Stickney, Randall rely on religion

Basic civil rights for all citizens of the state, including gay couples, are not special rights [“The leaders behind push to undo gay benefits,” page one, Oct. 14].

The law that Larry Stickney and Gary Randall are trying to overturn merely provides equal legal protection for all domestic partners who are currently denied the right to marry.

The only argument these men and others offer for objecting to this reasonable provision is a religious prohibition. We do not — as yet — live under a theocracy in this country, and our civil statutes should grant rights fairly and rationally to all.

Religious beliefs should not be used as an excuse to deny equal protection under the law.

— Michael Carr, Seattle

Don’t take step backward in quest for equality

We take exception to the premise that providing equal rights and protection under the law for gays and lesbians constitutes special rights.

In the article “The leaders behind push to undo gay benefits,” Larry Stickney stated, “one man and one woman is still the ideal.” Presumably his ideal would also not include divorce or multiple marriages.

The state of Washington does not pass judgment on the validity or morality of a second or third marriage after divorce, nor should it pass judgment on the validity or morality of a domestic partnership.

Equality will not truly exist until the state does not differentiate in any way between the marriages of our two daughters and the domestic partnership of our third daughter.

We don’t.

Voters of Washington, please do not take a step backward in the quest for equality.

— Jerry and Sue Howson, Des Moines