Con: Not all relationships are equal

In response to the Rob Marino letter of May 5. Heterosexual and same-sex relationships are not equal because the latter cannot procreate. This physical fact mandates inferiority no matter how hyperbolic the rhetoric gets about equal rights. Same-sex relationships cannot produce the genetic markers of both parents, thus requiring the services of a third person.

That is not to infer that same-sex couples cannot create loving, nurturing and supportive homes for children they may adopt or dependents they may acquire. Empirical data shows little difference between the profiles of either kind of relationship.

However, since the gay/lesbian lobby has put this question before the courts and the public as one of equal rights for “loving couples,” they have placed the issue on an exceedingly slippery slope.

Removing procreation from the marriage equation reduces marriage to a condition of love and emotion. Some, as in the gay/lesbian community, would have you believe that should be the only criteria for marriage.

Most in the liberal community would have you believe that denying same-sex couple’s marriage is denying them equal rights. To both premises I say, “El toro pupu (BS).”

Procreation has been the basis of all societies since the beginning of time. The institution of marriage was created primarily to protect the hierarchy of procreation, i.e., linage and heredity.

The gay/lesbian community has shrewdly shopped the courts over the past several decades picking liberal judges sympathetic to their cause with significant success. Homosexuality once considered abnormal is now accepted in mainstream society. And this has been accomplished primarily on the hyperbolic rhetoric of the moral, loving, caring and nurturing nature of same-sex couples. Now that homosexual acceptance, through legal and political channels, is a fait accompli what is next?

Since the abnormal within our society are constantly pushing the envelope of acceptance through political and judicial channels, it is reasonable to expect that another deviant group will emerge demanding their right to love and happiness.

Perhaps society has embraced tolerance to the point of accepting pedophiles into the community. Isn’t the goal of the North America Man Boy Love Association to permit sexual relations between men and boys for a greater consciousness of love and nurturing?

Or perhaps the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals will emerge as the next crusade for equal rights. There will always be whacko fruitcakes wanting to marry their pets because they love them so much and think their human.

But my greatest fear is from the lawyers who will represent, the judges who will favor and the politicians who will advocate for these insane minorities.

The one thing society must remember is that we are not a country governed by the “rule of law,” we are governed by the “rule of precedent” or case law. Find a judge to rule in your favor and you have set a precedent and established case law. Find more judges sympathetic to your cause and they will accept previous precedents as points of law.

Given the space I could list 50 more lunatic fringe groups that will use this homosexual model, if it is successful, to get their agenda accepted through the courts.

Liberal thinking has rendered societies moral compass groundless. There are no longer any reference points. Liberals and the legal profession are rapidly tearing down all of the boundaries established over centuries that prevent anarchy.

When a society cannot, because of judicial activism, determine what is acceptable behavior within its community then the door is open for all behavior to be legal, regardless of whether the behavior is unacceptable to the community at large.

We live in an age when the minority rules and the rights of a few, regardless of how outrageous, far outweigh the majority.