Marriage and Family, Then and Now (3 Letters) - NYT

Marriage and Family, Then and Now (3 Letters)
Published: July 11, 2005 - New York Times

To the Editor:

Re "The Heterosexual Revolution" (Op-Ed, July 5):

Stephanie Coontz instructs that we all should acquiesce to the new social experiment called the genderless family simply because change is inevitable.

Offering no evidence at all as to whether same-sex marriage would improve the well-being of our communities and our children, she simply says marriage has always been changing and this is the next change so just deal with it.

Ms. Coontz reasons that Americans oppose the genderless family experiment simply because it means more change. On the contrary, we oppose the same-sex family not merely because it represents a change but because it represents a bad change.

We oppose it because it denies the importance of wife and husband, mother and father for the family.

No family model can be a good human family that intentionally says one part of humanity, either male or female, is optional. That is precisely what the genderless family experiment does.

Glenn T. Stanton
Dir., Social Research and Cultural Affairs, Focus on the Family
Colorado Springs, July 8, 2005
•

To the Editor:

Stephanie Coontz has hit the nail right on the head. I have often had to laugh when reading the rantings of those who speak of the "holy and sacred" state of marriage. If this were true, there would not be so many marriages that end in divorce.

When money was an issue, it was the woman who kept the marriage together, no matter how unhappy, for the sake of the children and their survival.

In my lifetime of 82 years, there have been dramatic changes in the legal, social and psychological factors affecting the institution of marriage. And all for the better. Women are no longer possessions. They are equal partners.

Roslyn Fallick
Jackson Heights, Queens, July 6, 2005
•

To the Editor:

If only somewhere in the discussion of marriage, someone would ask the most important question to the future of any society: What is best for the children? It seems most "expert" answers come from a very adult-centered approach.

One question: Do you really think that children under 3 prefer being cared for by their loving parents or a paid stranger?

Susan M. Marra
Milford, Conn., July 7, 2005

The Heterosexual Revolution by Stephanie Coontz (New York Times 2005/07/05)