| Opinion/The Review

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Marriage & religion mutually exclusive

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or

Daily Photo Galleries

Letter to the Editor
Friday, Feb. 8, 2013, 8:57 p.m.

I'm writing about Rudy Gagliardi's Feb. 5 letter “Gays can change ways,” in which he spews religious dogma against homosexuality. The views of his religion should have no bearing on what the government's position on homosexuality is.

While Mr. Gagliardi and his religious compatriots may restrict matrimony to what their religion believes, the government can do no such thing. From the government's perspective, a marriage is simply a contract between consenting individuals.

The government's role is solely to recognize the terms of the contract, not stipulate that the parties have complementary genitalia. Moreover, marriage is not about some secondary purpose such as procreation. While religions infuse marriages with a divine purpose, there is absolutely no justification for it.

As Shannon Britton writes in her letter, “Gays' right to marry” (Jan. 15), the theocratic aims of those who view homosexuality as a sin against God are explicitly leading to the creation of a second tier of individuals who have their civil rights curtailed based on religion. This is similar to what occurs in some Islamic countries with non-Muslims.

As history has proven, the difference between theocrats of the Christian and Muslim varieties is only superficial, as both forms of supernaturalism, if given political power, spawn similar tyrannies.

Amesh A. Adalja


Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read Letters

  1. WQED beyond repair?
  2. ‘Normal’ pitfalls
  3. Data misrepresented
  4. Updated paving needed
  5. Can’t believe ATI statements
  6. Good for seniors
  7. The pope & child abuse
  8. Pipelines to the future
  9. VA denies benefits
  10. Home, sweet home?
  11. A WQED loss