Soft-headed tolerance
Is there anybody else out there like me?
I spent most of a recent evening about to throw up. The TV showed men kissing men (as in "You may kiss the bride."). Which was which?
I suppose that our nation, in its soft-headed tolerance, has decided that a little cancer is a good thing. How long can we promote homosexuality without feeling the results of it? It seems the Supreme Court has voted to leave our children a heritage of disillusionment, perversion and heartbreak.
When my nausea let up, I wept.
ROY W. MELTON
Little Rock
Flaw in the argument
The argument that the Supreme Court changed the definition of marriage as it is given in the Bible is flawed.
The biblical definition of marriage is that it is between one man and one woman for life: "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder." If one uses the argument that they object to gay marriage because God says it is between one man and one woman, they need to use the entire definition. However, when they do this, they will find the definition of marriage was changed in this country a long time ago.
There are some churches still adhering to the biblical definition. They will not marry a divorced person in church. People who are divorced and remarried cannot receive sacraments in the church because they are considered to be living in an adulterous state.
Other than that, it seems this changed definition is completely acceptable to most Christians and conservatives. Bakers don't refuse to bake their cakes; most pastors and churches will marry them; and I've never heard of a clerk resigning to keep from giving them a marriage license. Still, you can make the same argument used against gays--it is not between one man and one woman, and it is not according to God's definition in the Bible.
These people see nothing wrong with denying government rights and benefits for the care and protection of gay families. Do you have any idea what these benefits entail? Social Security, taxes, death benefits, survivor's benefits, parenting rights, medical emergencies, wrongful death claims and on and on.
This blatant discrimination leads me to believe there is something more at work here than traditional and biblical beliefs. I think Christianity is being used to persecute a group of people simply because they are different. Is this any way for Christians to behave?
SALLY MAYS
Roland
Don't stifle curiosity
After reading the letter from Janet Hill of Fairfield Bay, I was appalled by her efforts to stifle the curiosity of a child.
I understand that a child's "whys" can be irritating, but she ought to be thanking God for that curiosity instead of suppressing it. It seems that she would prefer to instill a blind obedience to authority.
We don't need human robots, we need more people who are willing to ask why! Where would we be if someone had stifled the curiosity of Thomas Edison, Marie Curie, Wernher Von Braun, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and all the others who sought to know "why"?
She needs to learn to channel her child's curiosity productively. Who knows what discoveries might be wrought by that child?
JERRY R. KINNEY
Maumelle
Opening up the box
This is a Pandora's Box of issues. First, problems in Charleston, S.C., will not be solved by taking down a flag. Hate is not caused by a flag. The solution is simple, Jesus said,: We are to love others as ourselves. Jesus by his death on the cross gave us liberty in him, and the Apostle Paul wrote that the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing. If the hate-filled foolish gunman had listened to those followers of Christ at the church, I believe no one would have died because his life would have been changed by Christ. More gun laws don't remove the insanity of hate.
The idea of impeachment of the sitting president is on the minds of many in America. We know that will never occur. But as a matter of education, one reason for impeachment is "for high crimes and misdemeanors." Perjury could be classified as such. Perjury is not just lying under oath but also the violation of an oath. Every president takes the oath when entering office, "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of the president of the United States ..." I believe this president has repeatedly failed to faithfully execute the laws (i.e., immigration laws); therefore, I believe he has violated his oath of office.
Recent editorials and comments on Common Core give me cause for concern. Here is the response of an 11-year-old when asked how he likes Common Core: "I hate it, all we do is take tests and don't spend time learning." I rest my case.
It seems left-wing radicals want a utopia, but when their ideas fail, the incredulity of their reasoning is simple: "but we mean well."
DON DENNY
Rogers
Using religion as tool
We have people who do not understand what their rights are, or what they are not.
The right to religious freedom means you can have a church, you can have long or short dresses, long or short hair, get tax breaks and worship however you want. You can drink or not drink, you can play Bingo or play with snakes. Heck, you can even believe what you want about how old the earth is and how long mankind has been here.
It does not give you the right to use your religion to discriminate against others for not believing what you feel is the only way.
If you work for any form of government, you cannot deny anyone service because of your religious beliefs. If you do, then you are not doing your job and you should be fired for violating the law.
I think if you are a person who discriminates against others because they do not meet your religious standards, then you are no better than a member of ISIS, just to put things into perspective.
PHILIP SHERLIN
Little Rock
Editorial on 07/06/2015