MORE ON DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIPS AS THREAT TO MARRIAGE: Random Blade readers

Re "Taking the blame for messing up marriage" (editorial by Chris Crain, Dec. 10)
1. Let's say the unsaid: Gay marriage is a threat to heterosexual marriage because it's the chief tool to maintaining a male-dominated society. When all the sex-discrimination laws are off the books, when we all have equal opportunities at work, there will still be the domestic front, the final domain of "privacy" and oppression. With gay marriage, we dissolve any possibility that men and women have biologically-determined roles and simultaneously break down the culturally-determined ones. If men (even gay men) can enter into a legal relationship as either oppressor or oppressed, then women can no longer be oppressed because of their sex. And the lesbian threat--that women actually can survive without men--needs no mention, I hope. There's no point in tiptoeing around this issue. The conservatives know it in their bones. It's time to be up front: proponents of same-sex marriage are out to radically change the institution of marriage. And that's a good thing.

2. Excuse me? Only gays should have access to legal nonreligious relationships such as civil unions and domestic partnerships or we are a threat to marriage? As a divorce lawyer in Tennessee, let me tell you without fear of contradiction that heterosexuals need no help from us in trashing the institution of marriage. Chris Crain's editorial reveals his affection for conservatism, tradition for its own sake, and religious mumbo jumbo.

3. As a human resources executive, I have had the opportunity to add domestic partner benefits as an option for employees. In all instances, the benefit was available to same-sex and opposite-sex couples. We offered the benefit to help define ourselves as an employer of choice in our industry. It had nothing to do with senior management's views on homosexuality or marriage; no one was making a statement in support of gay rights. Gay men and women certainly benefited, but it really wasn't about them. So if a Massachusetts company decides to eliminate same-sex D.P. benefits now that gay marriage is legal in their state, I can assure you it is about saving money, not some ideological statement about a newfound equality.

here

posted by Eve at 6:08 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home