Financial fixes with gay marriage ruling
With the Burwell and Obergefell cases in the books, it is clear that Obamacare and gay marriage are here to stay. Let’s now reform our tax and entitlement systems to deal with these realities. In the reform process, let’s acknowledge that single-parent households are generally not, for the individuals involved or society, as good as a two-parent home. We should also recognize that, due the current tax and entitlements system, many lower-income households have a higher standard of living than many middle-income households. Thus, the current system discourages many to make more money, and unfairly and illogically skews market results. Also, increasing longevity and diabetes should be part of the analysis, along with other things reasonably foreseeable. Let’s make the new system financially sound indefinitely.All of us will lose if our financial house becomes unraveled.
ALLEN BUCKLEY, ATLANTA
Court, not Congress, acts appropriately
I find it interesting that Congressman Tom Price referred to the system of checks and balances present in the Constitution to justify his disagreement with the Supreme Court’s ruling that allows same-sex marriages (“Georgia reactions to the ruling,” News, June 27th). The system of checks and balances was put in place by the authors to not only ensure that no one branch would supersede the authority of the other two, but also to guarantee that each branch would uphold its duties and responsibilities given to it under the Constitution. As Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion, same-sex couples were seeking equal opportunity to marry, a right denied to them by Congress. Whereas the legislature fell short in guaranteeing equal treatment under the law, the judicial branch took the proper steps accorded to it under the Constitution to correct this injustice.
CRAIG AMBROSIO, ROSWELL
Columnist Bill Torpy takes the position that “it doesn’t affect me directly, so what the heck” (“On gay marriage the other team wins one,” News, June 29). The 10th Amendment to the Constitution states “the Federal Government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the Constitution … all remaining powers are reserved for the states or people.” Regardless of whether you support gay marriage, one should support the wording of the Constitution and that the Supreme Court was not given the power to write /rewrite laws as they see fit. Legalizing gay marriage is not a power granted the federal government by the Constitution. Sorry, Bill, you are, and will be, affected with an activist judicial system. The next SCOTUS decision just may impact you negatively.
P.D. GOSSAGE, JOHNS CREEK
