Bruce Cochrane: No good response on why term 'marriage' is needed

Published Date

To the editor:

Recently I wrote a letter pertaining to gay partners, civil unions or whatever you want to call it and why I think it should not be considered using the term marriage. I usually could care less what or how people respond. People close to me could attest to that. So far i have seen three responses and I am sure there will be more. What I haven't seen are any good and educational responses on why exactly the gay population wants the term marriage so bad. I mean really if you want the same treatment as a hetero married couple come up with your own. Marriage was already taken, period. Again I will ask you this: Why can't a civil union have the same privilages as a heterosexual marriage. Why is it so important to use the term Marriage when it does not pertain to homosexuals and never should be.

I would like to respond to some of my critics.

First, the lesbian from California and part time New Hampshire resident, you want to rattle off a bunch of statistics well here is one: 9 out of 10 dentists recommend you use oral B toothbrushes. Truthfully if heterosexual marriages are defined by you as a "bad" statistic such as 70 percent of marriages end in divorce then why in hell would you want that term so bad. I mean, really, I could Google some stats for you, oh wait here they are:

1. In September of 2006, the Agape Press reported the following:

A survey by The Advocate, a homosexual magazine, revealed that promiscuity is a reality among homosexuals. The poll found that 20 percent of homosexuals said they had had 51-300 different sex partners in their lifetime, with an additional 8 percent having had more than 300.

2.In regards to homosexual couples and domestic violence, a recent study by the Canadian government states that "violence was twice as common among homosexual couples compared with heterosexual couples." Also, according the American College of Pediatricians who cite several studies: "Violence among homosexual partners is two to three times more common than among married heterosexual couples."

3. This one is what I found interesting when you rattled off divorce stats by heterosexuals, I could not find any on gays. I wonder why that is? Because there isn't any. There is not enough data to support any civil unions being un-unionized. Unless you look to San Fran where at one point they decided to allow such a thing and then went ooops we made a mistake and the governor used his veto power and all those so called marriages went bye bye.

So with that being said you never gave a real reason why gays want the term marriage so bad.

Next, the couple that I affected so badly — oh by the way I am so sorry I ruined your day. No. Not Really. That is awesome that little ole me would have that much of an impact on your day together. It's actually quite pathetic. Well, you decided to go the biblical route. Really... really, did you really mean to go there? So I guess this is for you.

Here are some quotes to ponder:

Leviticus 18:22-24: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination."

Romans 1:26-27: Look it up.

Hebrews 13:4-7: "Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral."

I would go on but give me a break. I am not going to get in a biblical war. I personally feel the Bible is a guide book for each individual, in return they can interpet the way passages are written to influence their spiritual healing.

Again you failed to give me a good reason why gays need the term marriage so bad.

OK, finally the most recent, the young lady from Silver Lake. Kudos to you to be affected so much to write an article and personally attack me. When I wrote my article I did not personally attack anyone. I just wrote how I feel on a subject that is obviously very touchy to some people. I am going to give you some criticism since you opened yourself up to it. First to use my name over and over in each of your paragraphs was just redundant and over used. Second, Love is Love and I get that but this is about something a little beyond your spectrum. Since you had the nerve to attack me and don't even know me, it is not fair at all and I am very surprised somebody didn't tell you to be careful. In the age of computers via email, Facebook, and tweeting there is a huge lack of writers' responsibility. If you don't know what I mean then I am thinking you write about people all the time when you don't even know them as a person.

Let me fill you in on a few things: My neice is a lesbian, one of my best friend's sister is a lesbian, and I worked with a guy for many years that was gay; to this day this guy would go out of his way to help a complete stranger. I know a lot more but that's not my point. All of them know how I feel and vice versa and you know what? We coexist and are very adult about it. We could actually have an adult conversation about the subject and nobody's feelings would get hurt. You are only 13 years old, so don't you dare think you can write an article about me and lecture me on Love. You have five more years before you can go to a voting booth so that would be your time to shine. Until then you might want to refrain from attacks. Voicing your opinion is one thing. Telling me about Love is another. Again you even failed to give me valid reason why gays need the term marriage. Keep writing though; out of the three responses, yours was the best. Coming from me that's probably not very comforting. But oh well.

To all: Have A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Bruce Cochrane

Center Ossipee