Letters to the Editor

Your views in 250 words or less

Tag: marriage

April
18th

MARRIAGE: State officials owe florist an apology

Re: “Sides rally support after florist refuses gay couple” (TNT, 4-12).

The Richland florist case isn’t just about freedom of religion. It’s about state officials imposing an unfair burden on conservative Christians working in the wedding industry.

It is reasonable for the state to expect retailers to sell their goods to the general public without regard to the ethnicity, religious beliefs or sexual orientations of their customers. It is not reasonable to expect vendors to provide goods or services for events that are inconsistent with their goals or values.

Artists, entrepreneurs and independent contractors have the right to choose

Read more »

April
15th

MARRIAGE: Extend tolerance to florist

Re: “Sides rally support after florist refuses gay couple” (TNT, 4-12).

Instead of looking at it from the perspective of either favoring or opposing gay marriage, let’s for once bring some rationality and reasonableness into the issue.

Premise No. 1: These men over the years have experienced discrimination and intolerance (though not previously from this florist).

Premise No. 2: Intolerance has been hurtful and unpleasant to them.

Therefore, they will now extend to the florist the same tolerance that they seek for themselves.
End of story: They have the wedding of their dreams decorated by one of the

Read more »

April
10th

MARRIAGE: Opponents cite faulty ‘evidence’

Re: “Study finds ‘suboptimal’ results” (letter, 4-9).

It appears that the opposition to marriage equality is clutching at straws. A recent study was cited to “prove” that gay marriage is “suboptimal,” yet the author of the study, Mark Regenerus, has admitted that this study was not actually about gay marriage since only two couples of the 3,000 adults he interviewed were actually in a long term same-sex relationship.

Just for the record, this “scientific study” was heavily funded by the Witherspoon Foundation to attempt to provide “evidence” against same-sex marriage for the current Supreme Court challenge.

April
10th

MARRIAGE: Studies can reflect biases

Re: “Study finds ‘suboptimal’ results” (letter, 4-9).

Mark Twain once wrote, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.”

The study of gay parents and the children they raise does not reflect the circumstances of those children or the love of the family they are raised in. Many gay and lesbian couples adopt children with pre-existing issues or with disabilities inherited from their parents which led to them being put up for adoption in the first place.

To judge the parenting of these couples without acknowledging the issues inherent in the child’s background is not only

Read more »

April
3rd

MARRIAGE: Study finds ‘suboptimal’ outcomes

Re: “Writer is wrong on gay parents.” (letter, 4-3).

The writer states that “there is zero evidence that same-sex marriage would produce worse parenting.”

In a recent study (July 2012) of children raised by homosexual parents, sociologist Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin surveyed 3,000 adults, ages 18-39. The goal of the New Family Structures Study was to determine if children raised by same-sex couples suffered no disadvantages when compared to children raised by their married mother and father.

Published in the journal Social Science Research, this rigorous study found numerous and significant differences between these groups

Read more »

April
1st

MARRIAGE: Writer wrong on same-sex parents

Re: “Don’t take us down a slippery slope” (letter, 3-31).

I’m not quite sure which part of The News Tribune the author skips each day, but there is zero evidence that same-sex marriage would produce worse parenting.

The laughably “hundreds of thousands” of motherless or fatherless marriages is the perfect example of “if you have no facts, exaggerate.” Unfortunately we do have these fatherless and motherless families as a result of heterosexual marriages, but these are often “absent” fathers or mothers, with one parent trying to make a go of it.

I suggest there would be a lot more thought

Read more »

March
29th

MARRIAGE: Constitution lost in all the rhetoric

It is terribly depressing that lost in all of rhetoric surrounding same-sex marriage is the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court’s responsibility is to determine whether or not the laws in the cases before it are constitutional. To the contrary, what I see in the news is discussion of everything but that.

Justice Samuel Alito is quoted as saying that “same-sex marriage is very new.” What does the newness of same-sex marriage have to do with whether or not the laws before the court are constitutional?

Justice Anthony Kennedy is quoted talking about “uncharted waters.” Don’t most constitutional issues deal

Read more »

March
28th

MARRIAGE: Don’t take us down a slippery slope

If the U.S. Supreme Court removes the God designed, the natural feature and purpose of marriage for one special interest group, will not the court also need to remove the parameters of marriage for all special-interest groups?

Why only homosexuals? Why not polygamists and bisexuals? Should not bisexuals also have the “right” to be married to both a woman and a man simultaneously if they “love” them both?

What supporters of marriage extinction fail to understand is that natural marriage flows from the laws of nature. Natural marriage is uniquely valuable because we are gendered species. The idea that all

Read more »