Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

MARRIAGE: Governor displays irrationality

Letter by James R. Reardon, Gig Harbor on Jan. 16, 2012 at 12:23 pm with 6 Comments »
January 17, 2012 10:40 am

Chris Gregoire’s recent proposal to legalize marriage between persons of the same sex is an excellent example of misplaced priorities and irrational behavior. With serious economic and social issues facing the state, our governor has highlighted this issue as her recent epiphany that it is unfair and discriminatory to continue the millennium-old practices and beliefs handed down from biblical times regarding marriage.

I find it hard to believe that she is sincere in her statements as it is so obvious that such a move undermines the important place of marriage in our society which has its origins in both the ancient Old Testament Bible and the teaching and traditions of Christianity. Actually you would have to dig pretty deep to find any God-fearing religion that has promoted such a concept.

Is this departure from our faith traditions the beginning of a whole new world order where anything goes? I am dismayed and surprised that Gregoire, being well educated and a professed Catholic, is promoting practices totally contrary to the Catholic Church.

Her proposal, along with her prior public support for abortion rights, places her in direct conflict with the teaching of the church she chooses to identify with. It just isn’t rational.

She is a dangerous person to be leading the state.


Leave a comment Comments → 6
  1. Here we go again! Another really foolish letter equating the simple proposal to change a state law about issuing government printed documents, as some kind of attack against the sanctity of the church and religion.

    The change is law, to issue Marriage Licenses/Certificates to same-sex couples, does NOT in any way shape or form do any harm to the age-old traditions of religious marriage ceremonies or vows. It just does not, no matter how you spin it.

    A same-sex couple who has a piece of paper printed and issued by the government still CANNOT use that document to compel any church or minister or priest to perform a marriage ceremony for that couple. The United States Constitution will not allow it.

    That’s just the way it is.

  2. Marriage during “Biblical times” treated women like chattel, polygamy and maintaining consorts was common, and men could get rid of unwanted “property” by reciting “I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you”.

  3. ManuelMartini says:

    “Is this departure from our faith traditions the beginning of a whole new world order where anything goes?”

    Why did your “new world order” eliminate and outlaw plural marriages?

  4. alindasue says:

    ManuelMartini said, “Why did your “new world order” eliminate and outlaw plural marriages?”

    I’ve always wondered that myself…

    But back to the main topic…
    One of the constitutional rights that I highly value in this country is the freedom to worship according to my own beliefs and not some government approved religion. However, in order to preserve that right for myself, I must allow that right to others as well.

    Using Christian standards, or the standards of any other belief system, to form the “legal” definition of marriage falls into a very slippery slope. Which religion do we use? Yours? Mine?

    Really, the only real reason to have a “legal” marriage on top of our religious ceremonies is to officially register the contract combining families and their assets. In an effort to preserve freedom of religion in this country, any “legal definition” of marriage should be just that simple.

  5. One of the principal reasons why Catholic priests can’t marry is to avoid issues of inheritance of Church property.

  6. Microsoft, others endorse same-sex marriage legislation


We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0