Marriage and Prop. 22

After talking to nearly 100 neighbors and discussing Prop. 22, I found that not one who opposed this proposition felt that same-sex marriage was better than or even equal to traditional marriage. They were voting to support the desire of a friend. We should not allow the desires of an individual to be considered a right that would alter a law that is good for our society. Laws should be changed when they will benefit society.

There are those in our state who want to love in a same-sex relationship. They cannot legally define this relationship as a marriage. Should we change this law because of their desires? If you feel that same-sex marriage will better society, then vote no on Prop. 22. However, if you agree that the best definition of marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman, then vote yes on Prop. 22.

JOHN W. ALLEN

Hacienda Heights

* I am really disturbed by the Knight initiative (Prop. 22) that says only men and women can marry. There are many same-gender couples in California who have been together 20, 30 and 40 years. It is unfair to say that these families will never be recognized in California.

To single out one segment of the population and say they may not have the same rights as everyone else is divisive. I also think Prop. 22 is intrusive. It would allow the government to tell us just whom we may or may not marry. I certainly don’t want the government getting that involved in my personal life. Do you?

RICK MILLS

Long Beach

* If nothing else, the final vote regarding Prop. 22 will clearly define what each side has been trying to tell the public for years: that they speak for the majority of Californians. Now it’s time to show one’s cards. If you fail to vote, you not only lose the privilege of grousing about the final result, you also must accept responsibility for failing your side of the debate by not going to the polls to settle this issue once and for all.

KEVIN O’BRIEN

Laguna Hills