It amazes me how people are turning the death of the Defense of Marriage Act into a religious debate (6-27, A1, “Closer to equal”). I am not asking for you or your God’s approval, forgiveness or acceptance. I don’t want or need you or your God’s tolerance.
I’m not asking you to advocate for me to go to heaven. I can advocate for myself.
I work every day. I pay taxes. I support charity. I’m a good neighbor. I just want the same rights you have as a human being. Rights given to you by other human beings. Just give me what you got.
The news from the Supreme Court that the Defense of Marriage Act has been overturned confirms to me that our nation is in a steep moral decline.
Now that we have made legitimate the marriage of two people of the same sex, what logical or moral barrier is left to prevent the joining of a father to his daughter or a man to multiple wives? None that I can see.
The key to the successful effort to legalize homosexual marriage has been political pressure on the Democratic Party. Organizations already exist, such as North American Man/Boy Love Association, that would be delighted to see consensual sex between men and boys decriminalized.
Now that the highest court in the land has opened Pandora’s box, I fear that we are going to see pedophilia and pederasty walk through that door to legality.
The president changed his mind on the issue of gay marriage when the polls showed that it was politically expedient.
If the same polls were to show that 40 percent of U.S. voters favored legalizing pedophilia, would he change his mind again?
I have read several letters from writers who do not understand the uproar about the Internal Revenue Service targeting conservative groups’ tax-exempt status.
To understand the outrage, simply substitute “African-American,” “gay,” “Jewish,” or any buzzword that is dear to your cause for “conservative” and “tea party.”
To understanding this administration’s persecution of the press, substitute the name of your favorite MSNBC talking head for James Rosen’s name.
If by doing this you still don’t understand the effect of these actions, you may be blinded by your politics.
State legislators are elected by the citizens of their states to represent the people who elect them. Because the legislators in both Missouri and Kansas seem to represent big business and not citizens, maybe it is time to change the rules.
The legislators seem to be intent on people living on minimum-wage salaries, so we the citizens should begin an initiative on paying legislators. All elected legislators should be paid minimum wage and should receive a monthly stipend and use a state welfare assistance card to access their salaries.
They should be penalized by not receiving pay or benefits when they have to go into an extra session because of a failure to complete their work in the allotted time.
Because these jobs are something that they choose to seek, there should be no benefits other then minimum-wage salaries.
Finally, all gifts from outside sources should be prohibited.
If legislators are truly representatives of the people who elect them, this shouldn’t cause any problems.
Rev. Gary R. Charles
If you were to view a listing of names of “normal” and “abnormal” people, where would your dear friend or relative appear?
I ask this question not to offend anyone or facetiously, but to seek an answer to what I consider a serious question that lingers in my mind.
Who will keep the world populated? Is the normal line long enough? Love is stronger than all.
God bless this world with its created people, and may we continue to evolve.
Ronald T. Craddolph Sr.
The Second Amendment does not need changing. It does not prohibit reasonable regulation of firearms any more than the First Amendment prohibits reasonable regulation of speech.
What we must worry about are people who believe they need weapons to overthrow their own government.
I am proud of my nation and its political system founded on the rule of law. I do not understand state legislators who swear to support the Constitution then advocate nullification, which fosters these illegal ideas.
Our political system allows us to vote for whom we wish. The Supreme Court decides the constitutionality of government actions. If the voters elect a president I disagree with or the Supreme Court makes a decision I disagree with, I accept this as a believer in the Constitution.
The Supreme Court has been wrong, and elected officials are often wrong, but we can work to change this peacefully at the ballot box.
Those who take oaths to support our Constitution need to repudiate nullification and remember they are supposed to protect the Constitution from domestic enemies — those who would seek the violent overthrow of our government.
Read the Constitution — Article VI and the 14th Amendment, Section 3.
Control gun owners
Better background checks and limits on the number of rounds in a gun’s magazine might help, but we should address where the weapons come from and hold the owner partly responsible for the crime.
In the latest massacre, the weapons were not the killer’s but those of his parents, so a background check would not have helped.
Perhaps if weapons were safely secured where a parent or owner had to release them to a shooter it might reduce the convenience factor. I believe that many weapons are too available to those who might misuse them.
Ensuring every gun is in a safe place can never happen. However, holding the owner responsible for the safe disposition of guns in their control can be done.
A weapon used in a crime shouldn’t belong to someone who could have prevented the criminal from accessing it.
Grammar still matters
I am an 871/2-year-old who was fortunate enough to have a teacher in a country one-room grade school in southern Missouri who insisted that her students learn good grammar rules.
She taught us the names of each word in a sentence, which were nouns (subjects and objects), verbs (predicates, action — transitive and intransitive), adjectives (modifiers) and adverbs, as well as about split infinitives.
This knowledge served me well in high school and as a secretary-stenographer before the age of computers.
It pains me now to read articles in newspapers that are so lacking in grammatical correctness. Am I so far behind the times that I missed the day someone decided these things don’t matter.
I know others have addressed this issue through the years in letters, but I have never seen an answer.
Perhaps when my generation has passed on, you will no longer hear from “grammar grouches,” and no one will care.
June Fulton Ellis