Uncategorized

Opinion: ‘A few basics’ show that SCOTUS was wrong on marriage

In the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, let’s review a few basics:
1. Human sexuality cannot be reduced to the pursuit of pleasure.
2. Marriage cannot be reduced to a vehicle either for the acquisition of benefits, or for the enhancement of self-esteem.
3. Children are not a commodity to be manufactured with the design of excluding one of the natural parents. Children are the fruit of the bodily union of their mother and father, who are complementary, not interchangeable. Neither is dispensable.
4. Complementarity of the opposite sexes is the sine qua non of marriage. It isn’t reasonable to assert that the biological reality written on our male and female bodies has been, or one day will be, superseded.
5. Marriage being what it is, its parameters cannot be altered. Attempts to redefine marriage will, in the long run, serve only to deconstruct marriage, as must be the case in any situation when the form is granted where the substance is missing.
“It is unwise to accept any concept if you have to invert a whole frame of reference in order to justify it.” Yet that is what the Supreme Court has done, turning on its head the human ecology of sex, marriage and the family. The writers of a recent (July 10) letter praising the decision imagine that, because the Supreme Court has spoken on the issue, the country will fall in line. Hmm — just as it did after Roe v. Wade?
Grace Weber, Weybridge

Share this story:

More News
News Uncategorized

Fresh Air Fund youths returning to county

The Fresh Air Fund, initiated in 1877 to give kids from New York City the opportunity to e … (read more)

Obituaries Uncategorized

Mark A. Nelson of Bristol

BRISTOL — A memorial service for Mark A. Nelson of Bristol will be held 1 p.m. on Saturday … (read more)

Sports Uncategorized

High school athletes ready for fall playoffs this week

See when your favorite high school team is competing in the fall sports playoffs.

Share this story: