The letter from Mr Sandro Mangion, co-ordinator and media officer of the Malta Gay Rights Movement (The Sunday Times, January 9) made me look up your editorial of December 19, 2004, and as I expected, I found the letter nothing more than another excuse to promote his movement's agenda, which, it now clearly transpires, includes that of introducing in Malta marriages between persons of the same sex.

Now that we have had the first public parade in favour of gay rights, and this was supported by representatives of the three main political parties, the public is entitled to learn from these political parties whether their defence of gay rights includes the legalisation of same-sex marriages.

I ask three direct questions.

What do the respective political parties understand by gay rights?

Whom do they accept as the arbiter on what constitutes a gay right?

Will they promote, or vote for, the introduction of gay marriage in Malta?

Having put these questions, I feel that I am in duty bound to acknowledge that Labour MP Marie-Louise Coleiro, who participated in the gay parade, has declared in unequivocal terms that "on a personal level I do not agree with gay marriages" (Maltatoday, January 9). She did go on to say that she is not against legislation to protect the civil rights of two persons of the same sex living together. That is completely different from corrupting the concept of marriage through extending it to cohabiting homosexuals.

Your editorial was quite correct to describe gay marriage as a self-contradictory proposal. A genuine marriage is, and has always been, the union of two persons of the opposite sex, mainly, though not exclusively, for the propagation of the human race, within a stable family. Of course, love comes into the equation, but I would not confuse love with sex, though both are essential.

What I find disturbing is that there are homosexuals who seek to promote their cause by twising values, including Christian ones, to suit their ends.

They have perverted the meaning of the word 'gay' to project a friendlier image of themselves. I have a children's book entitled Gay Stories of Saints which has nothing to do with homosexuality. The title has now lost its original and innocent meaning.

They have created the word "homophobic" to label anyone who dares to disagree publicly with their point of view as suffering from some mental disorder. There is no etymological justification for the coining of this word.

Now, they want to pervert the meaning of marriage and family.

Abroad, they have insisted that active homosexuals have the right to become priests and bishops, and to promote homosexuality which is morally unaccaptable to the Church they are supposed to serve.

Mr Mangion sought to impress readers by quoting a reseach study to support his arguments. What he fails to appreciate is that he quoted two researches, each of which conveniently supported the views of the bodies which commissioned them. I attach to these so-called scientific research studies the same value as those commissioned by the tobacco industry to 'prove' that smoking is not addictive and harmful to health.

In my studies at universities both in Malta and abroad I was told that the scientific research works of Cyril Burt and Margaret Mead were crucial to intelligence testing and antropology. Decades later both were accused of doctoring their findings to suit their ends.

My lecturer on psychology in England, whom I admired and whose erudition was not in question, also succumbed to the temptation of doctoring his findings to suit his ends in a research work done for UNESCO in a Middle Eastern country.

From the press reports that I have read it seems that the Malta gay parade was modestly attended, and it did not have the offensive exhibitionism which one has come to associate with such parades abroad. This leads me to believe that the majority of homosexuals in Malta prefer to look on their sexual orientation as a private matter, and that they believe that their cause is not served by an aggressive campaign.

Finally, may I say how much I admire those persons with homosexual orientation who do not indulge in such sexual activity, in the same way that I admire persons with a violent disposition do not give vent to their natural inclination.