“One of the most painful parts of the same-sex marriage debate is the accusation that those who oppose same-sex marriage must be blinded by bigotry,” according to Jenet Erickson.
People on both sides of the marriage debate believe in respecting all human beings and preventing violence and hatred, and that is where the debate over the definition of marriage should begin.
In a recent essay for the Daily Herald, Erickson discuses how redefining marriage to be between two adults instead of a man and a woman would change its purpose. “Marriage involves more than just the adults who marry. Because marriage involves children, society has a deep and abiding interest in how it affects them.”
According to Erickson, "Children need more than just two parents, even two loving parents," and children should become a major focus as this debate continues.
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Our thoughts...
- 18 of the most heart warming and feel-good...
- Why LDS Church's anti-discrimination stance...
- In our opinion: Fairness for all: Religion...
- What one word best describes Barack Obama?
- What The New York Times gets wrong about...
- Letter: Slap to our history
- Drew Clark: The beams and motes of getting...
- What The New York Times gets wrong... 90
- In our opinion: Fix, don't repeal,... 75
- Michael and Jenet Erickson: Utah... 50
- In our opinion: Fairness for all:... 46
- Why LDS Church's anti-discrimination... 40
- Mike Lee: Tax reform shouldn't penalize... 38
- Jay Evensen: Will Obama visit Utah? Do... 37
- In our opinion: It's time for Utah to... 27