Dr. Benjamin Carson's remarks have been taken grossly out of context by critics who refuse to acknowledge that homosexuals, who cannot procreate, have no bona fide interest in the same government protected marriage rights and responsibilities that heterosexual couples are subject to ("Hopkins chides Carson for gay-marriage remarks," April 6).
Unlike the growing number of bigots at Hopkins and elsewhere who denounce all non-supporters of same-sex marriage, Dr. Carson was in no way the least bit critical of homosexuality.
He understands that traditional marriage institutions grew primarily out of cultural, historical and ultimately theological concerns that males' irresponsibility toward children they fathered was socially disastrous.
The once common practice of "shotgun" weddings was perhaps as responsible for the dramatically improved life and health of women and children as the creation of the institution itself.
Unlike homosexuals, bisexual, polyandrous, polygamous and other groups do produce offspring. Yet there is very little support for gay marriages even among homosexuals or their families. And as Dr. Carson noted, there is little support by anyone for marriages between partners who advocate man-boy love or bestiality.
Government should not be involved in same-sex unions in any manner. Other than money from the government, gay couples can obtain just about all the other benefits of marriage on their own, either through their own contractual agreements or application for government benefits as individuals. Nor should they be categorically denied the right to adopt children any more than unmarried heterosexuals.
Barry C. Steel, Phoenix