Responses to ''Ga. keeps ban on gay marriage,'' Page One, July 7 [Letters to the Editor]

Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 7/10/06

[madprof98]

Gays want rights if not acceptance

I was pleased to hear the governor say that gay people are free to live their lives in Georgia. Thank goodness I don't have to leave the state after paying taxes here for 25 years.

The governor left no doubt, however, that I am in fact still a second-class citizen. Despite those 25 years of tax paying and eight years with my partner, we do not have the same rights as a heterosexual couple who have been married for one day.

To Gov. Sonny Perdue, the Supreme Court of Georgia, and the people who voted for the constitutional ban on gay marriage, we want you to understand that gay people --- your neighbors and fellow U.S. citizens --- do not want to get married in the First Baptist Church of Anywhere, Georgia. By all means, continue to exclude us from your religious ceremonies. We just want the same civil rights as you have and we will continue to have our relationships blessed in welcoming churches.

THOMAS FITCH, Atlanta

Faith in country is now all gone

I wonder, did the Georgia Supreme Court justices rule that the amendment to ban gay marriage was constitutional just to keep it from becoming a wedge issue again in the upcoming election, or do they really believe in its contents? Either way they have sold their souls.

I have been with my partner in a happy, monogamous relationship for nine years. Our union has outlasted many of those of our friends and relatives, yet we are the threat to marriage? Try outlawing divorce and adultery.

It appears that the justices are happy to continue with the status quo: no equal rights for gays. I would have thought that some of them would have understood what it feels like to be discriminated against. Will they be enacting Jim Crow laws in the near future, or is that too much of a stretch even for them? We gays have truly become the new, black, hated minority, and at the hands of several African-American state Supreme Court justices! How ironic.

It looks like I'll need to move to Canada and renounce my American citizenship just to be treated like an equal member of society. I have lost all faith in this far-right-wing, hate-mongering, religion-distorting country.

ALLEN RENSHAW, Mableton

Future generations will be ashamed

Our governor and state Supreme Court should be ashamed of themselves for throwing logic and compassion out the window in their support for a 21st-century "Jim Crow" constitutional amendment banning all legal recognition for same-sex unions. For the governor to say, "I don't think it demeans gay Georgians in any other way," sounds very much like the stale "separate but equal" rhetoric that the U.S. Supreme Court made obsolete about 50 years ago, except that in the case of civil marriage and civil unions, it is separate and unequal for gay Georgians.

Whether our current politicians like it or not, when the young people of Georgia eventually grow to hold the positions of authority in this state, they will relegate this type of thinking about gay Georgians to the same dustbin of history that the "Colored Only" signs of the past now occupy. Our current leaders should be forward-thinking in trying to legally protect all of Georgia's families, lest they be looked back upon by today's fair-minded young people as having stood and blocked the door to fairness, compassion and equality.

REED PITRE, Atlanta

Just as outrageous as racial prejudice

Justice Robert Benham's opinion says in part that the objective of the amendment is "reserving marriage and its attendant benefits to unions of man and woman." And that is OK and not discriminatory? Try adding one word --- "unions of white man and white woman" --- and immediately you see how discriminatory it is. Substitute the group of your choice to deny rights to Mexicans, blacks, Jews, etc.

Gov. Sonny Perdue says we have to listen to the "people's voice." Really, governor? It has not been that long since the majority wanted white-only neighborhoods, white-only schools and white-only drinking fountains. Did that make it right, governor?

RAY TOWNSEND, College Park

[madprof98]

Cynthia Tucker and her comrades have not produced an editorial response to the reinstatement of Georgia's gay marriage ban. Apparently they decided that printing these thoughts from typical AJC readers was the best way to voice their own viewpoint.

[The Sons of Liberty]

It looks like I'll need to move to Canada and renounce my American citizenship

"Delta's ready when you are."

[conservativecorner]

The whining pack of flamers just don't understand the concept of marriage.

