This letter is in response to Carolyn Ann Cook's letter ("A plea to embrace love in all its forms," Record-Courier, Feb. 5), which commented on a previous letter ("Definition of marriage at heart of debate," R-C, Jan. 31).
Cook seemed to be well intentioned but apparently is unaware that studies with identical twins demonstrated no genetic determinism for homosexuality (See "The Top Ten Myths About Homosexuality" at www.frc.org.) Her suggestion that God approves of homosexual activity because persons who have same-sex attraction "love" each other is childishly naive. At issue is the distinction between love and lust, which was not adequately broached.
Indeed, true love knows no bounds of sexuality. Love in any combination between males, females, as well as those with confused sexual identities is always to be encouraged, understanding that love is the desire that the best and truest good be realized for the beloved. It is when the desire of sexual pleasure becomes the surrogate of love that grave problems arise. It should be obvious that our love for our selves, children, animals and our friend's spouses would be grossly distorted if it were not chaste.
All lust within and between genders is blind to the physical and spiritual reality of sexual differences and their purpose to beget and nurture offspring. Why marriage should only involve a man and a woman is brilliantly argued in "What Is Marriage?: Man and Woman: A Defense" (2012) by Sherif Girgis, Ryan T. Anderson and Robert P. George, which is available in paperback. The degradation of true marriage and consequent devastation of our children is a bitter harvest that will be reaped for years to come.
Frederick G. Walz, Ravenna