Noia's notion of marriage incomplete

I agree that no one should be boasting about his or her sexual orientation, as Justin Noia writes in his Nov. 1 column "I don't hate gays (and neither does God)." I look forward to the day when sexual orientation is not a category by which to judge people.

I do have some squabble about the view of marriage in Noia's column, i.e. that marriage is primarily for procreation. In marriage, the bride and the groom are the most important, and not what comes after that. In fact, as far as I know, in marriage rituals, the vows are for the bride and the groom to love each other and be faithful to each other as long as they are alive. There is no mention of children at all. Children are important, yes, but they do not make or define a marriage relationship. In linguistic terms, children are not diagnostic components of the marriage relationship, but supplementary. If this is so, then there is room for a similar, meaningful relationship between those whose sexual orientation is other than heterosexual.

Daniel Arichea, Jr.

Bishop in Residence

Duke Divinity School