Be happy, let gays be happy
From www.dictionary.com: Bigot. Pronounced: [big-uh t] — noun; 1 — a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
Let me begin by admitting I have been a bigot about certain things in the past, and remain a bigot on only one topic at this point (that’s another letter).
In the recent past there has been a writer or two trying to justify why we should support gay marriage bans. One silly fellow tried to explain in detail how gay marriage is bad for business. Really? From where I’m sitting, it is Indiana that is bad for business, not gay people. The other end of the anti-gay marriage movement seems to be coming from the Christian crowd. Hey, I have news for you … it is nature, not nurture, so God is the culprit if you want to blame someone for the gays among us. He has a plan, and that plan includes gay people (to put it in terms you can understand).
And since politics seems to be a hot-button topic in these pages, here’s one for you: We’re paying our representatives and senators to legislate gay marriage bans in lieu of legislating real effective laws and regulations. I, for one, would rather my tax dollars be spent lowering my taxes.
Is it necessary we ostracize a segment of society? Do we need to say, “No, you cannot be happy”? Is it terminology? Because if it is, let’s simply call it a civil union, and let it carry the same legal weight as marriage. I have been friends with people who are gay, and they were, on the whole, more caring, concerned and supportive than my straight friends. I guess living for acceptance makes you more accepting.
I know short is sweet, and far more likely to be published, but I have just one more gripe: please, someone give Joe DeLorme of Clay City a happy pill. The poor guy had a political conniption fit in the opinion pages prior to the election, and is still having a fit after the election. Save the doom and gloom, Joe, eat some chocolate, be happy.
— Michael G. Davis