dear Editor:

There has never been a culture or religion in human history to define marriage as anything other than the union of a man and a woman. Polygamy is a variation that is still practiced today, most commonly involving the union of a man with more than one woman, but it does not sanction same sex unions.

One very important function of a marriage is to provide a healthy environment for nurturing children. Research has confirmed what has been known for generations, the best environment for a child is a stable family structure composed of a man (father) and woman (mother) in a healthy marriage caring for their children.

In addition to not being good for children, the homosexual lifestyle produces a significantly shorter life span than does a heterosexual life style.  At least in theory, our laws are intended to promote the general welfare of our citizens. Since a homosexual environment is not the best for nurturing children nor the healthiest for the adults involved nor is there any precedent in human history for homosexual “marriages,” why would we want to define a “marriage” in our laws to be anything other than the union of one man and one woman?

David Greer, Cambridge

up arrow