LETTER: Other relationships can't compare to marriage
To The Telegram: Sen. Jauch, thank you for your response to our expression of opposition to Gov. Doyle's domestic partnership proposal. In your response letter, you asked for opponents to "somehow explain how [your] 35 year marriage is somehow 't...
To The Telegram:
Sen. Jauch, thank you for your response to our expression of opposition to Gov. Doyle's domestic partnership proposal. In your response letter, you asked for opponents to "somehow explain how [your] 35 year marriage is somehow 'threatened' by these provisions."
This meaningless challenge misses the point. It isn't any single marriage which is at risk, but civilization itself.
The clear thinker will first of all compare the institution of marriage to the institution of government. Then ask which of these two institutions is more ancient and primary, which is the foundation of human civilization, and therefore, which one depends upon the other? Here's a hint, government is not the foundation.
It is unimportant whether or not the semantics of "domestic partnership" is employed. By whatever name, the proposal to grant legal status to same-sex relationships by government fiat makes sense only if one believes that government is the inventor and arbiter of basic human rights.
If you think your political position authorizes you to re-structure the way human society works, you are as arrogant as you are clueless.
No, the proper role of representative government is to simply recognize, not invent or alter, the foundation of our human civilization, which is monogamous, heterosexual marriage. Other relationships can never compare to the sacredness of marriage as the basis of society, and the natural fruits of marriage, children.
Here's another germane comparison -- contrast on one hand millennia of human tradition, moral standards and the basics of common law, to very recent trends in our troubled culture to forget these time-tested values, and to recklessly try to invent a "brave new world" based upon wholly untested values.
Politicians seem especially vulnerable to such unthinking trendiness. If you are so infected, and prefer the modern trendiness, we challenge you to explain logically why and how. If you cannot do so, we invite you to reconsider your position.
-- Gerald & Lenore DePyper