Letters To The Editor

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

February 02, 2005

Gay unions only reinforce values marriage fosters

Participants in the "Defend Maryland Marriage" rally ("Rally supports amendment banning gay marriage in Md." Jan. 28) called for a constitutional amendment banning marriage between members of the same gender. Such an amendment, they claim, will protect the institution of marriage. Protect it from what?

Do these people think that allowing same-sex couples to wed will result in homosexuality becoming a prerequisite for marriage in general? Do they fear a day when all would-be married couples will have to convert to a gay lifestyle to get a marriage license?

In short, what are they afraid of?

The concept of gay unions -- legal or otherwise -- poses no threat to traditional marriage.

On the contrary, a society that permits gays to marry is a society smart enough to recognize that genuine commitment sealed by a legal marriage is a stabilizing influence, both in the community and in the household.

Why -- in our increasingly unstable and transient society -- would we want to discourage such behavior?

Kim Johnson

Baltimore

Thousands came out to defend marriage

The Sun's article about our rally to amend the constitution of Maryland to protect our definition of marriage as one man and one woman estimated the crowd to be about 1,000 strong. While that would be an impressive number considering the bone-chilling temperature, it is grossly understated ("Rally supports amendment banning gay marriage in Md." Jan. 28).

We parked more than 50 buses with approximately 40 passengers each, some with nearly 50. Additionally, we parked 350 passenger cars and many church vans. And this does not include the people using nearby church lots and other various means of travel into Annapolis.

In my estimation, we had 3,000 people or more at the rally.

And when The Sun covers our rally on March 10, it will see that we will be back in greater force.

The Rev. Richard Bowers

Columbia

The writer is chairman of Defend Maryland Marriage.

Foes of gay marriage overlook real woes

As I read the account of the rally demanding a Maryland constitutional amendment against gay marriage, I wondered whether those people could be energized to demand effective government action against poverty ("Rally supports amendment banning gay marriage in Md.," Jan. 28).

It would be far better if they would focus their lobbying on goals such as affordable housing, a living wage and health care for all. They could rally against Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s proposal to scrap the prescription drug program for senior citizens ("A poor prescription," editorial, Jan. 23).

They should insist that Mr. Ehrlich maintain the agency that enforces wage and hour standards for Maryland workers ("Closing of labor offices opposed," Jan. 30).

This obsession with, and position against, same-sex unions offers no benefit to our society, but diverts energy from issues of importance to Maryland's families.

Raymond S. Gill

Crownsville

Protest the war, not same-sex love

So 1,000 people rally in Annapolis against gay marriage, which harms no one and can even provide for strong and loving family units. These "moral" demonstrators are encouraged and abetted by religious leaders and Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele ("Rally supports amendment banning gay marriage in Md.," Jan. 28).

Their efforts would be much better focused on the war in Iraq, which maims and kills people every day.

If you need something to rally against, choose something really immoral and deadly.

Ellen Apple

Pikesville

Iraqis show real faith in electoral process

No matter how any of us may feel about the legitimacy of the U.S. war on Iraq, we should still take a moment for humility regarding the turn-out for the election on Sunday ("A `commitment to democracy,'" Jan. 31).

Iraqi voters faced the prospect of death or bodily harm to exercise their vote, and did so in numbers that far exceed voter turnout in many elections in the United States.

Nadine G. Feiler

Baltimore

Election a triumph for Bush, soldiers

If you believe most of what the media has presented in recent weeks about Iraq, it would seem that any Iraqi even thinking democratic thoughts might be slaughtered by insurgent thugs. And even discounting the media's anti-Bush propaganda, Iraq is a dangerous place.

Yet despite spite previous atrocities and threats from terrorists, Iraqis turned out in force to vote ("A `commitment to democracy,'" Jan. 31).

The successful election is a huge boost for President Bush and his policies in Iraq.

More important, the courage of the Iraqi people and their obvious desire for freedom validates, at least in part, the efforts of the U.S. soldiers who have been killed, wounded or continue to be in harm's way.

Dennis Sirman

Catonsville

Consider forgiving debts of poor nations

In "World Economic Forum ends on a note of optimism" (Jan. 31), I saw no reference to any discussion of debt cancellation for highly indebted developing countries. Is it possible that this option was not even considered?

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.