Twisting a 2 into a 10
THE EDITOR, Madam:
Normally if you talk about transforming a two into a 10, it’s a very good thing. Not so here! Despite the LGBTTTIIMZ lobby grabbing 10 letters from the alphabet, they certainly do not represent 10 per cent of the population, as the Editor in Hiding stated in the article titled ‘Anti-gay apparatchiks dull humanity’. It’s easy to make up things when you don’t have to identify yourself, but it can’t be good for the newspaper that should have an interest in actual facts.
What is even more concerning than the ignorant or deceptive twisting of a two into a 10 is the advocacy for the distortion of marriage to move from recognising two to possibly 10 people!
The editor said, “It is right for human beings to love who they will and to express that love ... in the privacy of their bedrooms,” and then proceeded to call for the “amendment of the section of the Constitution that limits marriage to being between one man and one woman”.
Though he may be referring to allowing two men and two women to have separate same-sex unions, his own words betray that the ideology that supports such a move cannot logically hinder more than two men, more than two women or 10 men at that!
ILLOGICAL AND UNSCIENTIFIC
And is it really right for human beings to love and express physical love to anyone they chose in their bedrooms? Surely, the editor excludes incest and the older man and underage girl combination even in the private bedroom, right? Wrong, his expressed ideology would lead you to believe otherwise!
Instead of joining the global, illogical and unscientific experiment, why not advocate for sex to be only between a man and woman in the context of marriage, properly defined? That’s what is best for our children and our society. Those two are really better than the editor’s 10!
DR DANIEL THOMAS
Love March Movement