Marriage under attack

SIR – I could not agree more with your editorial (June 28): the evidence that marriage is the foundation of a healthy society is overwhelming.

Marriage and family life in Britain are in a sorry state. Family breakdown costs an estimated £51 billion a year, and one of the chief contributors has been the persistent undermining of the institution of marriage. The Supreme Court’s decision to allow a heterosexual couple to have a civil partnership may further this trend.

Marriage has always been about more than the legal protections it offers. It is the gold standard of commitment. The Government should back it, and invest heavily in policies that help counter family breakdown. James Mildred

London SW17

SIR – You rightly urge that “the institution of marriage” should “not [be] damaged” by the Supreme Court ruling. You then say that campaigners for civil partnership see the ruling as “a nail in the coffin of marriage”.

That was not the attitude of the couple who pursued the case through the courts. Nor was it the attitude of any of their supporters who were with us to celebrate, or of anyone sponsoring my Civil Partnerships Private Members’ Bill.

I and (I hope) my wife have been happily married for 26 years. The institution suits us. For whatever reason, it doesn’t suit the 3.3 million cohabiting opposite-sex couples in the Britain, over half of them with children, who have no recognition or protection in the eyes of the state. It also happens to be the fastest-growing form of family unit. Many would like to formalise their relationship, and that has to be good for family stability and many other things.

Allowing them to register their love and commitment through a different sort of partnership, though with the same aims as those who choose to marry, is not to undermine that institution but to complement it. We need both to thrive.

Tim Loughton MP (Con)

London SW1