Same-sex marriage issue's unsettling still
Revelers celebrate in Manhattan's West Village following the passing of the same sex marriage bill by a vote of 33 to 29. (June 24, 2011) Credit: AP
Regarding "Marriage law's fans, foes" [Letters, June 28], to the reader who asked what effect will this have on our children's morals, I say this: What effect have heterosexual divorce and serial adultery (Rudy Giuliani, David Vitter, Newt Gingrich come to mind) had on children?
I'm amazed when people resort to biblical references to justify a ban on civil marriage for gay couples, yet ignore other references -- e.g., allowing a husband to kill his wife for adultery, or his children for insolence. Polygamy also appears to have been acceptable.
Our foes have no business projecting religion or their beliefs onto something that is purely a civil matter. If they want religious denominations to continue to enjoy full representation without taxation, then they must stay out of civil matters.
Robert W. Pierce, Oakland Gardens
The headline "The opposition: Religious leaders blast law" [News, June 26] is misleading, and the story is woefully incomplete. Newsday and the rest of the media continue to create the false impression that "religion" is some monolithic structure that unanimously condemns same-sex relationships.
The Catholic Church and various Evangelicals are mentioned in the article. Where are the Quakers, the Episcopalians, the United Church of Christ, the Ethical Humanists, the Reform Jews? Where indeed is the mention of the countless clergy in the Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian and other denominations who are debating inclusion and marriage equality in their own churches?
Let us hear something about the clergy who realize that many of the ancient prohibitions in Leviticus are no more relevant to the modern world than the consent to sell one's daughters into slavery.
The United States is not a theocracy, and civil contracts do not require approval of a clergy that would impose its own brand of Sharia law.
William Orr, Dix Hills
To change a long-standing tradition like marriage, the decision should be up to the American people by their vote. It should not be up to a legislature or Congress, especially since one party has the majority.
Californians voted against same-sex marriage, but the court overturned that state's referendum anyway. This doesn't sound like a government for the people and by the people.
Irene Harshbarger, Holbrook
