Re Marriage: Purpose is to Nurture Children (letter 1-14). The writer is riding a one-trick pony. That identical letter ran last March. My vehement disagreement then is the same now.
Same sex partnerships in today’s society already play a part in the formation and nurturance of children via adoption, surrogacy, and foster parenting. Who is the writer to suggest that their unions are not suitable for creating a loving family because they are not “natural?”
Couples marry for many reasons. Those in their golden years who marry out of pure love, devotion and companionship. Those who marry in hospice, knowing their time is short. Those of childbearing age who simply want to remain that…a couple. How arrogant to assert that the primary purpose of marriage and heterosexual union is to procreate.
Families are formed by many circumstances: step-parenting, grand-parenting, foster-parenting, legal guardianship, and adoption to name a few. None of these situations fits the writer’s narrow definition of “own” family, and she implies that they are second best.
As the parent of a 23-year old young man, whom my husband and I adopted at birth, I have come to understand that marriage, family, and procreation are not as narrow concepts as the writer suggests. By her definition, ours is not a “natural” family structure, and somehow my husband and I are “pinch-hitters.”
Not hardly. Not ever.
The writer owes an apology to the scores of responsible, dedicated, loving “unnatural” families–gay and non–that she insulted in her letter…both times.