Letters to the Editor

R-74: Consequences and representation | LETTER TO THE EDITOR

To the editor:

Many people are inherently attracted to the same sex; this is a reality. Intolerance and ignorance do not have to be present for someone to have different legal opinions. Marriage is not in the same category as other historical wrongdoings and mistakes.

I do believe that society will be affected if children are increasingly raised in homes without a male and female parent present. It makes sense that negative public service consequences would result from R-74. This basic definition change also opens a very real and steep “slippery slope” for other legal topics that we currently take for granted.

Current definitions provide representation for two opposing beliefs. Civil unions and marriages legally solidify relationships with all benefits. Referendum 74 molds these two definitions into one, literally erasing the second of those valued viewpoints. Legal definitions are the only solid and confident voice that many children, teens, and young adults will ever know. They deserve to hear both sides.

Please vote “no” on Referendum 74.



We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.

Read the Oct 21
Green Edition

Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.

Browse the archives.

Friends to Follow

View All Updates