Amendment to Ban Gay Marriages

Re “Frist Backs Amendment Banning Gay Marriage,” June 30:

It is not Congress’ job to sanction the marriage of two people, no matter what their gender. That is a job we often delegate to organizations of faith. It is, however, Congress’ charge to distribute the rights of all Americans with equanimity, even if that equanimity is offensive to a particular senator’s faith.

Indeed, this tolerance, guaranteed by the Constitution, is the essence of the separation of church and state. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist now says he would rather change the principles of our Constitution than uphold them. Why? Because he cannot tolerate gay citizens enjoying the same rights as other Americans in committed relationships. Could it be that this represents a personal issue with Frist rather than a flaw in our Constitution?

James D. Scurlock

Marina del Rey

*

I can’t believe you buried Frist’s outrageous comments about gay marriage as an “In Brief” item on the next-to-last page. I expected to see them on the front page. His comments are as offensive as anything Sen. Trent Lott said.

Has Frist never heard the word “equality” or the phrase “liberty and justice for all”?

Rich Rudy

San Diego

*

Jonathan Cohn (Commentary, July 2) points out that the Constitution created by our founding fathers left the prohibitions against sodomy undisturbed. True. Of course, it also left Negro slavery undisturbed. Would he therefore argue that this was correct or desirable? Is a constitutional amendment the only way to recognize and protect the full rights of gay Americans? Nonsense. The justices have (surprisingly) righted a historic wrong by recognizing that gay Americans are persons too and are entitled to the protections guaranteed by the Constitution.

Morris Schorr

Woodland Hills

*

The June 27 commentary by Andrew Sullivan is sick. That America and, as a result, much of modern civilization is in serious decay has long been clear. Last week’s Supreme Court decisions take us another step down this pitiful path. Sullivan’s article is clearly the work of a deviant and distorted mind whose agenda is to “normalize” an abhorrent and unnatural behavior. His assertion that “most of us” fit an ancient definition of “sodomite” is ludicrous and wrong.

William Hilton

Reseda