Religious doctrine should not bypass common sense, compassion

Published on Wednesday, October 22, 2008 8:16 AM MST

Editor:

Of all the people voting yes on Proposition 108, how many of you have ever known a gay person? I would venture to guess a very small percentage, or more likely none of you at all, which is a pity; you have sold yourselves short.

I am not gay but have known gay people and had gay friends throughout my life. These people were loving, compassionate, trustworthy and patriotic. They loved their country and the freedoms that come with being American.

Depending where you live in the world, being gay could be a nonevent, or it could be a death sentence. Unfortunately, in the country that is known for having the most freedoms, it has been both.

Gay people go to church, have friends and are not so different from you or me; maybe that’s what you are afraid of finding out. I think it’s a sad affair when religious doctrine bypasses common sense and compassion for other human beings, when fear of the unknown breeds hate and ignorance.

I don’t expect to change your views on gay marriage, but at least consider the idea that God is the one who reserves final judgment on his people, and the government should not be allowed to judge who marries whom. The more we let the government into our lives, the less freedoms we have.

David Roberts

Safford

Print this story Email this story Post A Comment

Comments

8 comment(s)

102 wrote on Nov 4, 2008 2:02 PM:

" First of all, get your propositions straight. 102 in Arizona and 8 in California.

I voted YES on 102. That does not mean I hate gays. It means I care about our society and the environment that my children are raised in. "

Seems to me wrote on Oct 31, 2008 9:24 PM:

" It seems to me that the problem is the use of the term "Marriage". This word is sacred to many heterosexuals, Christians and people with deep spiritual beliefs. Another term that does not corrupt the image of marriage that these people hold sacred would be more acceptable. I believe strongly that male and female homsexuals should have rights if they choose to live together with a committment to one another. I think these special people should choose another term for their idea of marriage because it is not truly marriage as marriage is defined by history. "

happy hippie wrote on Oct 31, 2008 2:02 PM:

" I agree. I believe in state's rights, and if Arizona decides against it, then that's that. But at the same time, the continual alienation of gay couples isn't right. I don't see why we can't just treat each other the same, and that includes not pushing beliefs on people from both sides. If you're gay, that's ok. You should be treated with love and treated the same. If you're not, that's ok. You should be treated with love and treated the same. One side should not try to defeat the other. "

49ers Rock wrote on Oct 31, 2008 8:12 AM:

" GLBT's *are* different from normal people - its not how they act around the rest of us - its what they do with each other behind closed doors. Casual physical contact between homosexual men is many many times higher than physical contact between heterosexuals and why? Because its not about love, its about sex.

And David, I lived and worked in the gay capitol of the US for over a decade and knew, socialized and worked with and among many GLBT's. "

pirates wrote on Oct 30, 2008 10:40 AM:

" its not natural! "

Jessica wrote on Oct 26, 2008 4:09 AM:

" I am voting yes on 108 (it's not 102) because of a firm belief that marriage is only to be between one man and one woman. I have gay friends and of course they aren't much different than you and me; however I don't believe that gay marriage should be legal in the state of Arizona. A group of 1st graders in California went on a field trip to a gay wedding. I don't want that for my children. "

Doc Johnson wrote on Oct 23, 2008 9:19 PM:

" Amen, gentlemen.

On with Polygamy! "

bwana wrote on Oct 23, 2008 7:42 AM:

" Thanks Dave. I agree with your premise. "

WRITE A COMMENT

READER COMMENTS
* Be respectful of others, the writer and the subjects in the story.

* Be relevant. Keep your comments pertinent to the story that is being discussed.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All reader comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The Eastern Arizona Courier is not liable for messages from third parties. IP addresses can be subpoenaed and your identity established by individuals who have been hurt by your comments.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity: You can be prosecuted for identity theft.
* Comments unrelated to the story.

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in www.eacourier.com reader comments represent the individual's own views and not those of the Eastern Arizona Courier. The Courier does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than Eastern Arizona Courier spokespersons.

Thank you for your comments!