You choose, we deliver
If you are interested in this story, you might be interested in others from The Journal Gazette. Go to and pick the subjects you care most about. We'll deliver your customized daily news report at 3 a.m. Fort Wayne time, right to your email.


  • Fossil fuel dependence demands attention
    For months now we have dealt with arguments pro and con regarding the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline.
  • Democrats in denial about election results
    The liberal big media along with Democrats are trying to nullify the results of the Nov. 4 midterm elections by saying that Americans want Republicans to work with President Barack Obama.
  • Obsession with Ritz an insult to voters
    Should the state superintendent be appointed instead of elected? Absolutely not. I don't recall anyone throwing a temper tantrum when Tony Bennett was elected.

Redefining marriage poses grave threats

A coalition of same-sex marriage proponents are banding together to fight a proposed state marriage amendment. The members of this coalition don’t want Hoosiers to decide for themselves how Indiana should define a marriage.

They are quick to oppose the traditional historical, and natural definition of one man and one woman, but yet offer none of their own. Would someone please step up to the plate and tell us what a better definition would look like? I assure you, anything offered would be vulnerable to the same criticisms of inequality and bigotry. There is no possible definition of marriage that would not eliminate a whole class of people in one way or another.

The implicit argument being made is that marriage should be open to any two adults who love each other and are committed, whether heterosexual or homosexual. But how is this not discriminatory? Why only two? Why only adults? Why only people? Or for that matter, why must there be love and commitment? By their own standards, any definition proposed would not be truly equal for all. The efforts to expand the understanding of marriage, however innocent the intentions may be, will eventually render both the institution and the concept utterly meaningless.