Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

Tag: referendum 74


MARRIAGE: R-74 victory is bittersweet

I want to thank all the voters here in Washington who supported marriage equality. Words can’t express the gratitude my family and I feel. We are cautiously optimistic that when all the votes are counted, the current lead for approval of Referendum 74 will be sustained, or even surpassed.

Of course, we are elated to know that long-standing discrimination against one minority group will finally be ended: that now gay men and lesbians may have their loving, committed relationships legally recognized and protected; that now they may finally enjoy the same marriage rights that we extend to everyone else, including

Read more »


R-74: Do backers want another ‘house divided’?

Proponents of same-sex marriage want this issue seen in the context of being a civil rights issue. Many others see homosexual relationships not meeting the definition of marriage (as being solely between a man and a woman). Moreover, many states have solidified that latter definition as law in their state constitutions.

It appears that no matter how many liberal states adopt same-sex marriage, there are other conservative states that will never adopt it. Do proponents of same-sex marriage really want to establish two separate nations on this issue, as divided as our nation was before 1865?

If the holier-than-thou proponents

Read more »


R-74: Measure isn’t about religion, reproduction

Referendum 74 is about human rights. It’s about the freedom of two adult persons to enter into a legal union that is equivalent to every other legal union in this state.

Heterosexual couples where one or more partner is infertile are allowed to marry, though they will never bear children. So this isn’t about reproduction.

Heterosexual couples where both persons are not religious are allowed to marry. So this isn’t about a religious definition of marriage. Many religions approve of marriage equality, and they should not have their rights to perform same-sex unions prohibited by law. So this isn’t an

Read more »


R-74: We’ve already redefined marriage to suit the times

As I read some of the letters about marriage equality, I can only draw one conclusion about the thought process of certain individuals. It is plainly and simply ignorance. I have realized that it is impossible to appeal to everyone, so I wish to shed some light on the validity of these stances.

In the argument against Referendum 74, the writers state that marriage was created to benefit the next generation. This may be true, but it is also true that marriage was thought to give ownership of the wife to the husband. Can you imagine if this were true

Read more »


R-74: Recognize love and same-sex marriage

Please support Referendum 74. Love is the greatest thing we share as human beings, regardless of our religion, politics or gender. It is love that keeps a family together. It is the overflowing cup of love in the family that helps us share that love, in the full light of day, with others.

Love is not about making love. It is 100 percent the other way around: Making love is because of love.

It is not our job as community members to judge the appropriateness of the love and affection of others. Our job, our commandment as community members, is

Read more »


R-74: Marriage equality makes stronger families

My church endorses Referendum 74, which affirms marriage equality. We’re not in the habit of endorsing ballot measures. Indeed, it makes us a bit uncomfortable when the line between church and state gets fuzzy. However, this one was too important to sit on the sidelines, especially when there is so much at stake for our gay and lesbian members, friends and family who seek the right to marry.

Marriage equality is about real people – your neighbors and friends who are willing to declare publicly their mutual trust and commitment. As a society we are better off when couples get

Read more »


R-74: Deputy major should represent highest ideals

I was impressed by the courage but disappointed by the perspective of Deputy Mayor Joe Lonergan as he explained to the Tacoma City Council why he would vote against endorsement of Referendum 74, which would preserve the right of same-sex couples to be married in Washington state.

Lonergan said he felt obligated to represent the voters of his district and, using stale evidence, posited that a small majority of voters in his district would not support this right.

His position overlooked the rapid change of attitude in our country that makes it probable that the majority of voters would, indeed,

Read more »


R-74: Why redefine what God designed?

Don’t be misled by all of the TV ads and hoopla.

Same-sex couples already enjoy all the same rights and benefits as married couples in Washington under the domestic partnerships “Everything But Marriage” law from 2009.

The referendum is about the definition of marriage; it’s not about whether same-sex couples deserve official state recognition of their relationships or the rights and benefits of marriage.

Marriage as the union of one man and one woman is in the public good. It serves the interests of men and women, of children, and of society itself. We as Washingtonians must rally together to

Read more »