GAY MARRIAGE
Keep government out of matters of religion
Regarding “Will gays be punished for their own success?” (Opinion, March 31) the opposition to gay marriage is not about bigotry. It is about the definition of marriage, which came from God.
The government should have never gotten involved in marriage. Marriage is a religious ordinance. It is not about forcing religion on the non-religious; it is about forcing government on the religious. Let the non-religious stay non-religious, and have civil unions that can be recognized for the sake of equality in society.
MARGARET FAGRE, ACWORTH
Redefining institution invites societal chaos
Society has an interest in encouraging marriage for the purpose of having children and raising them. So, a variety of legal benefits, financial and otherwise, were created for married couples. But if the gay marriage movement succeeds in destroying the traditional definition of marriage, the situation will become chaotic.
The government will have abandoned the recognition of the value of the loving commitment of a devoted husband and wife. Marriage will be treated like a business contract between individuals. You will see all manner of people wanting to get “married” in order to get these benefits. Soon, a group of three people will claim they want to be married — then a group of six people, and so on. Where will it end?
These groupings will naturally be more transient, and less stable — and the government’s desire to protect children will have been thwarted.
BILL WHITLOW, AUBURN
COMMENTARY
Writer merits praise for column on aging
In our household, we are faithful readers of Leonard Pitts’ columns in the AJC. We especially liked the column, “As life quickly passes by, may we age gracefully” (Opinion, March 28).
It was delightful.
JUNE M. ALDRIDGE, STONE MOUNTAIN
ETHICS
Let’s call ‘gifts’ what they really are: bribes
On the subject of “gifts” to lawmakers, why not call it like it is?
The dictionary defines bribes as “money or gifts to alter behavior.” Does anybody really believe lobbyists are giving all of these gifts, trips, tickets etc. to lawmakers without expecting anything in return? How dumb do they think people are?
Bribes are (or should be) illegal, period.
JOE FINNEY, FAYETTEVILLE
SECOND AMENDMENT
No new regulations; enforce existing laws
Background checks do not prevent criminals from acquiring guns, because criminals can acquire weapons by illegal means. The “dangerous mentally ill” will not be identified because HIPAA laws prevent this.
We do not need more regulations for those who already obey the law. We need to enforce laws that are already in place. In the past, young men did not go on shooting sprees, and teenage girls did not take loaded guns to school. We also need to seriously examine how we are raising our children. It is impossible to legislate respect for others. We need to do a better job of teaching it.
CYNTHIA BLANKENSHIP, MARIETTA
