This article is a good example as to why social sciences are not real sciences: The authors of the study are comparing the historical infidelity rate of legally married heterosexual couples with the results of a poll of 85 “committed” homosexual couples. The difference in the infidelity rate may very well have nothing to do with being gay or straight and have everything to do with whether the couple is “legally married” in the eyes of the law or “informally committed” in the eyes of the beholder. In addition, there is no indication that the study is based upon stradified random sampling of both heterosexuals as the control group and homosexuals as the experimental group or that other than sexual orientation, both the control and experimental groups are similar in demographics (i.e., age, education, income, geographical location) the age at which they entered into the relationship, or the number of years they dated before they decided to get legally married (for heterosexuals) or commmitted (for gays).
The infidelity rate of “committed” gays may very well be significantly greater than the infidelity rate of “committed” straights, and as more gays legally marry, we may very well learn that the infidelity rate among married gays is significantly higher than married straights. But this particular study proves nothing other than that most social sciences are not real sciences.
I would agree that the methodology leaves much to be desired.
I still do not think same sex marriage ought ever have come into being. But that is based on theory and philosophy.