Basic Biology Lost on Letter Writer

Lorrie Farrelly of Yorba Linda has a letter published in the Los Angeles Times in response to their recent article on the marriage fight in Maine.

I suppose the absurd statement made by a Maine anti-gay-marriage worker -- "There is no family without mom and dad" -- might make sense were there not single-parent families, families headed by one or two grandparents, gay families, adoptive families, families headed by an older sibling and even the ultra-extreme Octomom's family.

There's nothing absurd about the marriage-honoring worker's statement. In each of those cases Ferrelly cites, both a man and a woman created those children – "mom" and "dad". So the statement stands – without mom and dad, there is no family.

Unfortunately, yes, there are children born to someone who is unable or unwilling to care for them (say... wasn't "safe and legal" abortion, in addition to contraception, supposed to end that?), and unfortunately, some children are left without their original parents due to death, and yes, some unmarried women foolishly have themselves inseminated using sperm foolishly donated by some guy who thought it would be a good idea to get paid for masturbating, especially if it meant passing along his genes supposedly-no strings-attached. But none of these things should be encouraged. For the sake of a better civilization, we should be encouraging people to 1) avoid conceiving children out of wedlock, 2) only get married (that means a bride+groom) when a) ready to be a dedicated spouse, and b) he or she has found a fundamentally compatible partner is also ready to be a dedicated spouse, 3) live in a way that honors and cares for their spouse; 4) put the needs of any children they birth or adopt over their personal desires and convenience.

[More after the jump.]

Notice I do not say everyone should get married. I do not say everyone should have children. Don't want to get married? You don’t have it. It is voluntary.

We should not be doing things that encourage people to conceive or raise children without providing those children with one mother and one father who are in a healthy marriage together.

Of all of those families, only one group does not have accompanying legal rights and responsibilities, and that needs fixing.

Two or more men, or two or more women is not a family, unless they are related through birth or adoption. Regardless, it takes both a mom and a day to perpetuate the family. Any couple consisting of two men or two women caring for children most likely is doing so as the result of previous relationships or artificial insemination. In either of those cases, the adults decided to create the situation knowing that it wasn't going to give those children a married home with a mother and father. In rare cases, same-sex couples may end up with orphaned nieces or nephews – and I do not have a problem with a domestic partnership being granted. We need not redefine marriage to accomodate this rarity.

Two unwed adults who love each other should have the right to marry.

Again, what if they don't love each other? How does the state know that one way or the other? And, again, by this standard, people who are already married to others or are closely related to each other would have a "right" to get a marriage license. And, finally, again, why just two? Isn't that a "bigoted" limitation?