Letters: Gay marriage; Disabilities; County Board size

Fond du Lac Reporter letters to the editor - Posted November 1, 2006

Every letter today was good so I posted all of them.

What happened in Massachusetts
I am writing in defense of the lady who was laughed at in a letter for her statement on what will happen in our schools if the gay marriage ban referendum fails.

Her statements were not comical, idiotic or preposterous, nor were they predictions. They were frightening, provable facts.

Thanks to the nationwide activist group GLSEN, Gay/Lesbian and Straight Education Network, here are examples of what's already taken place in Massachusetts alone.

Brookline High School —During Gay and Lesbian Awareness month, students were asked to wear pink cardboard triangles with the word "ally" and invited to "tell someone of your homosexual fantasies or experiences."

Ashland, Mass. —Middle School students were assigned gay roles for a play on discrimination. Two boys had to pretend to be homosexuals wanting to adopt a child. One had to say, "It's natural to be attracted to the same sex." Two girls had to act out the roles of lesbian partners. Parents only found out after it took place.

Silverlake High School, Kingston, Mass. — A ninth- grade textbook contained statements like "Testing your ability to function sexually and giving pleasure to another person may be less frightening in the early teens with people of your own sex." And "You may come to the conclusion that growing up means rejecting the values of your parents."

Framingham, Mass. — A high school survey asks; "How and when did you decide that you were a heterosexual? Is it possible that heterosexuality is a phase you will grow out of?" "Are you a heterosexual because you fear the same sex?" "If you've never slept with anyone of the same sex, how do you know you wouldn't prefer it?" "Is it possible you need a good same-sex experience?"

Need I say more?

Marie Corrente

Fond du Lac

Don't use disability as campaign issue
People who are undecided or want to vote Democrat on Nov. 7 should read the Oct. 26 column by Linda Chavez in The Reporter. If that doesn't unplug their nose, this will.

Two years ago John Kerry and John Edwards paraded Christopher Reeves on the television screen to try to win election to the White House. Now Jim Doyle is trying to stay in Madison by parading Michael J. Fox on television.

Let me give some advice. If you have never been confined to a wheelchair or had cerebral palsy or have never had a mental disability, do not go giving people fake hope. You have no idea what is going on in the brain of a disabled person. Doctors and family members know a lot more than you do.

If you want to win an election, do it some other way. The only thing you deserve by parading mentally and physically disabled people on a television screen is to lose.

Louie Schultz III

Lomira

Supervisors should be 'downsized,' too
Here's my opinion on the referendum. I know that the whole Rolling Meadows is a dead issue, but I want to use it as an example.

I was one of the employees. In May, when I found out that the county executive was thinking of closing it, I decided to look elsewhere. At that time, there was absolutely nothing for a nursing assistant anywhere in Fond du Lac.

I had six years there and loved every minute of it. Other people had over 20 years there. A lot of them retired, a lot of them eventually found other jobs. The ones that were hired at the new Rolling Meadows, I'm glad you are there for our residents.

Now my question is to the County Board members who are against the downsizing: How does it feel to wonder if you will have a job or not? Not only was a home taken away from the residents who came to love Rolling Meadows, but jobs were taken too. I'm for the downsizing. I want you to know how all of us felt.

Linda Maurice

Fond du Lac

'Yes' vote will protect marriage
Why should we vote "yes" to ban "gay marriage"? Because the homosexual movement is spending millions worldwide to promote the "homosexual agenda."

Getting activist judges to legitimize gay marriage is a key step. Lawmakers are needed to tighten the definition of traditional marriage.

Your "yes" vote will protect traditional marriage, families, religion and society. Twenty states have already done so. I can't, in 300 words, explain how profoundly important is this issue. You could get the facts in the well-researched book, "The Homosexual Agenda" by Alan Sears and Craig Osten.

They say "that once same-sex marriage is affirmed, then other forms of 'marriage' will quickly be affirmed as well, such as polygamy, … bestiality and child marriage. In fact, the policy guide of the ACLU calls for the legalization of polygamy …" Elites point to Europe for "progressive ideas." The book reveals that "… in Europe a generation of children is growing up with no idea of what a traditional family is like."

Christians and Jews know full well what God commanded about homosexual activity – check Leviticus 18:22 and Romans 1:24-27. Churches today, in trying to minister to the small (4 to 6 percent) of the population who are gay, have capitulated to subtle steps that will ultimately weaken religion, family and society.

We have been indoctrinated through the years by many means that gays and gay activities are no different than anything else in society. Hollywood has, for over 40 years, promoted homosexual characters and dialog in increasing frequency.

OK, gay people are just like everyone else in most ways. I agree absolutely. But when the institution of marriage of one man and one woman, blessed by God and proven through centuries, is about to be corrupted, I must vote "yes" to ban a homosexual version.

Hal Barfknecht

Mount Calvary

Writer urges 'yes' on death penalty
Let's see if I have this straight. It is OK for us to go out and kill upwards of a half-million deer in a season, several geese, ducks, rabbits, squirrels and even mourning doves. Their only crime is being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

This is all done with the blessing of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. However, we (the State) cannot kill even one single human being, regardless of the crime committed.

Most species of animals, even insects, have a social order, some even better than our own. That social order is either adhered to by all, or the violator is probably either going to end up as dinner for another animal or road kill.

As far as the possibility of executing an innocent person, although it's not impossible, forensic science has certainly cut the chances of that considerably over the years. The time to be against the death penalty was 30 or even 20 years ago. We shouldn't have been in favor of it at that time. Innocent people could have been executed. We are now past that point in history.

Therefore, a "yes" vote on the death penalty referendum on Nov. 7 would be correct.

Jeff Reese

Fond du Lac