Last week, a top New York court ruled in favor of traditional marriage.  Stacy Harp reported on it, and summarized the critical reasoning in the court’s decision:

  1. The welfare of the children.
    “First, the Legislature could rationally decide that, for the welfare of children, it is more important to promote stability, and to avoid instability, in opposite-sex than in same-sex relationships. Heterosexual intercourse has a natural tendency to lead to the birth of children; homosexual intercourse does not. Despite the advances of science, it remains true that the vast majority of children are born as a result of a sexual relationship between a man and a woman, and the Legislature could find that this will continue to be true.”
  2. A child needs a mother and a father.
    “There is a second reason: The Legislature could rationally believe that it is better, other things being equal, for children to grow up with both a mother and a father. Intuition and experience suggest that a child benefits from having before his or her eyes, every day, living models of what both a man and a woman are like.”
  3. The plantiff’s did not prove their case based on prejudice.
    “Plaintiffs have not persuaded us that this longaccepted restriction is a wholly irrational one, based solely on ignorance and prejudice against homosexuals.”