TribLIVE

| Opinion/The Review


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

Defining 'marriage' III

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 cmcnickle@tribweb.com).

Daily Photo Galleries

Monday, July 15, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
 

The editorial on same-sex marriage maintains that there is a parallel between the current marriage issue and the issue of slavery. There is no such parallel!

Today there are strong forces that have redefined marriage from the traditional meaning of being a union between a man and a woman. And they want that redefinition to be included in our laws.

When slavery was outlawed in our nation, it was not a matter of redefining it. For both sides on that issue, slavery had the same meaning, namely that some persons were the property of others, who could demand any labor from them without compensation.

Marriage cannot and should not be redefined. Other structures of cohabitations should be defined in other ways.

Hans Andrae

Jeannette

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.

 

 


Show commenting policy

Most-Read Letters

  1. Obama’s legacy
  2. Wolf an ideologue
  3. Be fiscal stewards
  4. Thanks to Cookies
  5. Henry L. Molinaro, R.I.P.
  6. Protecting taxpayers
  7. MRIs & back pain
  8. Pension fairness
  9. Bigotry vs. opinion I
  10. Obey speed limit
  11. Senate’s poor example