Split church and state on gay marriage

I am not quite sure why Cal Thomas believes that proponents for marriage equality want things to be determined by polls, which by nature are biased in favor of whatever reactive fear-inducing frenzy is in the media. This was evident in the California issue of Prop 8, where millions of dollars were spent by the Mormon and Catholic churches to spawn fear. We, instead, want rights, all rights, to be determined by the letter of the law.

Shall I remind him that nine world countries have granted equal marriage rights to same sex couples, and that one of the first was Canada? Has Canada suffered a decline as a result? Shall I remind him that seven states in the United States have granted equal marriage rights to same sex couples? Has Iowa become a den of depravity? Is he aware that many companies offer benefits to same sex couples throughout the country? Who might you ask? Northrop Grumman, a defense contractor located in Rolling Meadows, Deloitte, Hewlette-Packard, Xerox, Citibank, IBM, Microsoft, Target, American Airlines, Clorox, Johnson and Johnson, Best Buy and JCPenney to name but a handful. He cites the abortion ruling that struck down oppressive legislation, which removed a woman's right to self-determination. The federal government also struck down prejudicial state laws against blacks and interracial marriage. He mentions polygamists and their loss of personal freedom. That law, Mr. Thomas, came from the same mindset that all these crazy laws come from, the Christian belief that the Christian way is the only way.

I hope the laws of polygamy are reversed and people may enter into their faith's marriage rituals with equal protection under the law. I personally do not want more than one spouse, however, it is not my place to condemn someone else's beliefs. But let us return to the true argument that Judge Tauro's decision was based upon: marriage as a contract.

If the state did not issue you a license then you would not be legally married in the eyes of the state, in the eyes of your faith, yes, but for legal purposes, tax purposes, medical proxy purposes, inheritance purposes, joint property purposes, you would be viewed as single. I suspect that you would be opposed to a government ruling that required everyone to file their taxes as single, regardless of whether you had marriage contract. This is what those in long-term same sex relationships are required to do. Some of us are married but our contract is only valid in a few states. Your contract is recognized in all states and by the federal government. If you truly want equity, then I would encourage you to file your taxes as single. Join us in paying more taxes, receive less benefits and make us all equal. If marriage is God's domain, then marry in a House of Faith and don't ask the government for any special "marriage" rights. Does having a marriage license mean that you love your spouse more? No, so for go the contract and just be married in the eyes of your chosen deity.

Deeya Roberts

Lake Zurich