Beg to disagree on gay marriage

Re “Now, about gay marriage,” editorial, Jan. 21

While appreciating The Times’ well-articulated awareness that gay marriage is a basic civil rights issue, please note the erroneous term you used: “sexual preference.”

This implies there is choice involved. For this gay man, it has never been a matter of which gender I prefer, but rather which gender I was born to be oriented toward.

Buck Winston

Los Angeles

--

The Times bases its argument for legalizing gay weddings on the specious premise that marriage is a civil right.

Name one civil right that requires permission and consent from another person, a license from the state and a presiding official. You can’t, because marriage is not a right but a privilege that can be revoked by either partner at any time.

If marriage were a civil right, then we could not discriminate against polygamists or incestuous couples.

John Tintle

Nipomo, Calif.

--

To compare marriage between two men or two women with marriage between a black man and a white woman or a white man and a black woman is ridiculous.

The argument against the latter is political. The argument against the former is moral, and four members of the California Supreme Court can’t change that.

Robert S. Rodgers

Culver City