The recent column by Mr. Hess on the subject of gay adoption (“Fathers and mothers,” Feb. 1) wasn’t half as interesting as the responses. That’s either a reflection of an ill-considered approach to a nuanced topic or a simply a cry for better opinion writing. In the case of the column in question, I’d chose the latter. \nWhat I most enjoyed, though, was the morality cavalry riding to the defense of Mr. Hess, namely Mr. Scott Tibbs. When his letters to this paper (Jordan River Forum, Feb. 15), and countless others, engage any border of the topic of homosexuality, they give the appearance of being written by the Rain Man while counting cards at a Vegas casino.\nThe raging heterosexuality of Mr. Tibbs, moral and righteous in its certain nature, would do well to consider its biblical basis in totality: Jesus isn’t a convenience store. The judging, the stone castings and the false witnessing are rather enormous problems in the canon. If one could judge, they might be as bad as which organ hits what orifice and in what marital condition. Until recently, regardless of marital status or sexual orientation, those organs and orifices were illegal acts in over 20 different states. Et tu, Brutus? Sodomites – they are so petty!\nYet we don’t need a tolerance Kristallnacht upon either Hess or Tibbs. It’s a hoot to watch the sun hit Dracula’s skin. These two pieces of writing, opinion and approprobation have all the charm of a talking doll with a broken voice box. Eventually, even little girls with active imaginations will tire of listening to them.
Mark A. Price\nAlumnus
