On Jan. 16, I picked up a copy of the Kernel on my way to class. I normally find interesting columns and maybe see a funny comic strip, but today I was really in shock when I read a letter to the editor.

“A Defense of Traditional Marriage in the U.S.” actually made me send this letter to you because of how strongly I felt about this article.

The letter is a response to another letter that supports legalizing gay marriage. I know it is not uncommon for people to have problems with gay marriage, but the writer basically says, “I haven’t a problem with gay people … except if they want to get married.”

The writer explains that religious arguments are applicable through the idea that all men are equal in the eyes of God and without religion we would not know to love thy neighbor. However, it is stated in the Treaty of Tripoli, “As the Government of the United States is not, in any sen-se, founded on a Christian religion,” so religion should not play a part in arguments about the laws of marriage in the United States.

The writer feels gays have never been oppressed, “Ever.”

Has he not heard about Hitler and his slaughtering of homosexuals? What about how the Iranian government has executed over 4,000 people for homosexual acts? The death penalty is the sentence for homosexuals in places like Saudi Arabia, Mauritania, Sudan, Yemen and many other countries.

Sure people aren’t being executed or imprisoned by the U.S. government, but homosexuals are discriminated against by friends, family and their own government. There has also been no shortage of hate crimes directed toward the LGBT community, sometimes leading to murder.

The writer defines marriage as “the union of two people coming together voluntarily within the state with the intent of increasing the state’s population through procreation.” He applies this to same-sex unions to say that the government should not waste its resources to regulate and record same-sex marriage because they do not contribute to the expansion of society.

So, by using this definition, we can say that straight women and men who are unable to reproduce, older women who have gone through menopause and couples who do not wish to have kids cannot marry because they do not contribute to the expansion of society, and therefore the government should not waste their time.

They will not have access to their partner’s health insurance and will have to pay more taxes than couples who are married. Does this seem fair?

Same-sex couples can still raise children, whether they obtain them through adoption, or perhaps through a surrogate mother for a male couple or getting sperm from a sperm bank for a female couple. There are ways they can contribute to our expanding society.

In closing, I would like to say that I myself am a straight young woman who cannot wait to get married and have children.

I could not imagine being told who I can and can’t marry even though my decision has nothing to do with the people who make that decision. Marriage should be about two people who love each other, not about their sexual orientation.