Following the exchange 

I have always advocated same-sex marriage in the hope that it will cause all of us to rethink traditional marriage. 

I read Roger Barton's May 12, 2010, letter ("'Gray' for gay") and saw "how just anyone is allowed to raise children." I thought, "Oh, no!" That was followed by, "simply because they have been able to mate with a member of the opposite sex." Dang, but if he didn't go there. The next paragraph had gay marriage not "endangering anything," followed by uncontrolled reproduction being one of our biggest social problems.

Every year, we have more children getting off the bus after having left a household without two parents in it. More and more often, they go home to a household with no parent waiting for them at all. The social problems associated with this seem agreed on. What do we do about it? 

We live in a society that allows anyone of the age of consent to have sex with just about anybody of the age of consent. You might think that this be controlled by controlling just who is having sex with whom. We don't want to go there, for that might nullify the argument for same-sex marriage.

Nearly half our children are now born out of wedlock, and more than half of all marriages dissolve in divorce. A pregnancy no longer implies a marriage for the sake of the children. Keeping a marriage together for the children's sake has given way to no-fault divorce.

I thought the move from same-sex marriage to controlled reproduction was an extreme jump! Why wade into those waters? We could leave it as an equal rights issue and even bring up why asexuals and those who choose not to get married or have sexual relationships shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.

Italy has the lowest birth rate in the world and also has a booming population. If you say that you want to control your population or you have to control immigration, you are called a bigot and a racist. Why? Thinking that civil unions shouldn't be coupled with such an inflammatory subject as controlled reproduction shouldn't make you guilty of "homo-hatred" (Letters, James Nimmo, "Imposing homo-hatred," June 2, 2010, Gazette). Bad parenting can be addressed by itself without bringing irresponsible reproduction into it. It doesn't serve the argument!

Anyone following this exchange has probably recognized a little too much exaggeration for dramatic effect. I hope that the readers have found something worthwhile to mull over. That is a good thing, right?   

"Mark Mason
Chickasha

Pin It
Favorite

More by Mark Mason

About The Author

Mark Mason

Latest in Letters to the Editor

Wheeler Crit @ The Big Friendly Brewery & Taproom

View all of today's events »

© 2022 Oklahoma Gazette / Tierra Media Inc. All rights reserved.
REPRODUCTION OF CONTENT IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT PERMISSION IS PROHIBITED.
TO OBTAIN PERMISSION, CONTACT US

Powered by Foundation