Northwest Voices | Letters to the Editor
Same-sex marriage headed to ballot
Waiting to be convinced
Opponents of same-sex marriage claim their purpose is to “protect” marriage. [“Petitions block debut of gay-marriage law,” NWThusday, June 7.]
But I have yet to hear even one good argument of how letting same-sex couples have marriages of their own undermines the marriage of anyone else. One. Can someone come forward with just one?
— Rita Weinstein, Seattle
Why we have marriage laws
It seems as a nation that we have forgotten the fundamentals of human life on this planet. Why do we have marriage laws? They were designed to promote family life and the raising of offspring to follow us and to preserve our nation as we pass on.
As a nation, we have given tax advantages and benefits to men and women as a married couple to promote family life and provide for children until they mature and become capable of providing for themselves.
There is no benefit to this nation to provide financial benefits or tax advantages to same-sex marriages. Same-sex “marriages” do not exist in nature, nor should they exist in our human population. What is the benefit, other than a selfish financial benefit?
If we are going to promote life and preservation of our nation, we need to encourage marriage between a male and a female and their responsibility to teach our children the facts of life and preservation of our existence on this planet.
If two same-sex individuals wish to live together, so be it. There is no reason to give them financial or tax benefits by declaring them to be a married couple.
— Gerry Wooldridge, Renton
Keep religion out of it
“[F]or me, marriage itself is a question of religious faith ” [“Social issues split Inslee, McKenna,” NWWednesday, May 30.]
Thank you, Attorney General Rob McKenna, for your clarity. This is exactly why arguments for or against marriage equality and extending the right to marry to same-sex couples based on religious faith do not hold water in a legal debate.
Legislation must not be enacted, whether by the Legislature or through a citizen-initiated referendum, that upholds the religious faith of one citizen over the religious faith of another.
Let the laws governing domestic unions (whether marriage or domestic partnerships) apply equally for all citizens. Let religious institutions decide whether they choose to acknowledge and bless these unions according to their own doctrine.
— Thom Harrington, Seattle