EMAIL OF THE DAY II

“Dear ‘Freak’ (your word not mine):
In response to your rhetorical question ‘what were opponents supposed to do?’
How about this option:
Accept the judges’ decision as good law-abiding citizens and go about their lives. It’s now been several weeks since gays were legally wed in Massachusetts and I have yet to find a single heterosexual marriage that has crumbled because of this historic event. I have yet to find ANY heterosexual whose life has been significantly altered in any way.
Yes, I really don’t need love to sanctify my love for my partner either. In fact, I don’t think any couple needs the sanctity of marriage to tell them what they already know. What I do need are the legal rights that come along with that “sanctity.” It seems to me you are confusing the terms “marriage” and “civil unions.” I could care less about the religious blessing and guess what —- we’re not invading people’s churches and demanding acceptance. This is a pure government, civil argument. So, if you need to separate “marriage” as a church function go right ahead. But please do not concede any civil rights for me and my partner.
One more thing – the following quote of your really irked me:
“If marriage is primarily about a family, then it excludes ALL gays, except those who inseminate and hire surrogates which I believe is drastically wrong when there are needy children who can be adopted.”
So, families with adopted children should not be considered a family? Infertile heterosexuals should be denied marriage? What exactly are you saying? How about infertile heterosexual couples who hire a surrogate to have children?”