Letter: Can’t we accept a new concept of “family”?

To the Editor:

After reading Matt Esposito’s article on gay marriage, I understood why my friend said it made her blood boil. Over a couple of salads in Eickhoff, we talked about how ridiculously ignorant it was. I was shocked someone actually felt that way, and I hadn’t even read the article yet. (I admit, I had only read The Singal up to that point.) Even the title made me want to twitch – “Gay marriage arguments defy sense and tradition.”

Call me outspoken or a bitch (I’ve been called both numerous times), but you’re damn right I’m going to argue.

I attended one of the most beautiful wedding ceremonies this past summer and there wasn’t a dry eye in the house. And gasp! It was between a woman . and a woman!

I’ve never seen my boss happier in the entire three years I have known her. Sadly, their families refused to attend. They didn’t let anyone stop their bliss, and words can’t describe how much I respected that.

As a future educator of young children, I’ve been warned of the different family situations I’ll face in the future. In the past, most children had a mother and a father, but with the raising divorce rates, the nuclear family has drastically changed.

One day, I’ll teach a child with two mothers or fathers. Will some have a problem with it? Maybe, but I hope by then our nation will be a little more open-minded. Children will not be brainwashed with books like “Heather has Two Mommies,” but they are naturally curious beings.

I’ll be asked, “Why does Heather have two mommies?” My response will most likely be, “Heather has two mommies because they both love her very much.” I’d like to see someone argue with me about that. Love for children knows no gender.

If Bush intends to approach this matter “with kindness and . decency,” he may want to rethink his policies. There is no kind or decent way to tell a group it isn’t worthy of getting married just because it wasn’t legal in the past.

We, as a nation, apparently thought slavery and segregation were acceptable, but things have changed in 2004.

I couldn’t help but laugh at Matt’s weak attempts to justify his pigheaded opinion. “. [I]f you look at the situation logically, gay marriage makes no sense.” I’m pretty sure I’m looking at things quite logically when I say mind your business.

Did you care when Mr. and Mrs. Jones from down the street got married? So why should you care if Mr. Smith marries Mr. Adams?

I can only hope certain people will see beyond the ignorance plaguing their minds and realize their “lifestyle” isn’t the only one.

Candice Groves