Debate on same-sex marriages

Madam, - Kevin Windle suggests that heterosexual couples are "more beneficial to society" than their homosexual counterparts …

Madam, - Kevin Windle suggests that heterosexual couples are "more beneficial to society" than their homosexual counterparts and should therefore be treated differently in law. The logical conclusion is that childless heterosexual couples should not enjoy the same legal status as those with offspring.

Should we then examine people's willingness to have children and create a multi-tiered system according to some medieval hierarchy of worth? Surely couples in committed relationships should enjoy equal recognition under the law, regardless of sexuality or indeed marital status. - Yours, etc,

PATRICIA REILLY, Cavan.

Madam, - Kirsi Hanifin (October 17th) reminds me of the emperor Caligula who appointed his horse (Incitatus) to the Roman Senate.

READ MORE

It requires a degree of self-delusion rivalling that of Caligula to fail to perceive a difference between same-sex and opposite-sex couples. But then, in the "loony left", common sense was never an element in evaluating policy. - Yours, etc,

Ted MOONEY, Tavira, Portugal.

Madam, - The arguments against same-sex marriage presented in your Letters page of October 18th seem rather knee-jerk and weak; in fact "woolly", to steal an adjective from Kevin Windle.

Faithfully following the catechism, Mr Windle and Andrew Larkin say the purpose of marriage is to provide the proper reproductive environment. Mr Larkin writes that the love declared by two people who marry is "by its nature a life-giving love" and Mr Windle joins in by stating that "heterosexual couples are more beneficial to society [ because] they, and only they, can create the next generation."

Do they therefore believe that marriage should also exclude heterosexual couples who, either by choice or by nature, never produce offspring?

Mr Larkin goes on to state his belief that "sexual nature is not just a social construct". I agree wholeheartedly, and would point out that this includes homosexuality; or does he believe that all homosexuals are carrying out a social experiment rather than simply accepting the cards nature has dealt them?

It is precisely because homosexuality occurs in nature that it is so cruel of us to deny homosexuals the right to take full part in our human constructs, such as marriage. - Yours, etc,

COLIN McGOVERN, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Madam, - Surely same-sex couples have the right to be as miserable as the rest of us. - Yours, etc,

CONAN DOYLE, Kilkenny.