Hawaii Ruling on Gay Marriages

* Re “Hawaii Ruling Lifts Ban on Marriage of Same-Sex Couples,” Dec. 4: This row over gay marriage has always been a mystery to me. It seems to me that “marriage” as we know it, often but not always, has two parts:

One part is the secular aspect that the state imposes for stability. And this secular aspect is required of all “marriages” to be legally recognized. But this is basically a special form of a partnership agreement, the purpose of which is concerned with property rights and inheritance.

The second part, which is not present in all marriages, is a religious aspect. This clearly is not required for the state. It can only be required for those religious persons desiring to sanctify a secular function.

For the religious aspect, there are already churches that gladly and joyfully sanctify same-sex relationships. For the secular part, can any state show a compelling reason to deny a secular partnership to any couple? I think not.

ROBERT M. CROWDER

Laguna Beach

* The Hawaii court’s decision rejecting the state’s ban on same-sex marriage is thrilling to me. Several years ago when my gay son came out to me, my very first concern was not gay-bashing or AIDS (that came later) but simply the fear that he would be a lonely man, lacking sustained companionship, especially as he grew older, because he could never get married. Now there is hope for him and for thousands of other gay men and lesbians whose relationships can be stabilized and whose love for each other can be affirmed.

DORA B. GOLDSTEIN

Stanford

* Once again Hawaii proves itself the most civilized of states, as well as the most beautiful. May I propose Hawaii Circuit Judge Kevin S.C. Chang for the next opening on the U.S. Supreme Court?

RICHARD MILES

Los Angeles