Letter to the editor: Gay marriage is not a right

In her column "A beautiful country wedding," Bridget Newman describes a same-sex marriage and how it illustrates part of the on-going struggle for gay rights. Like many leftists, Newman uses that dreaded "r" word--rights--a word that connotes obligation and necessity.

But allowing same-sex marriage is not an obligation, and it is not a necessity. Marriage has served a myriad of purposes in many different cultures and religions throughout time, be it romantic, economical or social. There have been many debates about what marriage is and should be, such as in discussions of polygamy and monogamy. However, marriage, by definition, has in every case entailed the matrimonial union of partners of opposite sexes and therefore necessarily excludes same-sex unions.

Because there are so many different marriage customs out there, it's reasonable to infer that each society or religion can and does determine whom it allows to marry. But even allowing this obvious clouding of the traditional definition of marriage, there is no law, written or otherwise, that states or implies that the person or people that make such a decision on the subject are obligated to include or exclude any particular group. So once again, I have to say that homosexuals cannot claim marriage to be one of their fundamental rights.

There are many facets to just this one issue, and I cannot and do not want to go into them all. The point is that while we are all entitled to our own thoughts and beliefs and the freedom to voice them, there are many other things that we are not necessarily entitled to, and therefore, I would strongly caution any proponent of either side to think twice before talking about his or her rights.