Today’s “Not based in Reality” Letter to the Editor

I have to thank the editors at the Providence Journal for publishing such thinly veiled screed against marriage equality in their Letters to the Editor.

The following appeared today:

Joanne Ciocys: Divorce and family planning

01:00 AM EDT on Friday, July 18, 2008

Rita Watson, in her July 6 commentary, “New rules for an open marriage,” presents variations of polyamory as nonchalantly as an ice-cream vendor might suggest toppings and mix-ins. Too bad she paid more attention to the perversion-of-the-month than to the sweet news that accompanies conformance to God’s marriage and family design, the one that works best if it is followed.

Polyamory which Firefoxes dictionary doesn’t seem to be able to find, translates roughly to many loves. I didn’t see Watson’s original piece but I can tell you that every divorce I’ve seen around me had its root in marital infidelity. Why? I’d say about half the population of this country has the attention span of a flea. Boredom sets in, sex gets to be routine and it’s time to find someone new. A lot of that is people settling too early.

In about 95% of the cases of divorce that I know of, the divorcing couple met as teenagers or in their early 20’s. That’s got something to do with it too since the age of maturity actually appears to be heading upward, to around 26 or so these days. I’m nominally to connected to a few early 20-somethings and I can tell you their maturity has a long way to go.

Ms. Watson expresses concern over the divorce rate, laments the absence of role models for youth, and suggests family-focused education devoid of abstinence programs, but including “sexual responsibility.” If, however, education were to restore the true definition of marriage, teach natural family planning (the most responsible, effective and safe method of reproductive cooperation) and, rebuild self-respect, an essential ingredient in healthy personal relationships, what might the societal rewards be?

What Ms. Ciocys fails to understand is that abstinence won’t stop the raging hormones in the young. It is my opinion that insistence on abstinence only drives kids to do exactly what their hormones are telling them to do.

Good example, I recall a story that said these girls who had promised to be chaste thought a little blow job wasn’t out of the question. So they’d do hand jobs, blow jobs, etc. I hate to tell them that they’re delusional, there’s a dick inside an opening in your body, it’s sex.

And boys, forget about it. I remember my teenage years well, young, dumb and absolutely full of cum.
Anyone remember “Every Sperm is Sacred”?

And before I forget, natural family planning is also known as the rhythm method. Know what the teachers in my Catholic high school used to call people who practiced the rhythm method? They called them parents.

Consider the following survey results from Physicians for Life: The divorce rate for NFP users is 0.2 percent; abstinence is STD-free and doesn’t cause unintended pregnancies; abstinence before marriage costs nothing and has no harmful side-effects; intact marriages produce happier, healthier, children; intact families are more likely to boost the economy than drain it.

The Physicians for Life are an interesting group. They’re a rather misguided lot. They are against for abstinence, against abortion, birth control, and euthanasia. In essence, they’re Catholics. And they’re not Physicians for Life, they’re actually Alabama Physicians for Life. Just thought I’d bring that little dose of reality into the picture. Deep ass Bible belt and they’ve got wacketry in their beliefs.

It is reasonable to conclude that happily married mothers and fathers are the best role models for their children’s future relationships. Marriage has not failed us, but many of us have failed marriage. Therefore, instead of adding false “flavors” to the mix, let’s invest time and effort in fixing the problems where they lie — in our self-indulgent behavior.


Best role models huh? Herein lay the anti-marriage equality part. The self-indulgent behavior, that’s another one use against gay people all the time.

That said, we’re a very individualistic society and self-indulgence is a very big part of that.

2 thoughts on “Today’s “Not based in Reality” Letter to the Editor

  1. I’m so tired of the argument that two parents of the opposite sex married to one another is the best for a child. How offensive is this to happily married gay couples raising happy healthy children, or the divorced single mom of three whose husband beat her or cheated on her and she had the sense to leave. What about the young single mom who practiced the rhythm method but found out she was still pregnant and is doing her best to make the situation work.

    I don’t mean to suggest that its the guys fault at all. People are human, we mess up. I grew up in a home with two parents of the opposite sex who should have never married or lived together and they certainly shouldn’t have raised children together.

    I’ll agree that having two parents is good for the kids, its a lot of work and really you need a tag team to survive. But whether those parents are the same sex, opposite sex, married, adoptive parents…none of that matters as long as the kids are loved and treated well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.