Gays Should Accept Consequences

I rarely respond to an item in the newspaper, but I can’t let Dana Parsons’ column, “State Bill Protecting Gays Will Gauge Traditional Values” (Sept. 1), about protecting gays and “traditional values,” pass without comment.

I agree that the issue is about discrimination, and also about values and beliefs. The problem with his column is that he takes the position that his view of proper values and beliefs is best for Californians. I disagree. Gays should be discriminated against to protect traditional values. I do not believe the gay lifestyle is an acceptable “alternate lifestyle.”

He asks whether we would sit by and watch a relative suffer job loss or other discrimination because they were gay. I definitely would. If one of my relatives were imprisoned because he broke the law, I would be saddened, but because we believe we are making society better by isolating the bad apples from the good apples, I would accept it. Similarly, if one of my relatives is gay (and some are), I accept discrimination against them. If they choose to be gay (and I do believe it is a choice), then let them suffer the consequences.

It would be interesting to see what a referendum on AB 101 would reveal about the belief of fellow Californians. In the meantime, it would be nice if writers such as Mr. Parsons would stop putting themselves on a pedestal as having the superior view. Express an opinion, but don’t project it as the right opinion, or what the majority of Californians’ opinion should be.

JERRY LENNING, La Palma