Mr Martin Piper said that research has shown that "children of same-sex couples do as well, or even better, than children of heterosexual couples" (Poor attitudes against different family structures harm children most; Jan 11).
However, this is highly inaccurate as such research was based on limited data.
On the other hand, decades of social studies have shown the importance in the role of both a mother and father in a child's upbringing. A mother and father make up a complex entity necessary in creating a healthy personality in children.
One problem caused by the absence of either parent during the upbringing process is the missed opportunity to achieve sexual identity by identification with the parent of the same gender and differentiation from parent with the opposite gender.
Mr Piper also said that "heterosexual couples can have children they may not want or are unprepared for" while "same-sex couples deliberately and consciously plan for a child".
The Singapore Government only encourages parenthood within marriage as it provides the best environment for a child's upbringing emotionally, psychologically and physiologically.
Mr Piper also equated adoption to surrogacy, saying in both cases children may not be biologically related to their caregiver.
However, he failed to mention that surrogacy commoditises a child while adoption does not.
Lastly, he claims that surrogacy is similar to mixed-race and mixed-religion marriages in that they were once frowned upon and, hence, attitudes should change in order to have a society that is "compassionate, just and equal".
How does this apply to children, who make up the most vulnerable segment of society and will be deprived of their right to be cared for by their biological parents?
Isn't this far from being compassionate, just and equal too?
Kuan Weng Chi