Supreme Court’s refusal to rule on gay-marriage bans

“Refusal to rule a win for advocates,” Oct. 7 news story.

A wonderful new era is dawning. Barriers across this nation are being removed for same-sex couples seeking to be married. There will now be no impedance to any marriage except the decision to blend hearts and lives.

It is incomprehensible to imagine that after years of discrimination, after years of being told that their love is unnatural and that it doesn’t matter what “those” people feel, compassion and logic have prevailed.

We at Christ Congregational Church have been “open and affirming” for three years now and this spiritual stance has now been joined with the critical legal one. Equal rights for equal couples is now the law. For us, being open and affirming is not a cliche, it’s a creed.

The writer is pastor of Christ Congregational Church in Denver.

The highest courts are rightfully telling citizens that marriage rights cannot be taken away in a popularity or morals contest. When and if my partner of 29 years and I decide to marry, it certainly won’t imitate the many failed heterosexual marriages on public display, behind closed doors, or in divorce courts. It will be a marriage between two men with its own unique lifestyle, and will be a continuation of the wonderful relationship I am currently enjoying, with added legal protections, benefits and responsibilities of married life.

The salient question in the argument regarding gay marriage is why government at any level has any say in the matter. It smacks of so may “isms.” People of any number and sex should be able to live as they please. And they do. That some of them think they need a certificate to place on the wall is disappointing. They should have more confidence. No matter, they can easily get such a certificate from the various religions and, failing that, by downloading one from the Internet.

The one true reason that people today need governmental sanction is that it protects the community property of the surviving partner in case of death. Such a trifling problem could easily be handled by the simplest of legislation.

Look on the positive side: No more divorces. (This would obviously panic one segment of our society. Unfortunately, members of that segment would be largely responsible for drafting that community property bill.)