Acceptance Of Homosexuality
Brook Mingo#528394368801.856.5346
Dear Editor,I am writing a respons to Jon Cox’s editorial about Acceptance of Homosexuality. In it he writes that “legalization of all aspects of homosexuality would be a way of admitting that there is not a problem with being homosexual.” I am sure many of the lawmakers on Capital Hill here in Utah would agree with him, but is it not the responsiblity of the government to secure the rights of man, not take them away. It is not the government’s place to tell citizens who they can and cannot love, marry, or take their rights away because they happen to love a person of the same sex. This is comparable to a situation in which two lifelong best-friends who happen to be the same sex, and who have no other family memebers become the legal guardians for one another. Would the government be right in taking that right away from them even though they may not share the same bed?I can respect you for not agreeing with homosexuality; that is a very personal, religious choice. But to argue that if homosexuals were allowed to marry the fundamental unit of society – family – would be destroyed is incredibly biased. Two people, regardless of their sexual preference and orientation, who are willing to make a pact to love each other forever isn’t a step towards destroying society. Divorce, on the other hand is. Social acceptance does change the status of an act, making wrong into right; remember sixty years ago when interracial marriage was considered wrong, because the majority of society deemed it so? I would like to know Jon Cox’s opinion on that.