Reader Mike Wilke made an interesting point about a recent story that concerns a court ruling about parental rights in same-sex relationships:
I was pleased to read today's article "Kansas Supreme Court upholds lesbian mother’s rights" and the positive development that it represents for lesbian and gay equality.
However I would like to call your attention to the use of the language "non-traditional relationships" in the second paragraph of the story. I do not know what the KC Star's style guide states on this rapidly changing subject, but I suggest avoiding the use of such terminology. It judges same-sex relationships, rightly or wrongly, as different than so-called "traditional" relationships and is upsetting to me and others. In today's world, an increasing number of people and their relationships (gay or straight) may feel judged as I do with this language.
I request that The Star simply say "same-sex relationships" which is non-judgmental, and factually-based language.
Blurred lines
Reader Mike Wilke is correct in his observation that the use of the term 'non-traditional relationships' makes an obvious distinction from 'traditional relationships.'
And that highlights quite a difference.
I say 'BRAVO' to the Star for discerning correctly, and not blurring the lines.
Non-Judgmental Slippery Slope
Let's be really non-discriminatory and say "same-species relantionships." NO - WAIT - that discriminates against the zoophiles. And how can we be sure to be unbiased toward the pedophiles and pederasts and incenstors?
Gosh, this really IS a slippery slope, and there is no safety rail around the abyss at the bottom.