Letter from Rep. Brown
Upon returning home I found a stack of mail that I had received over the past week. Offers to warranty my car, surveys, advertisements to buy a new car even though I just did, bills (yuck), and one letter from the U.S. House of Representatives. A letter informing me that under the Patriot Act I am in violation of ... ? No, but it the thought crossed my mind. Actually, it was from my Representative Sherrod Brown.
I've sent him a bunch of canned letter from HRC and such, I've written him letters myself, and he's always supported the positions I've asked him to. Doubtful it's just due to my wonderful writing, charm and persistence, but mostly because he's a decent person.
I opened the envelope and inside was a hand written letter with a short but sweet message. "Very good letter to the ABJ. [Akron Beacon Journal] Keep speaking out." Well, this is cool for two reasons. a) Sherrod Brown read my Letter to the Editor and thought it was good, and b) my letter actually got published. I had no idea it had been in an issue of the ABJ. Then I had to stop for a moment to figure out which letter it was that got published.
Sure enough it was one about gay marriage. Bill Seitz (a bigoted rep. in Ohio) wrote to the ABJ making points about Ohio's (notoriously discriminatory) DOMA that he sponsored. I fired back with my own viewpoint of DOMA. Sure enough on April 28, 2004, it appeared in the Beacon.
If you'd like to read my letter it's in the extended entry...
This is the letter as it appeared in the Akron Beacon Journal. It has been slightly modified/edited by someone at the ABJ. (mostly the first paragraph to reference the other articles)
Defense of marriage laws by definition discriminate
State Rep. Bill Seitz, D-Cincinnati, in countering two Beacon Journal editorials, asserted that Ohio's proposed Defense of Marriage Act is not discriminatory (Feb. 16, Voice of the People, "In defense of DOMA").
Although the bill would not let same-sex partners marry, Seitz wrote that unmarried people of any sexual orientation have not had access to marriage rights. While that is correct, it is also a ridiculous statement. Heterosexual people have always had access to these rights -- all they have to do is get married.
When Ohio makes certain rights available to one group of people but expressly forbids them to another group, that is discrimination in its purest form. Seitz says that certain rights should not be afforded to "one's live-in lover, one's dependent, one's dog, one's cat or one's same-sex partner."
America is the land of the free, where we have the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It's not the government's place to tell me my relationship is less worthwhile. This has nothing to do with invalidating "existing statutory distinctions between married and unmarried people." It is about giving all people an equal opportunity under the law to be safe and happy in their lives.
Because people think something is improper doesn't make it correct to take away people's rights. Before desegregation in America, some people felt strongly about something, but it became apparent they were all wrong.
that letter is awesome! it's to the point and right on target with reality. i love it. also, that is pretty groovy your representative wrote you. i just started writing letters to my reps and what-not. i hope i get better at it!
Agreed (with Mattie), a great letter. I have just embarked on letter-writing and emailling representatives Down Under. The one thing I have learned about democracy, is that it only works when people get involved with it.