Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

Tag: referendum 74

Oct.
4th

MARRIAGE: Children deserve a mother and father

Re: “Why that word is so important” (letter, 10-4).

The letter writer reveals just how deeply homosexual “marriage” inverts the purpose of marriage. Is not the essential purpose of marriage to attach fathers and mothers to their children?

Government-created homosexual “marriage” deliberately separates children from at least one of their biological parents. Do children not have the right to a relationship with or to be known by both their father and mother?

Homosexual “marriage” changes the institution from a child-centered institution to a selfish, adult-centered institution. Deliberately conceiving a child who will never know or have a relationship with

Read more »

Oct.
2nd

MARRIAGE: Why that one word is so important

Re: “R-74 fight about one word, thousands of details” (TNT, 9-23).

I was offended by Bob Higley’s assertion that homosexuals are “never just satisfied with where they are.” Is he suggesting that people who are not just like him, like my daughter and her partner, should be satisfied being treated as second-class citizens, being denied some of the privileges to which he is entitled?

They are just like any other two people who fall in love and want to share their lives, committing to be there for one another in good times and hard times, creating a loving, stable

Read more »

Sep.
28th

R-74: Issue is a matter of fairness

I stood on the ladder in my mom’s bathroom with a paintbrush in my hand and listened to her in disbelief as she asked why I wanted to get married.

I was shocked that my mother was asking me why my partner and I wanted to get married. Wasn’t our domestic partnership good enough?

I explained legal marriage is another step toward national recognition. It is a desire to have rights outside the borders of Washington state. It is a matter of fair and equal taxation, and I have hoped to be married since the day I fell in love.

Read more »

Sep.
24th

R-74: Don’t relegate gays to back of the bus

Why should gays be allowed to marry? Why shouldn’t they?

Laws are supposed to have a utility, a benefit for the society in which they are enacted. These are separate from religious laws, which are based on faith, and can specify tenets which have little or no utilitarian value or a value justified by those same religious beliefs. But laws forbidding gay marriage are based on nothing but a thinly disguised homophobia. They have no utility.

Why take a significant minority of our citizens, good people all, and relegate them forever to the back of the bus? Have we not

Read more »

Sep.
21st

MILITARY: Gays openly serve – and all is well

This time last year, there were dire predictions about what would happen if Congress repealed “don’t ask, don’t tell” – that it would disrupt unit cohesion, hurt recruiting and ultimately threaten our national security. My favorite (from retired generals): 500,000 troops would quit, and the military would “break.”

One year after the repeal of DADT, the only news is no news. The branches have hit their recruiting targets, units remain intact, our nation’s security is sound. A UCLA survey of active- duty troops found improvements in quality of life and morale.

The military did not break and shows no sign

Read more »

Sep.
19th

R-74: Passage poses no threat to our marriage

Forty-four years ago, we stood before our family, friends and our Catholic faith community and vowed to be true to each other in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health, and to love and honor each other all the days of our lives.

That commitment has guided us through many successes and failures and even overwhelming tragedies. The mutual support has helped us grow as individuals and as a couple. Along the way we were blessed with three wonderful children and two treasured grandchildren. But the strength of our commitment would have endured even without children.

The

Read more »

Sep.
19th

R-74: Marriage debate must remain civil

Re: “A yes vote says God made a mistake” (letter, 9-18).

What I believe to be a relevant issue that seemingly is being overlooked is that marriage is a civil act, and religion has nothing to do with it. Comments such as “strange gender equality” and “persistent rejection of God’s instruction for marriage” have no place in a civil environment.

Religious environments have created endless amounts of mental and physical anguish. One has only to consider the Crusades of earlier times for constructive examples.

Sep.
19th

R-74: There’s no ‘right’ to same-sex marriage

The persistent argument that marriage between a man and woman is a “right” is false. This false premise is continually used to assault “marriage” in the name of equal rights for all.

Marriage between a man and a woman would be a “right” if any man could marry any woman or any woman could marry any man. The state places restrictions on those unions, making marriage a state-sponsored privilege. A son cannot marry his mother or sister, nor may a father marry his daughter.

Marriage between one man and one woman is a state-sponsored “privilege” that is the foundation of

Read more »