Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

PROP. 8: Marriage doesn’t need protection

Letter by David Bates, Tacoma on Aug. 18, 2010 at 1:13 pm with 15 Comments »
August 18, 2010 3:08 pm

Re: “Marriage rooted in public interest” (letter, 8-17),

I was raised under a traditional heterosexual marriage, and it wasn’t until my late 30s that I was able to get out from under the oppression of my youth and live my life as it should be lived. That’s a lot of years not utilized to their fullest. Most of the tools I acquired to negotiate life, I learned on my own, no thanks to the traditional marriage.

Who’s to say that homosexuals don’t yearn to procreate and would if they could? The gay couples I know with children make fine parents, and I would entrust them with my own child. Homosexuality has been around since the beginning of civilization; it was no stranger to the ancient Greeks. And homosexuality is well studied by social science; look at the size of the gay section in bookstores.

What’s wrong with loving couples wanting to take their relationship to what they see as the ultimate level? If marriage is such a great thing, why does it need to be protected? Shouldn’t people be flocking to it and doing everything possible to save and enhance their marriage?

Turning out children who are caring, productive, thinking and open minded and know they are loved is what we should be doing as a society. Based on what I have seen and heard, marriage is not necessarily a large component of that.

It’s silly spending resources fighting something that shouldn’t be fought.

Tags:
Leave a comment Comments → 15
  1. truthbusterguy says:

    There is one problem with the gay marriage argument. The act itself can never be justified? It is not love. Like bestiality, it is another act of perversion.

    Leviticus 18:22 Thou shall not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.

  2. readingthelatest says:

    Truthbuster-

    While you are flipping through the Bible, read a few more of those verses. If you are going to apply one law and ignore the rest, then you can safely be called a hypocrite.

    Would you stone your daughter on your door step if she is found to be a non-virgin on her wedding night?

    Do you have any blended fabrics in your closet?

    If you are a man, were you in the delivery room when your child was born?

    How many days did you wait to see your newborn?

    Have you shared your bed with a women on her cycle?

    Would you grow different breeds of crops in the same garden?

    Do you cut your hair?

    Have your worked on the Sabbath?

    Read more and you too might find that your standing with the Bible is in peril.

  3. iamjimbo says:

    I’m not taking a position either way. I just found the following statement interesting and thought provoking…

    “Who’s to say that homosexuals don’t yearn to procreate and would if they could?”

    p.s. they can…

  4. iamjimbo says:

    … a lesbian and gay man can procreate.

  5. readingthelatest says:

    iamjimbo-

    You are correct. A lesbian and a gay man can procreate and it happens often. But not in the “traditional” way.

  6. If a homosexual man procreated with a lesbian, wouldn’t that mean that both are now neither?
    Readingthelatest- O.K. you got God’s opinion in the O.T. Law, now get a much more current application ( the whosoever in the age of Grace, as opposed to Levitical Law for pre-Diaspora Israel ) , ahem : Romans 1 : 15 – 32.
    Skeptics run into their own walls, then they build new ones to keep out the last one they ran into. It’s called being “implacable”…

  7. funny how “Christians” keep referring to Paul. Shouldn’t you just call yourself Paulists?

  8. larsman – archaeological records demonstrate that pre-diaspora Israel is a myth not a fact.
    http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2010/07/31/betya-didnt-know-that-archeology-is-anti-semitic/

  9. thanks lars. bBoy will lead the charge in trying to blow holes in anything you have to say from the Bible. Fact is, it has no authority for many people these days. Oh, they’ll quote from it out of context when it suits their purposes, but don’t expect much more than that.

    Paul lived and died for Christ, and he always made it very clear when he was expressing his own personal opinion. But as I say, none of this matters to those who’ve relegated the Holy Bible to the book give-away pile.

    As for this question in the letter above, “If marriage is such a great thing, why does it need to be protected? Shouldn’t people be flocking to it and doing everything possible to save and enhance their marriage?” —

    marriage is hard work; it is not the easy way. Contemporary Americans are so geared to hedonism and personal happiness, the notion of working at something is anathema to them. Sacrifice is a word that is barely in the lexicon any more.

  10. PeterPlumber says:

    I take exception to most, if not all of the writings of Paul. After all he was a bit crazy. Most of the letters he wrote, which became a large parotion of the New Testament, were written while he was in one prison or another. He writes as if he knew Jesus, but he never met Jesus. He had a “vision” one day and his whole life changed. And we are supposed to base our lives upon his writings??

  11. Sumner401 says:

    I see the same few so called ‘christians’ are here using their bible to justify their hate.
    That sure gets old considering that this is America and everyone has the same rights and the book of myths known as the bible hasn’t got a single thing to do with any of it.
    But boy don’t the same few scream bloody murder about other religions using their book of myths to run their counties?
    Ironic, yes, hypocritical, yes, typical of them, you bet it is.

  12. Bb & Zip- coming from those who have never read the Koran or the Bible except in a “fly- by” or “drive-thru” fashion, don’t know how to spell, pronounce or locate most of what they spout, hold a concordance upside down and as “proof” of their ignorance cite the official elementary “stuck up scary children” websites invented by Ham-as(s), it’s not surprising the level of intellectual dishonesty that those espousing the “religion of peace (defined in the Koran as compliance to Shari’a law) are finding themselves surrounded by. Abraham purchased the concentric area around present-day Jerusalem (one united city) from the Tribe (children) of Heth of the nation of the Hittites whose land area included present day Hebron through western Jordan and southern Syria the agreed upon PRICE being 400 sheckels of silver. This area provided among many other things, a family cemetery. One of the first things that Islamic conquerors do is destroy or refabricate any historical reference to those they conquer as in the Hagia Sophia, Cordoba mosque and the Temple Mount at Jerusalem…

  13. The Bible is pure fiction. Kinda like Steven King or Lady Gaga.

  14. larsman –
    Your attempt to dismiss the knowledge base of critics is pathetic.- like most agnostics or atheists (actually I would qualify as a Deist), I have read various Scriptures (the Bible, the Quran, the Book of Mormon, the Bhagavad Gita, etc.), theologians, religious historians, religious theorists, et al extensively.

  15. stetsonwalker says:

    iamjimbo says:
    August 18, 2010 at 5:58 pm

    … a lesbian and gay man can procreate.

    Read more: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/letters/2010/08/18/whats-the-big-deal/#comments#ixzz0xPKdNGuk

    ….and they can marry!

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0