In the May 11 letter “Mother and father bringing new life into world is basis of marriage,” John Clark calls gay marriage a distraction from the purpose of being wed, which he says is procreation. Would he also consider a childless heterosexual marriage such a distraction, and would he deny them rights as well? Perhaps we should just invalidate the marriages of infertile couples because, after all, they have no children. And if one marries only to procreate, why do people enter into second marriages well after their childbearing years have ended?
Procreation is one of several different reasons to marry, and should not be used as a defining factor or prerequisite. I married my husband because I wanted to share my life with him; our children are a bonus we did not initially plan for.
It is not gay marriage that is “nonsense,” but rather Clark’s attempt to use procreation to veil what I believe is bigotry.