The Cincinnati Enquirer |
Editorial Page
|
Oct. 21, 1998 |
| TO THE EDITOR: The Cincinnati Enquirer’s stance on equal protection of the laws for homosexuals is unclear, "Cincinnati’s opinion is ratified by courts" [Oct. 18]. It purports to support equal protection but also days that citizens in Cincinnati should not be bullied by city government "to tolerate, accept, or protect a sexual lifestyle that most Americans believe is immoral." The implication of this statement is the possible denial of equal protection. Why? Because if citizens decide not to support equal protection, then the government (city, state, or federal) has no right to force them to uphold equal protection for homosexuals.
It is, in fact, the prejudice of heterosexuals which is responsible for the creation of the concept of gay rights in the first place. If people treated each other with respect and did not discriminate based on morally irrelevant characteristics such as |
race, gender, and sexual orientation - a respect which is the very basis of Christian moral teaching - then there would be no need for this debate.
Additionally, the Enquirer neglected to mention that Issue 3 is so ambiguous that the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to consider the challenge to it since it would make such a poor vehicle for a Supreme Court decision.
Lou Matz, Clifton
|
 |
 |
