How does same-sex marriage threaten anyone?

Opponents to marriage equality and Question 6 claim that allowing same-sex couples to marry — and achieve the legal rights and responsibilities of a state (not religiously) sanctioned marriage — is a threat to heterosexual marriage and the American family.

My husband and I have been married for 22 years. Over those years, our marriage has been threatened by our jobs, our finances, our extended families, the demands of caring for our children, and, yes, our own imperfections. Same-sex couples have never been a threat to our marriage.

As children, our lives were complicated by our parents' troubled marriages, which were undermined by their immaturity, selfishness, addictions and, in my home, a divorce followed by multiple remarriages. Same-sex couples were never a threat to our childhoods or our parents' marriages.

Our grandparents' marriages were marred by, among other things, domestic violence, alcoholism, philandering and pervasive gender inequality. I'm pretty sure that same-sex couples were never a threat to their marriages or families.

The truth is, generations of married and unmarried heterosexuals have been undermining the "sanctity" of marriage for generations. And it's not hard to name vociferous proponents of traditional family values who have been caught not practicing what they preach.

The same-sex couples and gay individuals I know respect and desire marriage and family and the commitment both require. Allowing two loving adults to wed strengthens, not threatens, marriage and families.

Melissa Goodman, Davidsonville

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • Religious freedom and the Constitution

    Religious freedom and the Constitution

    What many people forget is that the framers of our Constitution, through the First Amendment, sought to guarantee both freedom of religion and freedom from religion ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof").

  • Marriage equality can't wait

    Marriage equality can't wait

    In 1967 when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down laws banning interracial marriage in Loving v. Virginia, there was not a single dissent. Never mind that Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute had been in the books since 1924. The justices unanimously found discrimination in the institution of marriage...

  • Court's silence on marriage speaks volumes [Editorial]

    Court's silence on marriage speaks volumes [Editorial]

    Our view: Same-sex marriage is set to be legal in a majority of states, making eventual Supreme Court victory appear inevitable

  • Religious beliefs can't excuse discrimination

    A recent suggestion that some people should be exempt from serving gays because of their religious beliefs is nonsense. If you are licensed to provide a service or employed by the government to do so, you are required to perform that service without unlawful discrimination. Neither government employment...

  • Indiana learns discrimination is bad business

    The leaders of large corporations have not generally been at the vanguard of civil rights movements in this country. The average CEO is usually more concerned about stock valuations and quarterly dividends than about fighting discrimination. And when was the last time you saw the money-hungry NCAA...

  • Yes, some people do follow the Bible to the letter

    Yes, some people do follow the Bible to the letter

    In his recent column ("The conservative case for same-sex marriage," March 29), Eddie Zipperer gives three reasons why conservatives should favor same sex marriage. I find his second, poking fun at the Bible, to be both offensive and ignorant.

  • Selective reading of Leviticus won't justify bigotry

    Letter writer Adam Goldfinger objected to Eddie Zipperer's references to Leviticus and states that he does indeed try to follow the laws in this book ("Yes, some people do follow the bible to the letter," April 3). I find myself wondering how many people Mr. Goldfinger has personally stoned to...

  • The struggle for gay rights isn't over

    The struggle for gay rights isn't over

    The reasoning behind the "righteous outrage" that commentator Jonah Goldberg uses to describe "know-nothings of every stripe" who are serious about protecting civil rights is twisted at best ("How do 'religious freedom' acts encourage discrimination?" April 3.)

Comments
Loading