Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:32:04 -0500 From: Interfaith Working Group Subject: IWG Christian Science Monitor marriage language letter December 21, 1999 Readers Write Christian Science Monitor 1 Norway Street Boston, MA 02115 Dear Editors: We had three problems with an otherwise fine December 17 article about the upcoming California ballot initiative to officially limit marriage to mixed-gender couples. First, while "gay marriage" is conveniently terse, it is inaccurate. We prefer to say "civil marriage for same-gender couples." The phrase "gay marriage" implies that there could be two kinds of marriage: "gay" and "straight." Legally, there would be one institution, "civil marriage." Personally and religiously, the structure of each marriage would continue to take on whatever form each couple wants. Secondly: while opposition to the legal recognition of the marriages of same-gender couples "springs from a range of moral and religious views," the same is true of those who support recognition of such marriages. And third, the phrase "irreplaceable" to describe marriage as an institution implies that it would in fact be replaced, rather than improved, through the removal of gender discrimination. Sincerely, Barbara Purdom Christopher Purdom Interfaith Working Group Coordinators The above letter was sent on IWG letterhead listing 17 congregations and religious organizations and 62 clergy from 16 religious traditions. Visit our Religious Support for Equal Marriage Rights page: http://www.iwgonline.org/marriage/ -- Interfaith Working Group PO Box 11706 Philadelphia, PA 19101 http://www.iwgonline.org/ iwg@iwgonline.org voice: 215-235-3050 fax: 215-232-0829