Readers write: Marriage debate, bearing arms in the US
Marriage debate
Regarding the Aug. 15 & 22 cover story, “A florist caught between faith and discrimination”: I can empathize with the business owner who refused to provide flowers for a gay wedding, but I can in no way condone her actions. If one is to serve the public, then one cannot choose whom to serve. I’m sure that if Christ Jesus had been invited to a gay wedding at Cana, he would have attended gladly and wished the couple a joyous life.
In my view, any Christian sect that condemns same-sex marriage as aberrant behavior does not meet the definition of Christianity.
John Harris
Healdsburg, Calif.
The Aug. 15 & 22 Monitor Weekly has an ironic juxtaposition of articles on the state and religion. Photos show us the attempts of the Communist regime to suppress religion in 1986 Poland.
The next article, the cover story, “A florist caught between faith and discrimination,” shows the state attempting to do the same with a florist who simply followed through on her religious beliefs. We are letting a small minority dictate laws for the rest of us that usurp the religious freedom upon which this country was founded. As Pogo once said, “We have met the enemy and he is us.”
Paul Sedan
San Francisco
Bearing arms in the US
In the July 11 & 18 OneWeek article about gun control, “Would Australia’s approach work?,” the story refers to the Second Amendment to the US Constitution regarding the right to bear arms, neglecting to mention that the stated need to maintain “a well regulated Militia” is the justification for asserting that right. The right to bear arms has been passed to our armed forces – the military and local and state police. Civilian gun owners today do not constitute “a well regulated Militia.” Therefore the amendment has clearly outlived its ancient utility.
Steve Perrin
Bar Harbor, Maine
