Letters for Wednesday, December 6, 2006

• The heart of the matter

• New yardstick for marriage

• Same-sex couples seeking equal rights

• Everyone deserves clean, unpolluted air

The heart of the matter

I would like to offer a few words regarding Chris Metcalf’s letter (“How does gay marriage harm your marriage?” Letters, Dec. 5), which was in response to a letter I wrote (“What is the sanctity of an American marriage?” Letters, Dec. 4)

Metcalf writes, in reference to the acceptability of same-sex marriage, “Can you imagine a building where every carpenter defined his own standard of measurement?” But I don’t see our country as one building. Instead it is a whole village of buildings, of diverse colors, sizes and architectural designs — build your own house as you see fit, and let your neighbors build theirs in peace.

As for the argument that expanding the definition of marriage to including same-sex marriage somehow “cheapens and degrades the real thing,” I say again that I find it impossible to imagine how the circumstances of someone else’s marriage, gay or straight, could possibly cheapen or degrade my own marriage. Should I ever marry, I certainly would hope that the sanctity of that union would arise from mutual love, adoration and respect between my bride and myself, rather than some abstract societal moré as I would wish the same for any couple.

I also find it odd that Metcalf’s letter presents the Scandinavian countries as an example of a society which, according to Metcalf, has already been degraded by condoning gay marriage. I say odd, because in fact, when examined in terms of general quality of life, these countries are virtual paragons of successful democratic states. For example, Scandinavian workers, for the most part, receive great wages with many benefits (generous vacation time and parental leave, for example), and Scandinavian countries in general have great healthcare systems (often free and government-sponsored). Literacy rates in Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland are all at 99 percent, and, for the most part, violent crime rates, particularly in Denmark, are almost absurdly low. These are hardly the hallmarks of “degraded” or failed societies! (Citing statistics of the numbers of children born out of wedlock, as Metcalf does, is ultimately irrelevant in regards to the health of a society in terms of universally accepted criteria, because it is only of concern if one happens to subscribe to certain religious beliefs, which not everyone does.)

But my core thesis (which, I noticed, Metcalf chose not to contest) is still this: In a free society, one adult cannot dictate to another adult how to live their life, based on privately held, non-universal, moral or religious beliefs. This is not a partisan or religious view, but a simple and logical deduction drawn from basic principals of free society. And I say that it cannot be any other way, because any other line of reasoning leads to impossible contradictions or, ultimately, in practical application, to a totalitarian state.

Do we really want this for America?

Kilauea

New yardstick for marriage

To answer your question, Mr. Metcalf (“How does gay marriage harm your marriage?” Letters, Dec. 5): YES, I would love that for America! I would love for everyone in the United States (and even the world) to be granted equal freedoms and rights. I would love for people to be accepted for who they are, and not be judged by closed-minded fanatics who think they know what is morally justified.

Who are you to say that homosexual marriage is an empty pretense? Seriously. I could marry some random man just because he’s got a fat wallet. Not that I would, but hey, I’m straight! I have that right! And THAT would be an empty pretense. But my dear friend John, who has been in a loving gay relationship for over 10 years, can’t marry his partner. And unlike a marriage of convenience or a marriage for money between a man and a woman, John and his partner would have the real thing.

You said that “a man and a woman joined together in holy matrimony is the time-tested “‘yardstick” for marriage. Remember that time when women had no rights? When women couldn’t own property? When women couldn’t vote? How about when it was considered acceptable for a human being to be OWNED by another person? When men and women alike were judged because of the color of their skin? All of those ideals were considered socially acceptable at the time. And they absolutely wouldn’t fly now. Perhaps it’s time for a new “yardstick” of marriage — one that cherishes and honors love and commitment, and not just relationships based on anatomy.

Redmond, Wash.

Same-sex couples seeking equal rights

In response to Chris Metcalf’s letter (“How does gay marriage harm your marriage?” Letters, Dec. 5), the simple answer is: It doesn’t harm your marriage. In fact, Mr. Metcalf, it has nothing to do with your marriage.

You mention “holy matrimony” and “throwing society into confusion.” Where is the holy matrimony in a drunken, impromptu Las Vegas wedding ending in divorce 27 hours later (Britney Spears, 2003)? And where is the clarity and sanctity of marriage in a television reality show that lets “America, Pick My Dad’s New Wife!?” You may see these people as heathens, but at the end of the day, the marriage certificate issued to them is still legal and binding — for better or for worse.

Same-sex couples are not looking for a “sanction” of marriage, they are looking for equal tax benefits, inheritance rights, hospital visitation rights and pension survival benefits that are afforded to all of the Britney Spears and reality show brides and grooms. If you want to preserve the American way, teach your children acceptance, tolerance and inclusion.

Kapa‘a

Everyone deserves clean, unpolluted air

While researching your Sun Village, I read your article by Lester Chang (“Sun Village man wants end to Kapaia Valley burning,” Jan. 26) regarding the health problems of Ned Sparks and others at Sun Village in Lihu‘e. Two of my daughters and I have experienced similar asthma and allergy problems due to smoke pollution. First it was the burning of the Everglades in Florida when they drained them and lightning strikes occurred. We moved to California on advice of doctors that we could lose one of our daughters. Again a few years ago the Parks Department burned eucalyptus brush, triggering asthma and pneumonia. My supervisor was also on the Pollution Control Board of three counties and they can burn only if smoke blows away from homes, the fire department stands by and there is prior notification. They have not burned in my area since, although it was scheduled twice yearly.

For a recent burn in Monterey County officials had to not only warn people but if they had to leave to avoid health problems they would be paid their expenses.

I hope the Sun Village (and particularly Ned Sparks’) problems were resolved favorably, and if not — a follow-up article? Kaua‘i is a lovely place; I just returned the 18th. We are all entitled to clean water and unpolluted air.

Aptos, Calif.