Letter: URI student stresses the historical, social, religious values of marriage

By:

Posted: 11/20/07

11/20/07 - To the Cigar,

Marriage is a vital aspect of every human society and has been for 3,000 years. This union has always been considered to be a holy, sacred union ordained by God.

Two of the most important aspects of marriage are love and procreation. However, during the current inner conflict of our great country, the sanctity of marriage has come under attack by mostly far left factions fighting to redefine and create an entirely new entity of marriage. This is wrong on so many levels, mainly because the idea of gay marriage is based upon different principles than natural, heterosexual marriage.

Remember also that heterosexual, monogamous union is the only type of marriage recognized by all five major religions of the world. Instead of factors such as love and procreation, gay marriage would be based largely upon adult desires and choices, both sexual and idealistic. I believe, and would never think anything other than the fact, that homosexuals should be respected and should certainly never be discriminated against.

However, many claim that it would be discrimination not to allow this community to marry, given they are not allowed the civil rights that heterosexual marriages enjoy. These include the so-called 1,138 protections that are enacted when two persons are wed. This cannot be discrimination due to the fact that not all extreme adult fetishes can be condoned.

As I stated in the debate this week, allowing gay marriage now could lead to other groups claiming they have the same rights to wed in the future. Since the far left obviously seems to want to change, undermine, and eradicate the definition of marriage, what do they propose it to be? Anyone who loves each other? Any one person can marry any other? Who are these people to feel they have the right to change the definition of marriage, a human institution and tradition that has been around since the days of Adam and Eve.

Now I realize that the slippery-slope argument is largely invalid and unacceptable in our "enlightened" state of philosophy. But that being said, if this new "version" of marriage is enacted, who is to say that someday in the not-too-distant future, the far left won't be at the doors to the halls of government asking the state to "recognize" bisexual familial arrangements?

Surely, two bisexual women who love each other and also a common male partner should be allowed to wed? Surely the three of them together could provide a loving, caring environment for children? Surely, the three should be allowed to share each others' worldly possessions and be entitled to all the same benefits that "normal" hetero and homosexual couples enjoy?

Surely, by not recognizing the "love" and "validity" of such an arrangement, the government would be unfairly discriminating against these people?

Worse still (or maybe not worse in the eyes of the far left), what if an uncle wants to marry his niece? What if a doctor testifies that the two are genetically different enough to safely conceive? Does that make it OK? If they "love" each other and they can provide a loving, caring household, shouldn't that be enough? Who are we to "discriminate" against such an arrangement?

Perhaps Mormons in Utah should be allowed to live the way they choose, instead of being ridiculed by the rest of the country as "freaks" and "criminals" simply because they seek to live a little bit differently than the rest of us?

But you don't see the far left encouraging Mormons in Utah to "come out" of the proverbial closet. If any of these "civil unions" (including gay marriage) were allowed to transpire in the name of "freedom from discrimination," these counterfeit, ridiculous ideas would certainly create a breakdown of the sanctity of marriage, at best, or a complete breakdown of society as we know it, at worst.

History, social science, anthropology, religion, theology and nature itself all support the traditional definition of marriage. The traditional family structure is at the forefront of American societal concerns, and the threat of such preposterous unions as to include any different combination of gender or number of partners legally allowed to wed can only lead to the further deterioration of the family values system.

The left has had no substantial argument for being pro-gay marriage, except for the points I have recently heard at the debate. These points include that gay marriage is a modern civil rights fight, and the definition of marriage itself should be eradicated. Neither point is valid in any way, shape or form.

The civil rights battle was based on the fact that people were not even allowed simple, basic human rights based on the color of their skin. The last time I checked, gays have every civil right that blacks (and women) in this country fought for, including the right to vote, own property, go to the same schools, ride on the same busses, etc.

We do not discriminate against gays in this country. We have decriminalized homosexual acts. We have criminalized "hate" against them. We have accepted them into society as normal. They hold public office, they run large companies, they serve in the military, and they are even priests! Sexual orientation is a personal matter. How we define living arrangements is a personal matter. It does not belong in the halls of government.

Traditional marriage is recognized to protect the sanctity of the monogamous, heterosexual union as recognized by the five major religions, and as practiced since the dawn of time. Thus, I oppose any government recognition or endorsement of any measure to sanction something as ridiculous and counterfeit as same-sex marriage. The almighty, eternal and sacred union of one man and one woman should be preserved in this nation.

It is always amazing to me that the leftists always claim that America was founded on the principle of freedom. It certainly was. But at the time, freedom meant (to the founders) freedom to practice any religion, freedom from a king, and freedom from unfair and excessive taxation.

The leftists enjoy attacking religion, relish governmental meddling and control of our lives and our markets, and they raise taxes at every turn ... yet when it comes to "gay marriage," we have to allow it because "our country was founded on freedom." Yeah, right.

Jonathan Hansen
College Republicans