Letter: Amendment on gay marriage is a diversion

Wednesday, March 17, 2004 | 8:44 a.m.

The proposed "Protection of Marriage Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution is an election-year diversion from all the important issues. The amendment attempts to frame a negative, a denial of freedom, in a positive frame. Its wording becomes incoherent unless one translates it to mean that equal protection under the laws does not apply to homosexuals in the case of marriage. The amendment should just say that, but few would like how that sounds.

If the "Denial of Marriage Amendment" were actually to become part of our constitution, it would be a cancer on all our freedoms. Besides, homosexuals are born that way. Left-handedness is also an ancient sign of evil. We might just as well forbid left-handed people from marrying for fear that their adopted children might also become left-handed.

One would hope that the president is not serious about constitutional prohibition of homosexuals. One would hope that this is merely an election-year diversion from the important issues such as the environment, health care, Social Security, public education, jobs, and all those people dying in Iraq.

The most important question Americans need to ask is: "Do we really want to spend all those billions and increase our risk of terrorism just to be the world's imperial power?" Such questions will never get asked, though, as long as our main concern is that Rosie O'Donnell married her girlfriend.

JERRY BITTS