In response to Kathryn Jean Lopez’s editorial, printed in the Muskogee Phoenix on Nov. 13, I have to say that I strongly disagree with part of her premise. Like her, I believe strongly in the sanctity of marriage, and that it is an institution that deserves to be cherished. 

Where I disagree is her belief that the only way to strengthen the institution of marriage is to restrict it.

To me, this comes across the same as saying that the only way to protect freedom is to take it away from people who don’t fit into the narrow category of "those who have always had it.” I have to ask, what is the harm in extending the right to marry beyond the narrow definition of “only a man and a woman can marry”? 

I don’t understand how someone can say that giving two men, or two women, the right to marry each other will weaken it or make it any less precious of a gift. It seems to me that, contrary to the opinion of many people, extending the right to marry will in fact strengthen it.

After all, there is precedent. 

Originally, the right to vote was restricted very narrowly — only white, landowning men could vote in the earliest days of the United States. That right has been extended several times, first to allow any white man to vote, then to allow any man to vote, then to allow women to vote as well. 

I do not believe that the right to vote has been diminished at all by allowing more people to exercise it. By the same token, I do not see how the institution of marriage will be diminished by extending it to cover same-sex couples, especially since that would result in more marriages being performed.

In conclusion, I would like to add that I find the harassment and intimidation directed at opponents of gay marriage to be deplorable. 

While I may disagree with their opinion on this matter, to try to force them to change it in this manner is both worthless and meaningless. If the shoe were on the other foot, would those people appreciate being singled out because they believed something different than the current prevailing opinion?

Jeffrey “Jaime” Ehlers

Tahlequah