Dear Editor:While it appears that there is much about which Mr. Thedy and I agree, I would like take a closer look at a couple of points from his letter in the Oct. 26 issue of the East Tennessean.

The first point involves the “right” to marry.

This is a moot point. Regardless of whether marriage is deemed a right or a privilege, the key question remains – do relevant grounds exist for depriving a group or groups of this “privilege?”

The second point is one about which I suspect Mr. Thedy is speaking from assumptions or hearsay – namely his claim that “it certainly isn’t legal, tax, inheritance or health issues . any rights of such things afforded to straight couples can be obtained by homosexuals by entering a legal contract.”

As someone who has sat opposite an attorney dealing with such issues, I can attest that the legal issues are convoluted, thorny and expensive.

Additionally, complete equality in these matters is unattainable.

Even in ETSU’s fairly affirming environment, I cannot claim my husband on my health insurance.

If he were to get sick, I could not take family medical leave.

And he is not eligible for the spouse tuition break offered to ETSU faculty and staff, these considerations are just the tip of the iceberg.

Every day loving, committed couples struggle with immigration laws, lose inheritance and find themselves barred from hospital rooms by the “real” family.

Personally, I would agree with Mr. Thedy’s aim of making “every union a ‘civil union.'”

Already the civil and religious aspects of marriage make for odd bedfellows. I would advocate making the law deal exclusively in “civil unions.” Marriages are not now and never were created in court clerks’ offices.

My husband and I know what we are to each other and need neither an official piece of paper nor a verdict in the court of public opinion in order to make it real.

— Joel Tramel

Author