Gays for equality

I refer to the letter The Threat of Gay Marriage by Paul Kokoski (June 13) and was amused and angered at the attitude towards homosexuality.

Speaking of homosexuality as a "phenomenon" makes it sound like it is some form of commodity gadget everybody wants. Homosexuality is as old as the human race, proof of which is the Bible itself, for had it not existed it would have hardly been worth condemning, would it? Also, referring to it as a condition implies some form of bio-medical disorder and as far as I know no gay virus has been detected.

I was amused by his phobia about homosexuality destroying marriage. One would think that some form of Gays Against Marriage league was afoot. Gay people ask only for equality, not preferential treatment.

As for homosexuality "violating natural law", whatever that may be, it has been well documented in various animals including primates. If he thinks marriage is a "natural law", may I remind him that it is a purely social contract. Therefore, if the sexual act is to be merely a procreative act, marriage is absolutely unnecessary. Luckily for the human race, marriage exists and should be encouraged.

It is also true that homosexual unions tend to crumble more easily but has it ever occurred to Mr Kokoski that society is in no way helping gay unions survive? If a gay couple is faced with antagonism everywhere they go, then it is no wonder that they retreat into a "gay bubble" and this poses a huge strain on a relationship. I certainly do not advocate promiscuity, for too much of anything is harmful. It is wrong for someone to indulge in unbridled sexual activity at the cost of hurting other people but it is just as wrong to indulge in religious fundamentalism, regardless of people's free will, for the sake of moral personal gratification.

However, I would like to thank Mr Kokoski for informing us that the late Roman Republic collapsed due to moral licentiousness. Somehow I thought that the murder of Caesar and the power struggles of Octavian, Marc Anthony and the Senate had something to do with it.

As for the Bible, apart from being one of humanity's most powerful works of literature, it is open to interpretation. If you compare the Old and New Testaments you will notice the different attitudes as ancient society evolved. Of course, we can always go back to the Deuteronomical Law and reintroduce slavery and gender segregation, among other things.