Letter: Same-sex marriage law of the land, not a ‘social experiment’
In his op-ed on same-sex marriage (TCH, Sept. 27), David Brown is so wrong.
It is not a “social experiment.” And in our state, the Legislature and a majority of voters initiated it, not “five Supreme Court justices.”
Brown says the “Baby Boomer” definition of marriage is “a way for two people who love each other to enjoy their commitment,” and the “traditional” definition is that it provides a stable environment for children.
Civil marriage is neither of those things. It is a legal construct that creates a next-of-kin relationship between two people. That is all it does.
Before same-sex marriage, committed gay couples were denied equal status under tax and inheritance laws, military and Veterans Administration regulations, Social Security, etc. Marital status is recognized in about 1,100 federal laws and many state laws, and there are tangible benefits for married couples.
When my first wife became a Catholic recently, her archdiocese sent me formal letters regarding an annulment of our 12-year marriage. I barely read them. If her church decides we were never married, it makes no difference to me or to our three grown children. Nobody’s religious definition of marriage should determine the legal marital status of any two people.
Dennis Cresswell
Pasco
This story was originally published October 12, 2015 at 6:44 PM with the headline "Letter: Same-sex marriage law of the land, not a ‘social experiment’."