Letters - A Setback for Same-Sex Marriage - NYTimes.com

Letters - A Setback for Same-Sex Marriage - NYTimes.com

Letters
A Setback for Same-Sex Marriage

The public speaks

On Election Day, we as a nation were able to exclaim a phrase uttered by the late, great Tim Russert: “What a country!” The election of our nation’s first African-American president was indeed historic.

Yet while we helped close the book on one ugly chapter of our nation’s history, we left unfinished another.

To see three states pass bans on gay marriage and one state bar gay people from becoming adoptive and foster parents was disheartening.

I believe it to be a travesty that two people would be denied the chance to be married and become parents based solely on their sexual orientation.

In an election that ushered in a new era of change, apparently some bigotry remains.

I am amazed at how far we have come, yet also how far we still have to go. Bryce Hopkins

Buffalo, Nov. 6, 2008

•

To the Editor:

Straight people are allowed to marry and divorce multiple times. They can get drunk and get married in the middle of the night in Las Vegas by going to a drive-through chapel. They can get on a show like “The Bachelor” and sell themselves on national television to find a spouse.

But somehow my 25-year relationship with my partner is a threat to the “sanctity” of the institution of marriage.

The vote in California on Proposition 8 was more than just wrong. It was immoral and pathetic. Mitch Kohn

West Hollywood, Calif., Nov. 6, 2008

•

To the Editor:

That the passing of Proposition 8 in California was pushed so forcefully by religious organizations underscores that marriage as a governmental contract goes against the principle of the separation of church and state.

If this nation truly supports the separation of church and state, the only governmental piece of paper available to any couple, gay or straight, should be a certificate for civil union, giving equal rights to all.

A marriage certificate, issued by a church and including no civil rights in the eyes of the government, should be available as a separate contract.

Elizabeth Lundgren

Somerville, Mass., Nov. 6, 2008

•

To the Editor:

“Equality’s Winding Path” (editorial, Nov. 6) reveals the true rift over the divisive issue of gay-marriage bans.

You refer to the “ugly outcomes” of the votes, the “defeat for fairness” and “unfair treatment” of “vulnerable groups” — all terms indicative of the fact that you see this issue as one of rights.

The fact that 30 states have now passed similar bans on same-sex marriage should perhaps alert you to the fact that not everyone has accepted that version of the issue, and that many Americans have chosen to define gay marriage not as an issue of rights but as one of morality.

As a country, we are still firmly rooted in a Judeo-Christian ethic that leaves certain unions outside of the pale of acceptability. Aaron Ross

Bergenfield, N.J., Nov. 6, 2008

To the Editor:

Even as we celebrate Barack Obama’s historic election, it should be noted that according to exit polls in California, 70 percent of African-American voters supported the gay-marriage ban.

I hope that the African-Americans who voted against marriage equality will eventually take to heart the lesson it took white Americans so long to learn: when we deny the rights we treasure to others, we only diminish ourselves. Jack Drescher

New York, Nov. 6, 2008

The writer, a psychiatrist, is emeritus editor of The Journal of Gay and Lesbian Mental Health.

•

To the Editor:

As your editorial notes, progress doesn’t come in a straight line.

One bright light in this somber season for marriage equality is Connecticut. Last month its high court ruled that it is unconstitutional to bar same-sex couples from the state’s marriage laws. Starting next Wednesday, same-sex couples will be able to marry.

On that day, when couples approach the town clerk’s counter, we’ll see not only happy, committed partners for life, but also citizens coming before their government as equals.

With hard work, and leadership at the national level, I firmly believe that Californians and every gay and lesbian citizen of this country will get there, too.

Lee Swislow

Boston, Nov. 6, 2008

The writer is executive director of Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, which represented the couples in both the Connecticut and Massachusetts marriage equality cases.

•

To the Editor:

Yes, true equality for gays has a long way to go, with Florida, Arizona and California enshrining discrimination in their constitutions.

There is a silver lining to Tuesday’s results, however, with the election of Barack Obama and an increase in Democratic Party representation in Congress: it is very unlikely that an amendment to the United States Constitution to ban gay marriage will be passed during his, let’s hope, eight years in office.

It was especially heart-warming that President-elect Obama mentioned a united America that includes gay and straight people in his victory speech in Chicago. That is a major step forward toward ensuring rights for all people, regardless of their sexual orientation.

Claude M. Gruener

Austin, Tex., Nov. 6, 2008