The ruling against Proposition 8 and the federal Race to the Top program

Marriage proposals

Re “Ban on gay marriage overturned,” Aug. 5

Reason and law prevail; the ruling declaring Proposition 8 unconstitutional is a reminder.

My understanding of our country’s basis for all laws — the U.S. Constitution — includes the concepts that all persons have equal rights, and that there is to be a separation of church and state.

Clearly, Proposition 8 discriminated against part of our country’s population based on sexual orientation, and that is just wrong. In addition, many of the arguments against it were based on statements from the Bible. Though Christianity clearly had an influence on the framers of the Constitution, they recognized the need to have a basic set of laws that were not unduly influenced by any one religion.

This decision reaffirms that the reason of law prevails over emotional political and religious arguments,

thank God.

Forrest Shattuck

Orange

I’m 54 years old. Half a century is more than enough time to get used to the idea that something is not an option.

Which is precisely what made Wednesday so remarkable.

I called home to see if Jaymes had remembered to pick up the water filter from Home Depot. He answered the phone with the most exuberant “I love you” that I’ve heard from him in our six years of partnership. He told me that Proposition 8 had

just been declared unconstitutional by the federal court.

Then he asked me to marry him.

What a surprisingly strange, otherworldly experience.

Later I closed the class I was teaching with the news that I was headed out to celebrate the Proposition 8 ruling. When one of my students asked, “Are you getting married?” and I replied, “I was actually proposed to this afternoon,” the class burst into a spontaneous wave of applause. That surprised me a little.

And with each student’s expression of congratulations — and there were many —I realized it wasn’t marriage per se that was being congratulated. It was the fracturing of a 54-year-long story of being “less than,” of being “other.” It was an affirmation that my relationship deserves equal protection. Wow.

By the way, Jaymes didn’t remember the water filter from Home Depot. And I can’t imagine having cared less.

Charley Lang

Los Angeles

The writer is a professor of psychology at Antioch University Los Angeles.

After 54 years of marriage to the same woman, I must be near the top of the list of people who have credentials to talk about this subject. I don’t want to hear anyone who has not been married for at least half a century to the same person talk about how sacred or meaningful the institution of marriage is. That would reduce the noise level to a whisper.

I am particularly offended by the idea that if two people who happen to be the same sex are in love and want to make a commitment to each other, that they will destroy the nature of marriage.

Marriage is more likely to be diminished by the Bristol Palin/Levi Johnston marriage comedy.

I see no evidence that the politicians and crusaders have done anything to alter the 50% failure rate of American marriages.

It is time to change the subject and let people make their own marriage decisions.

Charles Weisenberg

Beverly Hills

I am losing faith in our judicial system, as liberal judges continue to use their power for social engineering purposes.

U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional, and thus arrogantly ignored the will of Californians who voted not once but twice to confirm a historical, time-honored and biblical stance that marriage be defined as between one man and one woman.

Bonnie O’Neil

Newport Beach

I believe in having more than one wife. My girlfriends are willing to live with me as my wives in total commitment for life.

So I take great hope, following Walker’s ruling, that my future wives and I will soon enjoy the full panoply of equal protection under the law, with the outdated proscription of polygamy finally being ruled unconstitutional.

Hooray for the new “morality.” It is as one wishes to define it.

Joseph S. David

Brea

While we celebrate this decision, young progressives understand that our work is not done. This ruling is not just about marriage; it is about equality. True equality will require a revolution in the way we think.

The organizing work we do today seeks to ensure the ascension of a progressive generation. It is the rise of this group that ultimately will be necessary to permanently establish true equality in California and in America.

The Los Angeles County Young Democrats remains committed to mobilizing a generation of progressive Democrats who will carry on this fight.

David Graham-Caso

Los Angeles

The writer is vice president of communications, Los Angeles County Young Democrats.

Flaws, promise of Race to the Top

Re “A sprint or a marathon?,” Editorial, Aug. 1

Thanks for jumping off the education bandwagon and writing a cautionary editorial on the misguided direction of Race to the Top. As it has been said: “Education is a journey, not a race.”

Linda Mele Johnson

Long Beach

United Teachers Los Angeles is heartened at The Times’ recognition that Race to the Top has many flaws. California schools are severely underfunded, and the amount of monies Race to the Top would bring are insignificant compared with the recent cuts to school budgets.

Because there is no reporting or linkage of a student’s test scores to his or her name or academic record, many students do not take standardized tests seriously and often “bubble” their answers in a random fashion. To use such unreliable data to evaluate teachers is problematic at best.

UTLA opposes Race to the Top mainly because of its approach to school funding. It creates a competitive model for funding schools, penalizing students whose schools and districts will receive no monies through no fault of their own. This is unfair and shortsighted.

Race to the Top does not meet the educational needs of millions of children nationwide.

A.J. Duffy

Los Angeles

The writer is president, United Teachers Los Angeles.

Fifty-plus years since Brown vs. Board of Education and despite decades of education-reform studies and hearings, the status quo still rules. No wonder California leads nationally in dropouts.

Race to the Top challenged us to take on the status quo, which has fostered a culture of failure in public education. California responded with innovations: an open-

enrollment policy allowing students to attend a school based on its quality, not just its location. Similarly, parents can now “trigger” change at persistently low-performing neighborhood schools. Children have one shot at a top-quality education.

Shaking up the status quo can be scary for those who foster failure. How much longer will status-quo apologists hide behind pretentious claims of “imperfectly” drafted laws to deny fundamental, substantive education reforms?

We drafted legislation, SB X5 4, to end a culture of failure in our public schools. We must proceed with all deliberate speed: Negative economic and social consequences will last generations if we don’t.

Thankfully, this president, the governor, a majority of the California Legislature and the state Board of Education get it. Hopefully, another half a century of educational paralysis won’t elapse before The Times gets it too.

Sen. Gloria Romero (D-East Los Angeles)

Sen. Bob Huff (R-Glendora)

Sacramento

The writers are, respectively, chair and vice chair of the state Senate Education Committee.