“No on 1” and gay activists groups are desperately trying to assert their personal significance and respect, as they see it, of their relationships. But there is no way they can command respect by trying to force or seize the ways or structures, titles, names or definitions of some other group of people. Real respect comes when you assert your dignity by demanding respect for yourself, as you are, in all your diversity. It is not gay pride to aspire to an institution that is by definition, a heterosexual institution that in every society, in every culture has existed and been defined as marriage of one man and one woman.

I strongly feel gay men and women are forcefully adopting a uniquely heterosexual institution of marriage, thereby, unwittingly, denying their own unique identity and dignity. I do believe in the dignity of every human being whether I agree in their lifestyle or not. Gay men and women are entitled to their rightful dignity. But they are not entitled to “marriage.”

Lets also be honest about “the benefits” or “civil rights,” i.e. Inheritance, property rights, medical care benefits, employment benefits that come with marriage. They already are in most cases available and/or could be easily available to unions of homosexual persons without calling these unions “marriage.” Pick another name. Gay unions? Either way gay activists need to earn their respect, not force it upon people. Vote yes on Question 1.

Bernard Willimann
Portland