Letter: It’s about protecting values, religious freedom

To the editor:

Although gay rights activists want you to believe that voting no to the Marriage Amendment in November will not have any consequences, it will, indeed, have profound consequences throughout society. Marriage would become genderless and there would be no boundaries for marriage.
In other states where same sex marriages are legalized, Christian businesses have been sued for not participating in a same sex marriage ceremony. This includes photographers, caterers and printing companies. These are small business owners who have made a choice, but their religious freedom has been taken away. This amendment isn’t about giving equal rights to people who have same sex attractions, but about protecting the rights, and religious freedom of heterosexual couples.
In Canada, pastors and religious leaders have been arrested for preaching on their religious views on marriage. They have also been ordered by human rights organizations to perform same sex union ceremonies or be fined or arrested.
So for those of you who think this is about love and acceptance, please take another look. It’s about protecting our values, rights, and religious freedom. Marriage was defined before government ever existed. Please Vote Yes on Nov.6

Julie Spiers
Monticello

  • Chris Weidenbacher

    This opinion is further from the truth. This amendment cannot force “Christian businesses” (i.e. Churches) to marry same-sex couples. They are private enterprises and are SEPARATE from the government. This amendment in no way will oppress or limit religious freedom. It will just let one minority group have the same freedoms as every other American gets and deserves. Religion should have absolutely nothing to do with it.

  • Katie Bondhus

    Thank you, Julie. You make good points, it’s more than about whether same-sex marriages should be “allowed”. If legal marriage was re-defined as open to all, or un-defined really, not only would other types of spouses legally exist, but ALL applicants for legal marriage, no matter the quantity, gender, age or species of participants, would be taught in school to be equal, respectable no matter your beliefs.
    AND lawsuits (or threats of lawsuits or boycotts) like you speak of would remove any moral, religious or common sense reason for not participating…or “celebrating” these variances.
    You have given me a whole new outlook on this topic and renewed my hope.
    I don’t have a problem with same-sex partners as human beings, but I don’t agree with the idea that their partnership needs to be called marriage.

  • Susan Rego

    When opponents of gay marriage say the Pledge of Allegiance, do they skip over the part about “liberty and justice for all”? Why are we denying our gay friends and relatives the rights and responsibilities of a legal union?

    The points made in the original letter are incorrect. Minnesota Public Radio called them “misleading”: http://tinyurl.com/8k97lz2

    Maybe we can solve this disagreement by having all happy couples get a marriage license from the state that legalizes their union. Then they can have a wedding ceremony officiated by the minister or priest of their choice, at their discretion, of course. No one would force any church to go against its beliefs.

    • dave

      Gays and Lesbians have the same rights as any US citizen. Nobody is taking anything away from you to do and be wit whom you please. Go away and leave us lone and get on with your lives and don’t expect everyone to eat your food!

  • Kelsey Kramer

    Voting No will not legalize same sex marriages – it just wouldn’t ban them! I found this quote right on the Minnesota for Marriage website, “The amendment makes no changes in rights and benefits for gays and lesbians.” What the amendment would do is make it possible for the legislature to give rights and benefits to the GLBT community. People wouldn’t be automatically open to marrying whomever they chose without restrictions. Katie, if you really think that our legislature would open marriage to being allowed to all “species” or “age” — could you really imagine our legislature legalizing adults marrying children?!? — we have bigger things to worry about in our government then this vote. The fact of the matter is that people need to educate themselves on the real issue up for vote. It’s easy to jump on the bandwagon for either side of this matter. If nothing else, I urge everyone to truly educate themselves on the FACTS of this matter and then make a decision.

    To me, this is a question of civil rights. What other types of marriages used to be looked down upon because they might threaten our “values?” Could you imagine if people weren’t brave enough to make a stand and support biracial marriages? Be on the right side of history November 6th. I will support love, not hate.

  • Clara Peterson

    I have no hard feelings against anyone, but if they believe in God and his ten rules (comandments). They should know that The Lord God made male and female.
    He didn’t create two people of the same sex in the begining.

    • Susan Rego

      Our Constitution does not favor one religion over another. I respect the right of any church to not allow same-sex weddings in their own practice. But my religion does bless same-sex unions, and our members would like to bestow legal rights and responsibilities at the same time, just like others do. The state is currently showing favoritism to the values of some churches over others, and that strikes me as a violation of freedom of religion. We all believe in freedom of religion, don’t we?

      • dave

        Sure we all beleive in freedom of religion just not government endorsed marriges of the same sex. You have everything others have but the contract. Im not predjudice but have my beliefs, If your church endorses same sex marriage fine marry them however you will never get the majority of people to see this as something normal.

  • Allysa M. Hamann

    This is ludicrous. If TWO people love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together than they should be allowed that. Doesn’t anyone remember learning about The Golden Rule in kindergarten? “Treat others the way you would want to be treated.” So if we are all created equal and are supposed to have equal rights then this shouldn’t matter. The only place I’ve ever known is this small one minded town and I had to get out. I joined to Army. Most of you need to realize the facts of this whole predicament. The Bible was written by Christian followers of Jesus many years ago, not by God or Jesus themselves, but by mortal men. And The Bible can be interpreted in many different ways. Inquiring it may lead to finding a more profound faith. In the book of Leviticus it goes on to describe other sins that are punishable by death such as children disobeying their parents, or adulterers, and women who are not a virgin on their wedding day shall be taken to her father’s house to be stoned to death. We undoubtedly don’t interpret these scriptures literally anymore. Many of those interpretations were evidence to the time that they lived in. Homosexuality is labeled an abomination, but so are things such as eating shell fish or mixing fabrics. Abomination doesn’t necessarily mean sin, it just means unclean and there are other sexual sins that are considered an abomination in The Bible. It wasn’t even considered homosexuality until years following its print. Blind faith is just as risky as none at all. Church and government are supposed to be separated. That’s how this country was founded. I am a soldier fighting for others freedom; this is a freedom I will not go down without fighting for. We live in a world where anything and everything is ever changing in our society. Just think, one lifetime ago it was looked down upon for interracial couples to marry, and I am a white woman whose dated black men, Puerto Rican men and it really shouldn’t make a difference who anyone loves. Equal right for everyone, please vote NO to Amendment 1 in NOvember.

up arrow