Browse By

States With Gay Marriage Have Higher Fertility

One of the arguments people make to justify their opposition to the legalization of same-sex marriage is that marriage equality will wreck fertility rates. The purpose of marriage, they say, is to create children. Heterosexual unions often create children, while homosexual unions can’t do this without some extra fussing around, and so, these people say, allowing people to get married to people of the same gender will disrupt the reproductive function of marriage, and result in a lower rate of fertility.

There is one fatal flaw with this argument: Its conclusions are based upon conjecture, rather than actual information about what happens out there in the world of real human beings.

Alexandra Sifferlin wrote earlier this week that “If you’re struggling to get pregnant, the best states to live in are Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Jersey.” It happens that all of these states have legalized same-sex marriage. That seems to contradict the arguments of Family Values types that legalization of same-sex marriage will wreck the family and interfere with the procreative mission of heterosexuality.

Sifferlin was writing about the fertility scorecard released this week by the National Infertility Association. The report combines data about the fertility rates and the ease with which couples are able to gain access to fertility treatments in each of the 50 states. It then classifies the states into 5 categories, ranging from a fertility grade of A to a grade of F.

If these letter grades are converted into numerical form, with the most fertile states receiving a score of 5 and the least fertile states receiving a score of 1, a clear distinction appears. The argument that same-sex marriage will lead to increased infertility is not supported. On the contrary, states that have legalized same-sex marriage have a higher average fertility score, of 3.88 out of 5, compared to states that have not legalized same-sex marriage, which have an average fertility score of just 2.94 out of 5.

It appears that opposition to marriage equality for heterosexual and homosexual couples is associated in some way with factors that are harmful to the efforts of parents to make babies.

13 thoughts on “States With Gay Marriage Have Higher Fertility”

  1. paul corbin says:

    Does anyone else think that arguement was foolish to begin with? I love people and I believe that people have a Constitutionally protected right at the age of consent to be with (physically/sexually) whomever they choose. You can love anyone you choose no matter the situation which is also protected. I personally dont care who you sleep with and would rather not be inundated with anyones ventures (hetero/homo) in love. When it comes to the word married LGBT needs to come up with a new description because marriages are beyween man and woman by definition . In order to stop the stupidity of this fight lets create a word and make it defined as LGBT lifelong commited unions and no one can argue against it. We The People of the United States have been fighting each other so long that if we dont stop it we are going to lose our home. Our enemies love it because while we are fighting the thief has caught us in debt to a bank and once they come to collect it will be to late. We have forgotten how to fight for each other and how to communicate. We must remove anyone that profits from conflict so that our leaders are unbiased and not corrupted by profit. We can win back our country.

    1. J Clifford says:

      Paul, marriage is no longer by definition only between men and women. Language changes as reality changes.

      1. paul corbin says:

        Thanks for the response. But no comment on anything else. Please move past this definition thing. The world has you stuck on the wrong things, how about this once the word marriage means whatever we as a people say it means by a vote(which would be great by the way) can we take this anger and frustration and zeal and passion and fix our nation? Or are we destined to seperate our nation on subjects like what the definition of “is” is? Isnt their a country out there with a peoples government that acctually works that we can emulate. Its not that we have disagreements those are bound to happen but the enormous amount of resources and time spent on this and we still have food banks closing with people (gay and hetero) still not getting a meal. Its really a matter of wasted time because we are inefficient at agreeing to disagree. Any thoughts.

        1. J Clifford says:

          It’s the word marriage that gives people legal rights, so, it matters.

  2. paul corbin says:

    Then lets call it ,marriage. 2.0 and be done. The word marriage only has the force of law because a judge says it does. We can give any word we want the same definition as marriage and have a vote to give it the force of law. If you get down to the root of it, this is a way for groups to make large sums of money and they do it by keeping you and I at odds. All these studies about a choice in sexual preference adversely effecting fertility rates, its always environment that affects changes. If you and I create an environment where problems like these are solved quickly and we both agree to honor the outcome of a vote no one could profit from our disagreement. Thats what we need but it will only happen when we agree to fix the root of our issues. Thanks for the imput J

    1. J Clifford says:

      I don’t think disagreement is the problem. Disrespect and abusive marginalization is. Separate but equal hasn’t led to respect, but to further abuse. We don’t get to vote on other people’s rights. We create those rights, or take them away, with constitutional amendments.

