Home › Island Views › Letters
Letter To The Editor: Vote no on the bigot Amendment 2
STORY TOOLS
Tell us about it
- What would you add to this story? Tell us what we missed.
- Do you have photos from this event? Documents we need to see? Share with us.
- Upload photos & videos
- More ways to get your stuff online and in the paper.
RELATED STORIES
- Collier, Lee voters see marriage as one man, one woman; statewide, Amendment 2 passes
- Amendment 2: Married couple worries about what measure will mean
- Amendment 2: Naples men married in Toronto oppose amendment
- Amendment 2: Married couple says measure supports one-man, one-woman
- POLL: Amendment 2 - Will vote change what marriage means in Florida?
- Some ministers to preach for, some against gay marriage proposal
More Letters
- Letter to the Editor: Careful what we govern
- Letter to the Editor: Stop short-term rentals
- Letter to the Editor: What is it that we want for our children?
Share and Enjoy [?]
Amendment 2 does the following:
1. States as true marriage equals one man one woman. Reiterates the current status of marriage in Florida thus covers no new ground.
2. Declares equivalent legal unions invalid. This is the real thrust of the amendment.
Proponents say this protects marriage. I say it attacks legal unions. A non-marriage legal union of one man and one woman will be declared illegal. This denies legal protection for partners in a common law partnership. The not-so-hidden agenda is the attack on legal unions of two men or two women.
This bigotry plain and simple. If this is Christian “do unto others” I am ashamed to call myself Christian.
Michael Gaynor
Marco Island
Comments
This site does not necessarily agree with comments posted below — responsibility lies with the relevant reader alone. Read our privacy policy & user agreement.
What rights do the Constitution of the United States Provide? If this amendment passes, will the State of Florida not grant equal protection regardless of race, religion or gender? State recognition of matrimony should be limited to acknowledging and protecting the rights of all citizens engaged in State sanctioned contractual relationships. Where in the Constitution does it say only certain combinations of human beings may engage in contractual agreements or enjoy recognition and protection of those agreements when sanctioned by the State?
#1 Posted by Fossil on October 15, 2008 at 6:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Post your comment
(Requires free registration.)