To the editor: I have survived 46 years of marriage, followed by 17 years of (fill in your own adjective). This does not make me an authority. I have opinions.

Webster's definition of marriage? He gives 10 of them! Why must the definition of one word be restricted by law? Especially since the making and breaking of each marriage is handled individually both at its start and its finish.

When justices of the peace, ship captains and possibly others can perform marriages, the `` benefit of clergy'' is a misnomer. The `` legal cohabitation'' of gays should be of little interest to the church, since our constitution specifically separates state and church.

Somewhere in this country's inception words similar to these were written: we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men were created free and equal, that we were endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these rights are the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

No short letter will answer all the controversy. If there was no need for the protection being sought, the problem would not exist. Since this world holds myriad religious beliefs, what if the gays formed a church of their own? Or perhaps, twin churches! Their churches could then define marriage on their own terms, and perhaps escape the inevitable court costs and lawyers' fees common to all divorces. Robert F. Maskell , Attleboro