Controversy Over Prop. 22

Isn’t it about time that politicians stop being controlled by dogma and stay out of people’s bedrooms? God or nature created sexual diversity, which has existed since the beginning of time. How two people give each other pleasure is no one’s business. If any two people want to make a bond of their love for each other, they should be granted recognition and validation by society. The American Indians accepted homosexuality and gave it free choice, validation and a significant place in the culture.

Recognizing the rights of homosexuals to marry would increase creativity and decrease violence and promiscuity. It would also help the deleterious effects of the population explosion. Many of the greatest men through the ages have been homosexuals. How about focusing on more important areas such as brutality, criminality, economic rape, human rights, enhancing creativity and tolerance of differences! Vote no on Prop. 22.

HARRY SEAGAL MD

Los Angeles

*

Mike Downey’s Feb. 18 column says everything that needs to be said about Prop. 22. It’s not about preventing same-gender marriage, which is already illegal; it’s not about “defending” heterosexual marriage, which isn’t under attack from anyone, least of all those gay or lesbian couples who wish to have their relationships recognized just as heterosexual couples can. It is about nothing more than the religious right’s ongoing campaign to vilify, marginalize and persecute gay men and lesbians. Californians have rejected such efforts in the past and should again.

JOHN GIBSON

Los Angeles

*

I have thought a lot about Prop. 22 and, unlike Downey, I have decided to vote for this proposition. He and many others have misunderstood the intent of the proposition. It seems that they do not want to have any definitions in this world, and this is what Prop. 22 is about--definitions. It is not about the people involved in relationships outside marriage; it is about definitions.

How do we describe the difference between two items? We give them different names. How do I know if I am buying The Times or a different newspaper? I look at the name. I believe Downey was a sportswriter at one time. Why don’t you put his current column in the sports section? You don’t put his current writings on the sports page because you realize that he is not a sportswriter (by definition). Prop. 22 does not judge people’s lifestyles--it just asks us to define them.

ALAN KEDDINGTON

Laguna Niguel

*

The Random House College Dictionary: Marriage--the social institution under which a man and a woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.

Black’s Law Dictionary: Marriage--legal union of one man and one woman as husband and wife.

The Bible: Marriage--Matthew 19:4,5--” ’Have you not read that he who made them at the beginning, made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ ”

Any questions?

CANDY NUNNO

Anaheim

*

Prop. 22 is supposed to protect marriage. What a joke! Many, many heterosexuals do not “honor” this institution and never have. I wonder what percentage of marriages are entered into for 1) lust, 2) companionship, 3) a green card, 4) money, 5) power, prestige, social position, 6) convenience, 7) social or family pressure, 8) fear of solitude, or any number of other reasons besides the so-called “sacred” purpose of procreation by a man and a woman. Should these types of marriages all be outlawed? Should they be sanctioned just because they’re between a man and a woman?

And what about the 50% divorce rate? Should divorce be made illegal to further “protect” marriage?

ED CARTER

Culver City

*

Everyone I know who says he or she is voting in favor of Prop. 22 is divorced. I’m not sure what to make of that.

KURT WELDON

Winnetka

*

The fact is we (the gay population) are the last group of people to face outright discrimination. This discrimination is based solely on our personal sexual preference. We are Catholic, Buddhist, Jewish, Protestant, etc., and contribute to society in every way, no different than the heterosexual segment.

Like others, we have the good and bad, the ugly and the beautiful. We are celebrating our 50th anniversary this year and to our friends and others, no gifts please; just vote no on Prop. 22.

TOM GIBBONS

BOB CLARK

Los Angeles

*

So, the God-loving, Bible-reading proponents of Prop. 22 factually believe that civil marriage is a divinely sanctified (read: special) covenant between a man and a woman. Sounds like excessive church-state entanglement to me. Or have I just named another legal basis for a constitutional challenge after it passes on March 7?

WILL WYCHE

Palm Springs