Letter: We don't need to redefine marriage

Last updated 12:00 30/01/2013

Relevant offers

Letters to the Editor

Let's say goodbye to tests at the Basin Plenty of sacrifice in protection cause The Bard essential to education system History coming back to bite us Too easy to cast roads in bad light We could always raise the Basin Mainstreaming puts strain on teachers What does the future hold for te reo Maori? Swiss method worth considering Fed Farmers top of all bleaters

OPINION: I have to thank former MP Gordon Copeland for his concise article about the futility of proceeding with the Marriage Redefinition Bill (Opinion, Jan 24). He explains exactly what marriage is and that no other relationship can ever be called ''marriage''.

The children in a marriage can grow up with two biological parents who are committed to each other and to the raising of a family. There is no more solid a foundation for children to grow up in. They are spared the confusion of living with one parent and a step-parent and seeing their other biological parent once a fortnight.

Sadder still are the many adults who must spend time and money to find one of their ''lost'' biological parents. No matter how committed people in other relationships are to each other, theirs can never be called ''marriage''.

CARLA TOLLENAAR

Waikanae

Ad Feedback

- The Dominion Post

Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content