Same-sex marriage excludes biological parent

Wednesday, March 8, 2006

‘‘Children deserve both parents — male and female” was the headline on my letter in the Feb. 10 Gazette of Politics and Business. ‘‘Disrespectful attitude” was the headline on Mark Hodge’s Feb. 17 letter.

My letter was directed to the elected and appointed officials of Maryland not to any particular group of people who are doing their best in their family circumstances. The state of Maryland is ‘‘about to deny the children’s right to have both biological parents in the home.” A marriage between two women does exclude the biological parent or a biological parent substitute.

There is a significant difference between government deliberately creating motherless or fatherless families through legislation that sanctions such an arrangement and people doing the best they can with the circumstances they find themselves in.

The New Hampshire Legislature initiated a commission on the ‘‘Impact of Same-Sex Marriage on Society.”

The commission stated: ‘‘Marriage matters and it matters a lot. Marriage is an important social institution that has a number of interconnected purposes including the procreation and protection of children ... the family structure that helps children the most is a family headed by two biological parents”

The commission concluded, ‘‘New Hampshire should adopt an amendment to its constitution defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.”

It is an effective technique to indiscriminately label those opposing same-sex marriage as afraid and hateful. I hope that Mr. Hodge will find respect and tolerance for all in this new century, not just those who agree with him.

Ruth M. Jacobs, Rockville

The writer is an infectious disease physician.