Dick Campbell

To the editor,

I feel a bit uneasy with the idea of same-sex unions, called marriage or something else. I’d rather see traditional marriage, bisexual and lasting. But then, is it any of my business? Or for that matter, is it the business of anyone else except those directly involved? Should it really be any concern of the law or of government? It’s not just same sex; where is there any necessity for prohibition of plural marriage of three or more consenting adults?

For a long time, our marriage laws have prohibited marriage of close relatives. This of course was deemed necessary to avoid in-breeding and resulting birth defects. It makes absolutely no sense when applied to same-sex unions. But there it is in the new laws on the subject. See New Hampshire RSA 457:2 as it will take effect January 1, 2010.

Why not just repeal all laws, state and federal, that govern marriage? Traditional marriage would be no less solemn, no less permanent, for those who believe that that is the way it should be. They would still take their solemn vows, under religious or social auspices or just to each other. And those who believe in non-traditional marriage would be free to act accordingly. Tax laws would be modified to treat everyone alike, without regard to marital status. Since traditional marriage is primarily a religious rite and status, don’t laws regulating it come close to violating the First Amendment?

This change would entail repealing a much larger volume of law than enacting. Wouldn’t that be refreshing?

Dick Campbell

Gilford