By Redefining Marriage, We Reduce Its Meaning

Re “Yes, Polygamy Is Everybody’s Business,” Commentary, Feb. 9: Naomi Schaefer wants to justify same-sex marriage as valid by attacking polygamy as a form of child endangerment. Child rape has always been a crime and, in California, spousal rape is a crime also. Polygamy can’t change that. However, once the institution of marriage is changed for same-sex partners, there are no logical reasons for preventing marriage between brothers and sisters and other adult relatives -- or polygamists.

Clyde Feldman

Sherman Oaks

Interesting irony. A number of your Feb. 9 letters vilify Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for opposing legal marriages of one alternative lifestyle, and then you grant a full half-page to Schaefer to vilify another. Given that child abuse is already illegal, how can she reject non-abusive marriage between consenting adults? Exchange the words “polygamy,” “incest” and “homosexuality” and you’ll get it. This is the dirty secret all gay-marriage activists keep avoiding intellectually. How can you want legal sanctions for “your” alternative lifestyle and call “mine” a perversion?

When Christmas is celebrated every day, Christmas is celebrated no days. When marriage comes to mean everything and anything, it soon comes to mean nothing.

Jon Pratt Driggs

Santa Clarita

Schaefer’s commentary reopened my scars from a controlling marriage full of child abuse. Kudos for her sagacious clarity and rationality. It is with a hopeful heart that I pose the question: When will there be justice for the emotionally paralyzed victims of familial abuse trying to protect their bodies and their individual rights?

Deborah Jamieson

San Marcos, Calif.

Re “Massachusetts Debates the State of Matrimony,” Feb. 6: Regardless of which side one may be on in the Massachusetts marriage controversy, it is clear that we have a court that’s out of control. The Massachusetts Supreme Court is usurping the constitutional authority of the legislative branch of government and creating law instead of interpreting it.

That four justices -- actually, just one swing vote -- can force their will on millions of people is just plain tyranny and the height of arrogance. Only an elected legislature can pass laws -- and is therefore accountable to the people. The court thinks it has to answer to no one. It is time to change that now.

Thomas Collier

West Covina