Jump to content
I'm a little puzzled as to your letter. It sounds like you are saying we should have gun control laws, instead of just laws to punish miscreants, just as we have laws to prevent rape or murder or embezzlement. But--we don't have any laws that prevent any of these things, we only have laws to punish the people who commit these crimes. Even restraining orders (the only murder-prevention law I could think of) are only applied to people who have singled themselves out as a threat. I'm not saying we shouldn't have reasonable, carefully considered gun control laws, I was just puzzled by your letter.
Good job Amy, thank you for taking the UB to task on their deceptive "journalism".
It is a disgrace to the UB that they have not issued a public apology to the Rural Library District for their outrageous error in reporting that the state auditor’s office had issued two findings against the district. A quick search of the State Auditor website shows no findings have been issued against the District. A finding is the most serious charge the State Auditor’s office can issue against an entity. These are usually procedural matters resulting from misunderstanding the law, not cases of outright fraud, yet all non-profits strive to comply with regulations and avoid findings. The UB reporting a letter from the State Auditor office as a finding is analogous to a police officer stopping you as a courtesy because your vehicle taillight is out, and the UB reporting the next day that you were arrested.
The issue for me is that why did your husband think he could waltz out the door on you and your boys? Why did he think that it would be ok--that you and your children didn't really need him, and that whatever his needs were, they were more important than his commitment to his marriage? I once heard a woman lament that "It used to be that only a dirty rotten skumbag would abandon his wife and kids. Now your run-of-the-mill jerk does it." What has changed is the way we treat marriage in this country--the way we teach men that women don't really need them, that the kids do fine after divorce, that love is the reason we stay married so if you aren't feeling it..... But consider this--how often, when we hear someone is divorcing, is our first question "Are there children?" (I know gay couples do raise kids too but that's the exception, not the rule for most gay couples. ) We just wanted to keep marriage as a way to strengthen the male-female bond becasue when it fails, more people are hurt.
I wish there was a way to assure same-sex couples that the opposition to gay marriage was NOT due to bigotry--that most all of us have no animus toward gays, that we have friends and loved ones who live outside the closet and this is all ok. I know there are people motivated by prejudice against gays; I find such people embarassing, I am not silent when they speak in my presence, and I am glad their views are not those of the majority.
Namvet, it is embarrassing to me that you could read my letter and make a comment about amrriage to an animal. That is a disgraceful thing to say and I suggest you ask the UB to remove your comment.
I'm glad your marriage works for you, and I know, of course, that individual marriagers vary tremendously in how the couples express their commitment. But those aren't my ideas about what a marriage is in my letter, that's what marriage has been for centuries across virtually all cultures and all faith traditions. And please, it is not by definition bigotry to say that the union of a man and a woman is of such overwhelming importance to a soceity, that it should be singled out and given special status. I am really glad that gay couples find peace and happiness in their unions--wishing them long and enduring love--but read below about a woman abandoned by the father of her children and left to care for them on her own. The children and their mother suffer much more--I only wanted my society to do all it could to add strength to that male-female union becasue when it breaks, more harm is done.
Ms. Dolling, you should know that many people oppose same-sex marriage without the slighted bit of antipathy toward homosexuals. You are concerned with individuals, others are concerend about society; I believe changing the definition of marriage will undermine it as an institution. It has nothing to do with feeling acrimony toward gays. I finally sent my letter off opposing same-sex marriage, and do you know the number one reaosn I have hesitated this long? It's becasue I fear reprisals from people like you who have labeled me as a bad, horrible bully and maybe will do little things, like stage a protest at my place of work or leave threatening messages on my home phone. Your letters should not vilify the opposition.
I am very troubled when people who disagree with Catholic teaching presume to speak for Catholics. There are many people who identify as "Catholic" but who, ahem, rarely attend Mass and certainly do not bother studying theology. The right of conscience Moreland refers to also requires that the Catholic study church teaching in depth before deciding that his or her moral reasoning trumps that of the entire Church hierarchy. Here is what Bishop Cupich says about approving same-sex marriage: " But, what is lost? What is lost is any reference in the new law to marriage as that institution in society in which children are generated and nurtured in a family and learn about gender from the way it is lived by their mothers and fathers. The faithful monogamous marriage of a man and a woman will no longer be the legally established social standard by which children conceived have a mother and a father to raise them, and mothers and fathers take responsibility for the children that they create. Rather, the new law gives exclusive emphasis to a couple’s relationship, to the point that the needs and rights of children are subordinated in order to create a new legal entitlement for adults." Bishop Cupich does not, in this quote, go into the carefully reaosned theological reasons Catholics should oppose gay marriage, but I can tell you it is a whole lot more carefully reasoned than what Moreland put in her letter. Every Catholic I know disagrees with Moreland, who should not presume to speak for a majority.
Last login: Wednesday, April 17, 2013
2013 Best Of The Best Winners
The latest wine and dine news.
The Valley's people, wine & food.
Find your way around the Valley.
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2013 Union-Bulletin. All rights reserved.