      1. paul corbin says:

        As a citizen we all have the same “individual” rights. I believe that was placed in there for a reason. So that no collective group whether a majority or minority could usurp our individual rights. Thats where we must be super careful, we give a group preferential protections and then you begin eliminating the individuals rights fairness and equality under the law. I agree completely. We elect individuals to vote for us, we elect individuals to have a public voice for us. We cannot elect a group nor should one be provided protection from the indivual rights of other individuals as mandated by the Bill of Rights.

  3. Bill says:

    Paul’s heart seems to be in the right place…he wants to see people pull together and make a better world…but his arguments regarding marriage equality always just seem to miss the mark. Give gay marriages a different name (say, marriagayed) and move on? While we’re at it, why not give gay humans a different name, say hugays? And maybe call their kids (yes, gays can have kids) something like childrigays. Just to make sure no one ever confuses them with, you know, normal people. Maybe we could get them all to wear a lavender Stars of David while we’re at it, just to further avoid confusion.

    I trust Paul wouldn’t suggest the same approach for blacks, or the handicapped, or persons of Lithuanian descent. What it comes down to, Paul, is this: people are people. Recognizing this, declaring it, and driving it home…those are really the keys to making the world a better place. And it starts here, now, with one simple assertion: gay marriage = marriage.

    1. J Clifford says:

      Right, Bill – just like we don’t define drinking fountains as White Drinking Fountains and Colored Drinking Fountains. They’re just drinking fountains, for everyone.

      The hugays language example makes it clear what’s going on when people say that they don’t want to discriminate, but just don’t want to let gay people join in with everyone else.

  4. paul corbin says:

    It was great speaking and conversing with you J and Bill , I am a handicaped veteran. I wouldnt assume to associate being LGBT with any other ethic, religious, or call it anything but what it is, a choice and an absolute personal and individual choice. If the LG BT in this country wish to see success without all this propoganda they would look at a country like Israel which embraced their citizens choice and affords every right to them including military recognition of their unions. Its off the table now and as a country they can move on. Bill you were right about my concern that there are larger issues and I really hope we get to them as a country sooner than later. Millions of lives are at stake, marriage is a privilege, living should be a right.

    1. Bill says:

      I know it’s considered a trite thing to say in some quarters, Paul, but: sincerely, thank you for your service.

      Just a couple of small corrections to your otherwise nice post: (1) being gay isn’t a “choice” any more than being heterosexual is a choice or being a Latina is a choice. People are born that way. (2) I’m not sure I can agree that “marriage is a privilege.” I rather think it’s my right (and my wife seems to feel the same way).

      1. paul corbin says:

        Its pretty simple for both of my comments to make great logical sense. You both applied for a marriage license and a judge/JOP someone with credentials determined your commitments valid in your state. Ask anyone who has had their marriage ripped from them after they did the same things and not recognised ie INS desides your marriage is a fraud and sends your significant other back to Latin America. Its a privilege to have been born here. What have you or I done to earn that privledge nothing but many have before us and many will after us. Now, attractions may be a chemical reaction but acting upon those attractions is a choice. I could be born with both male and female reproductive organs so Im not sure what I am , Im attracted to girls so I choose to persue a relationship or maybe I have an obsession with men ,but the moment will come when I will choose what actions I will take. Everything is a choice and you have a responsibility to every other citizen to make choices that will benefit society. When I choice to disobey the law they determine whether I had the ability to make choices, if I do not they offer me an alternative sentence but the majority of LGBT if brought before a jury and the jury was asked to prove whether they were in fact LGBT. The jury would not be able to determine that fact without evidence of their actions. Actions that were performed after making choices.
        Whew that was alot to type on my phone.

  5. Michael says:

    Research in Italy showed that women with gay relatives were more fertile than average. This data seems to corroborate that where there are more homosexuals in the population, fertility rates increase. Indeed, during the AIDS epidemic, fertility rates dropped. From my own experience (I am gay), my sister was trying for a baby with IVF in Dubai. It just wouldn’t happen. She came back home, stayed with me for a week, returned to Dubai, and the IVF worked immediately.

    Interestingly UK gay population densities and fertility rates also match. Exam grades also seem to follow the same pattern. The more gays and lesbians, the higher the grades!

    How remarkable would it be if homosexuals actually play a role in procreation. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!