Your views in 250 words or less
Re: “God outlawed homosexuality” (online letter).
No I’m not gay, although that should not matter. In fact I don’t have any close friends or relatives who are openly gay.
I support everyone’s freedom to have their own personal prejudice based on race, creed, gender and sexuality, as long as they stay silly thoughts in their head. I realize most intolerance is religiously based misinterpretation.
Neither I nor anyone else can stop anyone from their ingrained bias and prejudice. I do find it particularly interesting that some actually pretend to know what God is thinking; I don’t know what my …
A respondent to Leonard Pitts’ column (TNT, 5-3) stated that the Bible condemns homosexuality, polygamy, incest and other atrocious activities, as they are “on the list of many types of sins” (letters, 5-11).
Since when is what two consenting people agree to an infraction of the rights of others, as mandated by the Constitution? Incest and rape are definitely atrocious sins, but they are not consensual, they are crimes. But just to love someone? Is that a crime? And to want to commit to each other – and GLBT relationships tend to last longer than heterosexual ones – well, …
The Los Angeles City Council passed a resolution on Wednesday which is an affront to all that is sacred in these United States of America. It states, in part, that the City of Los Angeles is to be “… first in the nation to declare derogatory, sexist, misogynistic and racist language as having no place on public airwaves in one of the most diverse cities in the world.”
Apparently the City of Los Angeles has seceded from the United States of America and the Constitution, which ensures their treasured “diversity.”
Let me be “first in the nation to declare derogatory, …
Re: “This is a modern nation, isn’t it?” (letter, 2-28)
If employers choose not to include insurance coverage for abortions, it does not mean they are suppressing women’s rights. They might choose not to offer that coverage to employees because of costs, religious convictions and/or conscience’s sake. Why should all employees be required to bear the cost of a procedure a minority might want?
If, because of conscience, the owner of a corner market chooses not to sell lottery tickets, would you picket the store because it is suppressing your right to a legal activity or just go to
Re: “Contraceptives ‘war’ pushes women’s votes away?” (TNT, 3-2).
Yes, in one sense, this was a skirmish over contraceptives. But there is a much larger issue at the heart of it, which is largely being ignored.
Can Congress and the president strip away the right specifically put forth in the very first sentence of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? It says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (emphasis mine).
If Congress can ignore this very plain restriction, then nothing else is protected. The prohibition against Congress enacting …
I remember when it was prudent to refrain from invoking the Bible or testifying how Christian, or what type of Christian, a candidate might be. John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, proclaimed he wouldn’t be beholden to the Vatican were he elected president; he would serve as president according to the Constitution.
It was understood this was how it is. After all, governmental powers and limitations are constructed by the Constitution, not the Bible. Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich would have you believe government should be run in accordance with biblical principles.
This is opposite what the founding fathers imagined. The …
Our federally elected leaders solemnly swear (or affirm) to protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. In my opinion this endless political game of partisan politics whose object is to support the party (take your pick) rather the people is a violation of that oath.
If our government goes into default we will suffer grievous harm to our nation, our identity, our system of government and our Constitution.
I wish it was possible to perform a mass impeachment, except that the judges and jury, conveniently, are the very ones who are about to betray us. The …