Your front-page interview with Ryan Anderson (May 8) was excellent. Ryan made some significant points about the reasons to maintain marriage as between a man and a woman. Civil union laws have pretty much covered all the needs any homosexual couples should need to correspond with the same rights afforded heterosexual married couples.
Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution is the concept of marriage mentioned. However, religious freedom is supported by the First Amendment. Marriage is not a right of everyone and should be regulated by the states (not the federal judiciary). Those states, which have chosen through the democratic process that marriage is the sole purview of man and woman, should have their sovereignty upheld. There is no discrimination of rights when homosexuals have civil unions. As Mr. Anderson so aptly stated, “live and let live,” but don’t degrade the long-held esteem of the marriage covenant.
- Doug Robinson: Violence against women is...
- In our opinion: The Affordable Care Act needs...
- Can a news channel 'solve problems'?
- My view: A global warming solution to grow...
- The relationship between religiosity and...
- My view: Balancing personal conviction and...
- Lawrence and Windsor won't trump Utah...
- Join the discussion: Is feminism misunderstood?
- Lawrence and Windsor won't trump Utah... 114
- Stuart Reid: Translations of religious... 63
- In our opinion: The Affordable Care Act... 63
- My view: Balancing personal conviction... 53
- In our opinion: The long-term outlook... 51
- Letter: Policy disagreement 45
- In our opinion: Use market forces and... 35
- My view: A global warming solution to... 35