Regardless of the Supreme Court’s decisions in the two cases being considered concerning same-sex marriage, I suspect the fight over that issue will continue for some time, just as the fight over acknowledging full rights for African Americans and women continues with some people today.

The two points I’ve heard most from those who oppose same-sex marriage are No. 1, God forbids it and No. 2, allowing marriage among people of the same gender will harm society.

The first argument, I think, needs some clarification. I believe the accurate statement is really “My concept of God forbids it” since not everyone shares the same idea of God, and many don’t believe in a god at all. Also, even those who share the same concept of God don’t “hear” it say the same things that everyone else hears. So, how can “God forbids it” be the basis for a law?

As to the second reason, I would like for those who voice it to imagine two separate societies:

One society’s laws apply to all adult citizens equally. In this society, all citizens feel a sense of belonging and so are inclined to cooperate with and contribute to solving the problems faced by the community around them.

In the second society, certain laws apply only to those adult citizens who conform to the majority view of what is best. Anyone whose race, gender, religion or sexual orientation, regardless of how talented, educated or eager to contribute they may be, is shut out.

Which of the two societies would be the healthiest, and why?

I would think that the opponents of same-sex marriage whose professed concern is for the health of society would want to ensure that their society’s laws promote a sense of peace and harmony for all of its citizens, rather than just for themselves.

Wayne L. Parker

technical writer