Karen Mahler, Moorhead, Published May 06 2012
It is not about parents’ fitnessI take issue with Ken Sims’ letter of April 28 regarding the Marriage Protection Amendment in Minnesota. He seems concerned about making marriage a meaningless political gesture.
Judging by the divorce rate, many heterosexuals already see it as a meaningless gesture. It has nothing to do with the sexual preference of the individuals involved.
Sims says that “Under a genderless definition of marriage, the interests of the children are secondary.” In some cases, this might be true; however, this situation is far from exclusive to same-sex relationships. In many heterosexual marriages, the interests of the children are secondary to those of the heterosexual adults. There are many of us who are raising children alone who know that all too well.
This, again, has nothing to do to with sexual preference. The fitness of a parent has more to do with character, integrity and commitment than biology, so spare me the sanctimony.