Dear Sir,

A great deal of nonsense has been recently written and said about same-sex marriage.

Most comments have been as incomprehensible as the reason why millions of people around the world are gay. It surely cannot be a matter of choice.

I did not choose to be a white male with short legs and grey hair. My wife did not choose to have long legs and be left-handed. Fortunately, none of these features is illegal.

Let me cut to the chase. All adults of sound mind have the right to enter into contracts with similar adults for legal purposes. Since most gays are of very sound mind, and since being gay isn’t illegal, there is absolutely no reason why two such people should be prohibited from contracting to having a loving relationship “for life, to the exclusion of all others”.

It would also be unjust to prohibit application of the word “marriage” to such a contract, rather than “civil union” or similar. Frankly, the term “civil union” seems quite reasonable to me, and I do not understand how a man can have a husband, or a woman a wife.

However, the parties to the contracts should be the ones to choose the necessary labels, and dictionary definitions are changing all the time. for example, the word “pansexual” isn’t even in my dictionary, but I think it is here to stay.

CLIVE R. DAKIN

Hamilton