Big love and hate.

I was surprised that your article "Big Gay Love" [June 6] made almost no mention of legal recognition for polyamorous relationships. I used to think that conservatives threatening that gay marriage would lead to legalized polygamy was an insulting red herring just used to scare people. But when I amassed my arguments against legalizing polygamy, I couldn't come up with a single one that hadn't been used--speciously--against gay marriage. From "it can't be good for the children" to "roommates will use it to get a tax break" to "only a tiny percentage of people would ever take advantage of it," they all sounded too familiar for comfort.

Surely multiple partners face many of the same problems as unrecognized gay couples in terms of medical decision-making, child custody, inheritance, et cetera. Don't we have an obligation to stand up for their rights to marry whom they choose? If our rallying cry is that consenting adults can enter any relationship they choose and deserve the legal rights and responsibilities of marriage, how can we leave out polyamory without being hypocrites?

CATE BURLINGTON Kensington, Md.

Congratulations! Now the religious right has everything it needs to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment. Your tantalizing cover and the photos that illustrate the article on same-sex polygamy should energize the Republican base like it's 2004. While I applaud your opening the issue up for debate, I resent your timing and for giving the "slippery slope" crowd something to show on their e-mails to scare bigots into the voting booth. Wildmon couldn't have done it better.

GIL MARTINEZ Jaffrey, N,H.

At last, a feature story to which I can truly relate. In the eighth year of a committed relationship, and while I was out of town on business for several months, my companion met someone to whom he was irresistibly attracted. When I returned home, my emotional ties to my companion were so strong that my only course was to adapt to the situation. Fortunately, there was no problem adapting to the intimacy of a young, bright, handsome, and sexually exciting man. The three of us moved to California, where we built our own house. After 14 extremely happy years, our relationship was dealt a terrible blow by the unexpected death of our youngest member. Although devastated by our loss, my companion and I survived long enough to celebrate our 40th anniversary. Now my companion is gone, and for the past 15 years I have been living on borrowed time, lonely but buoyed by memories of two loving men.

PAUL SILVA Berkeley, Calif.

The article on gay polygamy could not hit the presses at a worse time. Just as the far right is pushing for the FMA in Congress, we have this nonsense plastered on the front cover of your magazine. I am of the opinion that since this particular issue "escapes" the general understanding and approval level of most gay people, it is going to make a big hit with the White House and Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. This media folly will probably contribute to the passage of the amendment we have fought for years. Polygamy is not an appealing Mormon custom, and it is even less logical for the gay community at a time when we want to seek equality in marriage rights.

R.J. KOWALIK Bridgewater, N.J.