I have to admit it, i am torn here.
I see both arguments. As pointed out by Miller and others, it is an outside sport, that was and in most cases is still played in winter weather where the weather can be a factor.
I also see the argument by Escrow and others...that this is to be a championship, that is at a neutral site and not let any outside influences effect the outcome. Literally be the best team wins...not due to the fact they are used to playing in cold weather.
Yes, teams like Philly, NY(both), Buffalo(just sayin....
), New England, Green Bay, Chicago and Cincinnati would have a definate advantage if NY was having extremely cold weather and this gets played in it. Do we really want that as a factor?
I personally feel you have to go one way or the other. If you want to eliminate all factors that could help one team over another...then you pick a neutral site with NO team in the area that has either a warm climate or dome stadium so weather or HOME fans have no effect on the game. Then let the best team win.
So no, NY should not get the superbowl. Then again...neither should the superdome in New Orleans or any other current NFL franchise city. But if you won't do that...then yes, you have to eventually go in the weather...and give some of the northern teams some of these advantages.