Our local newspaper (not dead yet, but shrinking) published an odd letter to the editor the other day. A woman wrote in to explain that same-sex civil unions are okay, but not marriage. Why? Her answer is “just because.”
There are a great many of us who desire to keep the definition of marriage as a legal and/or spiritual union between a man and a woman. Not because we hate gays, not because we fear gays, not for religious reasons or fear of change — but simply because marriage is between a man and a woman.
Is your head spinning from the circularity of this argument? It not only begs the question, it’s factually wrong. For example, in Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine, Connecticut, and, beginning next year, New Hampshire, marriage is not between male and female only. Also, in Spain, Canada, Belgium, Netherlands, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, and soon in Nepal (most likely) marriage is not between man and woman only.
I’m hoping that civilization will move briskly forward while this letter writer’s thoughts are still zooming around in circles. Her head is like a little hadron collider in which particles never meet.