An absurd position

Share with others:

Print Email Read Later

Regarding "When Two Become One" (Sept. 15 Forum): Bishop David Zubik's argument boils down to this: Marriage is for reproduction.

That's unworkably restrictive. Of course there is far more to marriage than just having children, as every married person knows. But Bishop Zubik isn't married, so we can pardon him for not understanding marriage very well.

If marriage were only for having children, as the bishop proposes, then we should require proof of potency and fertility of couples as a condition of getting a marriage license. We should deny marriage to anyone beyond child-bearing age. Some people marry who can have children but prefer not to. Should they be forced to divorce? Arrested? Fined?

Bishop Zubik's argument, although stated in proper church-like language, is preposterous. There is no reason why it should influence the legal rights of Pennsylvanians.




Create a free PG account.
Already have an account?