Many people supported gay marriage in good faith, based on promises its advocates made. Here are three assurances that are no longer so sure.

1. LGBT people need marriage.
2. Legalizing gay marriage will make LGBT people feel better.
3. The kids will be all right.

The children of cohabiting same-sex couples seem to fare better than the children of legally married same-sex couples.

Failed promise #1: LGBT people need marriage.

There has been no dramatic "rush to the altar" among same-sex couples. Recent Gallup data show that only 8% of Americans who identify as LGBTQ are married to a same-sex spouse, while 6.4% are living with a same-sex partner. By comparison, 11% of those who identify as LGBTQ are married to an opposite-sex spouse and another 11% are living with an opposite-sex partner.

These figures suggest that much of the increase in marriages among LGBTQ-identified individuals has been driven by bisexual or nonbinary people in opposite-sex relationships. Presumably, many of these individuals could have married the person of their choice, even under pre-Obergefell law.

Also please notice heterosexual people are marrying in much larger percentages than self-identified sexual minorities. Even after years of legally permitted same-sex marriage, same-sex-attracted persons are not drawn to married life “just like everyone else.” Redefining marriage did not radically transform the relationship behavior among same-sex-attracted individuals.

Failed promise #2: LGBT people will feel better if we redefine marriage.

The reality: The mental health numbers for sexual minorities have not improved. In fact, there is some evidence that their mental health has declined. Researchers have long observed that sexual minorities report higher rates of psychological distress than exclusively heterosexual populations. What remains contested is the explanation for those differences.

We were told that stigma and discrimination were driving elevated rates of depression, anxiety, and other mental-health challenges. Reduce the stigma, and the disparities would narrow. Yet after extraordinary gains in legal recognition and cultural acceptance, including gay marriage in the U.S., the worldwide evidence is difficult to reconcile with the so-called minority stress theory.

A study using data from UCLA's Williams Institute compared different generations of sexual minorities, ranging from those shaped by the Stonewall era to those who came of age during the push for “marriage equality.” The expectation was that younger cohorts, who experienced significantly greater social acceptance, would demonstrate substantially better mental health outcomes.

But the study found that the “equality generation” experienced higher rates of psychological distress and suicidal tendencies.

The researchers acknowledged, and I quote, “Our findings are clearly inconsistent with the (minority stress) hypothesis” that declining social stigma would produce corresponding declines in mental health problems.

A 2025 systematic review of 123 studies from 31 countries reached a similar conclusion. The review found substantially higher rates of depression, anxiety disorders, and bipolar disorders among LGBTQI+ individuals than among the general population. Nor were the disparities small: The rates of distress among LGBTQ individuals were between eight and 11 times greater than the general population.

In fact, the combined studies found that 35.3% of LGBTQI+ individuals reported depressive disorders, compared with 3.8% of the general population, or nine times greater.

None of this proves that discrimination plays no role in mental health outcomes. But surely, if “minority stress” or discrimination were the primary explanation for the high rates of psychological distress, we would have seen some positive movement in these numbers. That is exactly what we do not see.

Failed promise #3: The kids will be all right.

The reality: High-quality recent evidence shows that children of married same-sex partners are not “all right.”

This topic is so important that it deserves its own article. For now, let me give you evidence that casts doubt on the very strong assurances the sexual revolutionaries gave us.

A 2017 study showed that by the fifth year of elementary school, young children in same-sex parent families had significantly lower emotional well-being on three different standardized measures.

The measures include:

• interpersonal skills,
• externalizing well-being (which includes things like aggression and acting out), and
• internalizing well-being, which includes things like anxiety and depression.

Compared with children living with their married biological parents, the children in alternative living arrangements have higher levels of psychological problems. The children of same-sex parents, shown on the far right-hand side of the chart, have as great or even greater problems than other children, even children in alternative family forms.

The authors attribute those difficulties to higher instability, meaning that same-sex couples have more changes in relationships and living arrangements.

The 'hold constant' fallacy

But this shouldn’t make us feel any better about these findings. More instability in the parents’ relationship is not a factor that we can legitimately “hold constant” or “factor out,” as if it were a completely independent factor. The well-documented increased instability in same-sex parents’ relationship means the kids experience more divorces, breakups, re-partnering, changing living arrangements, and so on. This instability is part of the package of having same-sex parents.

This reminds me of researchers back in the day trying to say that single parenthood isn’t so bad, if you “hold constant” their income. But having a reduced income is part of the experience of having unmarried parents. This attempt to explain away an unwelcome finding in no more valid when applied to same-sex parents today than it was when applied to unmarried parents back in the 1990s.

Another study examined a wide range of family structures, including married biological parents, single parents, cohabiting couples, stepparent families, legally married same-sex couples, and same-sex cohabiting parents.

This study found that children with same-sex cohabiting parents were 3.3 times more likely than those with intact married biological parents to suffer serious emotional problems. Children with same-sex married parents were 5.4 times more likely to have serious emotional problems when compared with biological parents married to each other.

These empirical results directly contradict the assurances we were given prior to the Obergefell ruling. With man/woman parents, marriage supported better emotional outcomes for children than with any arrangement of unmarried man-woman parents. But with same-sex parents, the opposite was true. The children of cohabiting same-sex couples seem to fare better than the children of legally married same-sex couples.

And yes, these estimates were adjusted to eliminate the effect of demographic factors, such as the child’s race, sex, and age. We don’t really know what exactly accounts for these findings. But we can conclude this: The idea that “the kids will be fine” is no longer a slam-dunk, end-of-discussion statement.

Full disclosure: The author of this 2021 paper is my colleague, Fr. Paul Sullins, Ph.D. a retired professor of sociology. If you are going to dismiss him because his clerical collar indicates a conflict of interest, you should probably also dismiss the findings of self-described gay or lesbian scholars. They certainly have an interest in some research outcomes rather than others.

RELATED: Hello Fresh's unappetizing 'Pride' ad exposes the sordid truth about gay 'marriage'

Sean Gallup/Getty Images

Genderless marriage

In any case, I have shown enough to cast serious doubt of the assurances that advocates of genderless marriage gave us. Make no mistake, “genderless marriage” is a better description than “gay marriage.” The court removed the dual gender requirement for marriage. That was a tacit assertion that the sex of the body is irrelevant for marriage and by extension, irrelevant to parenthood.

We were told that gay people needed to get married. Evidently, not too many of them got that memo.

We were told that gay people would feel better. Evidently, and sadly, that is not the case.

Finally, we were told that the kids would be fine. The evidence I’ve presented shows that this is not self-evidently true.

People are making life-altering decisions based on the assurances of activists. The decision to have a child is not a decision that can easily be walked back if you figure out you had bad information.

It’s time to reopen these important conversations.