Editor, The News:
Re; Simple position (News Views, May 11).
Well, marriage certainly has “progressed” from the bad old centuries when it meant the lifelong union of a man and a woman, for better or worse, richer or poorer, with all those misguided humans thinking that was the only way to live with your ‘significant other.’
Thankfully that definition changed when divorce became legal and you could easily exit marriage to go on to greener pastures and (hopefully) happier marriages.
Then we decided that the concept of a formal agreement between a man and woman to live together was not necessary and ‘marriage-like’ unions were recognized and granted the same legal status as those stodgy couples who bothered to marry in a church or before a justice of the peace.
Now we have progressed even further in our understanding of what a marriage can be. As the editor points out, the union of two men or two women is legal in Canada, as well as in many other enlightened, progressive countries. What would have been considered inconceivable, not so long ago, is now recognized as a legitimate “marriage.”
I can’t wait to see how the definition will continue to progress. The combinations and possibilities are quite breathtaking. If two humans can match up, why not three or four people (in any combination that is desired)?
There must some progressive thinkers on the horizon who will rectify that boring idea of only two people in a marriage.
Since I consider myself a progressive thinker, I think that although it may sound unthinkable now, why can’t the future hold human and non-human marriage?
I’ve seen many stickers on vehicles that state the vehicle owner often prefers their dog or cat or (in Maple Ridge, their horse) to humans, so it only makes sense, if enough progressive thinkers get together and solicit our wise lawmakers, that Roger and Rover or Jane and Fluffy can get “married” and live happily together.
And don’t forget the ultimate union, the one that I think will finally complete the progression; yes, don’t laugh, marriage to self.
However, we would have to reword the old stipulation to “till death do I part.”
But, wait, what if you ever decide that you no longer wish to be married to yourself?
L. Draper
Pitt Meadows