To the editor:
I'd like to thank Denny Smith for his June 4 "Gay marriage response." He made a "calm and civil" attempt at answering five questions posed in my May 26 letter.
However, I feel we need more elaboration on four of them:
1. What percentage of homosexual unions end up being totally monogamous throughout the couple's entire lifetime?
D.S.:- ". I am guessing it is probably similar to heterosexual marriages, which would be around 50 percent."
P.D. - I did a little more research on this, and noted that McWhirter and Mattison spent five years studying 156 male couples - 312 individuals - "in loving relationships lasting from one to thirty-seven years" and not a single couple reported sexual fidelity lasting longer than five years. From other sources I have read, it appears that most of these couples want to keep the "cruise option" open within their committed relationship. So if there is data showing otherwise please show it.
2. If we change the definition of marriage to mean also a union of two men or two women, what rationale will we have to refuse other unions?
D.S. ".Comparing same sex civil marriage to marrying one's pet is a totally hurtful analogy, and one that I hope does not surface again. Asking if they can then marry a boy is another hurtful comment but let's address it. The same laws that apply to a heterosexual man marrying a young girl would apply to a gay man marrying a young boy or a lesbian marrying a young girl."
P.D. As to "hurtful analogy," do you not think it's hurtful to see the tradition of man-woman marriage that has been the very foundation of civilization since the beginning, being equated with something totally outside of the natural law?
Activists say that the basis for promoting same sex marriage is to honor those who love each other. Using that criteria, why not man-boy; and if a man loves his dog and the dog loves him, why not? As to laws; we had laws against abortion and sodomy, but that was changed due to pressure from activist groups. So laws can be changed for the better or for worse. Which brings up the question: Are there any homosexual activist groups who publically condemn man-boy sexual relationships?
3. If we are defining homosexuals as a "minority" similar to that of blacks or any other race that can be identified by their DNA construction, please tell us what biochemical property defines the homosexual.
D.S. "I did not understand the question about defining a 'minority' being connected to DNA, or what that has to do with a person's right to pursue a loving relationship and a lifetime of happiness with the person of their own choosing."
P.D. I interpret the motive of those pushing "same sex marriage" as this: "We were born as homosexuals, we can do nothing to change it, therefore we must have a sexual relationship with someone of the same sex; and some of us want to call it marriage, others of us do not want a marriage contract - but that doesn't matter, we insist that traditional definition of marriage must be changed."
Homosexual activists claim this is a civil rights issue similar to that of Blacks in the 1950s-60s. We know Blacks have genetically defined characteristics that identify them. So if there is no genetic identifier for the homosexual, then the only identifying characteristic is based solely on behavior. But what about those homosexuals who went through programs like Exodus International or Courage Apostolate- (a 12 step program patterned after AA) and became heterosexuals? which brings up another question: Why do some homosexual activists groups persecute ex-homosexuals? see Parents, Friends of Ex-gays and gays (PFOX website)
4. Apparently, in 1973, the American Psychiatric Association took homosexuality off the official list of psychiatric disorders. What was the scientific basis for that decision?
D.S. "I trust that trained psychiatrists have more expertise than I, so I personally trust their reason for doing so."
P.D. - I was hoping for some scientific data because Rueda & Schwartz in "Gays, Aids and You" say this change was the result of pressure tactics and intimidation. Also, Herrell and others published papers in the Archives of General Psychiatry, showing homosexual people are at a substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidal tendencies, major depression, and anxiety disorder." More info at narth.com
PS: In the spirit of Col. John W. Ripley (USMC), I would ask all the men out there who are hiding behind the "safe and secure" zone of anonymity when writing the online posts to consider stepping out into battlefield and walk point for awhile by signing your name. In my opinion you are setting a cowardly example for boys and young men.