[LachlanMinnesota]

I beg to differ: Gays have exactly the same rights as heterosexuals, they just don't define them the same. They can marry anyone of the opposite sex that they choose, but they want an additional right to marry people of the same sex. Everyone is in the same exact legal position.

They are being treated equally, but want more.

[IncPen]

The solution is to get the government out of the business of licensing things.

[cake_crumb]

"Despite those 25 years of tax paying and eight years with my partner, we do not have the same rights as a heterosexual couple who have been married for one day."

Heterosexuals HAVE no special rights. It was only because of the Bush administration that the marriage (tax) PENALTY was removed. Gay people seem to be extremely immature.

[Doohickey]

...we do not have the same rights as a heterosexual couple...

Folks, I'm a little bit confused. Maybe some kind FReeper can set me straight. What are these new rights I got when I got married? I'm not finding anything in the Constitution that gives married people more rights than singles.

[cake_crumb]

"What are these new rights I got when I got married? I'm not finding anything in the Constitution that gives married people more rights than singles."

Good questions. If you find the answers, let me know.

[Doohickey]

...set me straight...

No pun intended there. Really. *snicker*

[cvq3842]

I'll say it again: it's ironic how many seem to equate the institution of marriage as currently defined with racism or segregation. Yes, marriage is between a man and a woman. No, it is no longer illegal to marry someone of another "race," nor should it be. But there IS legal segregation in society - separate men's and women's restrooms are perfectly legal, even in public buildings. Why? Because MEN AND WOMEN ARE DIFFERENT - they are equal in the eyes of the law but not identical. The institution of marriage recognizes this.

Reminds me of the man in the Monty Python movie who wanted the right to be pregnant. ignores a basic biological fact, no?

[toddlintown]

"Delta's ready when you are."

If he sits right behind his "life-partner," he can fly United.

[Citizen Tom Paine]

Notice that there was not one response stating that many (the majority?) of people think the behavior is reprehensible, or that they may be putting their immortal soul in jeopardy by persisting in such behavior..

[cvq3842]

Good question. But whatever recognition and support married couples do receive is not "discrimination" in my mind, just because it is limited to those who have chosen the type of commitment deemed by society to most likely result in a stable family in which to raise children.

Marriage, by definition, "discriminates" - against singles. But so what? You can't deny someone a job because they are unmarried, but social security, pension and/or health insurance benefits going to spouses has not been held to be "discrimination" against single people. Married people have taken on a status and are recognized for it. Heck, veterans get government health programs and retirement benefits (and the more the better, I say!) - is it "discrimination" because non-veterans don't get them? I think not, of course.

There's a joke here about marriage being like combat, but I hope I'm explaining my overall point. I need more coffee, I think.

[Leatherneck_MT]

"It looks like I'll need to move to Canada and renounce my American citizenship"

Adios

[cake_crumb]

"Notice that there was not one response stating that many (the majority?) of people think the behavior is reprehensible, or that they may be putting their immortal soul in jeopardy by persisting in such behavior.."

I'm guessing that letters representing majority opinions were "filed".

[freedomlover]

Nice screen name.
Good talking to you.

yours
ThingamaBob

[cake_crumb]

"Heck, veterans get government health programs and retirement benefits (and the more the better, I say!) - is it 'discrimination' because non-veterans don't get them? I think not, of course."

You missed the "universal health care is a civil right" theme during the Democrat National Convention.

[Rummyfan]

It appears that the justices are happy to continue with the status quo: no equal rights for gays. I would have thought that some of them would have understood what it feels like to be discriminated against. Will they be enacting Jim Crow laws in the near future, or is that too much of a stretch even for them? We gays have truly become the new, black, hated minority, and at the hands of several African-American state Supreme Court justices! How ironic.

Yes I saw the new 'Gays Only' drinking fountains, and dining room at The Varsity on my last trip to Atlanta.

[Rummyfan]

When did 'homosexual' become a race?

[Rummyfan]

That's my thought too, and it should be empahiszed in this discussion. They want a special right.