Joyworks Library
Letters to the Editor
Marriage is a legal and civil matter - Period
Sent to the Editor of The Day, New London CT on 09 February 2004.
To the Editor:
I've long believed that it is short-sighted, parochial and just plain ridiculous to keep consenting and conscious adults from voluntarily agreeing to take responsibility for and to provide for one another - for all their lives, which is what banning the marriage of persons of the same sex does. Recently, I read in your newspaper that, "Rowland has said he would sign a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage if one reached his desk.", Well - there it is - PROOF - that banning same-sex marriage is a BAD idea!
Attempting to interfere in anyone's choice of living-partner is just plain Un-American. Even considering a constitutional amendment is beyond absurd. Although I am on vacation in Florida, I don't think I've left the planet - or the USA. Isn't this still the same country whose very roots began in the search for freedom? Freedom from religious tyranny? Freedom from government intervention into private matters unless harm is being done to persons who cannot defend themselves or to the state?
As far as state involvement goes, marriage is a legal and civil matter - period. The only questions for our legal representatives (our government) should be asking are: Does righting the injustice of prohibiting the legal marriage of any sane and consenting adult to another sane and consenting adult potentially harm the involved adults? Does it harm the state's interests in any way?
Or does it, perhaps, even benefit the state? I'd suggest that correcting our current discriminatory marriage laws does benefit the state. For an adult to have another adult make a legal commitment to them to share their lives for as long as they both shall live - means that they are legally responsible for and to one another. And, anytime the state is not left as the only other legal entity to provide care and concern for someone, the state benefits. Boiled down, it's really that simple.
Questions of whether amending the marriage laws to extend the freedom to marry the person we choose and who chooses us that go beyond these considerations are bred of ignorance and intolerance. (What I really want to know, Mr. Rowland, is, "What happened to Republican's believing in less government, not more?", which your readiness to sign such an amendment suggests.)
And to Brian Brown, Family Institute of Connecticut, who was quoted in The Day on February 7th as saying, "Marriage is not created by law, It's a social and anthropological institution that has lasted thousands of years." What planet have you been visiting?
Marriage is most certainly created by law. Marriage is not legal unless it is certified as performed by someone recognized by a legal entity to perform the legal (not religious) act - everywhere in this country - even in your town and your state. What your church or temple recognizes or approves of or not has nothing to do with the laws of any state in this country. Thank god!
Joyce Thomas, Norwich Connecticut 06360
Writing from West Palm Beach FL, on hiatus from the snow
