Letter's meaning misinterpreted
To the Editor:
A letter was published March 25 entitled “Keep protecting traditional marriage.” My grandfather, Ken Bowman, responded April 1 to showcase the inaccurate and bigoted view the letter expressed.
One should not use freedom of speech to denigrate others. Opinions are a right, but bigoted, false and misleading information presented as opinion are not. Examples in the original letter: “Statistics (whose?) show them (gays or others leading an unnatural lifestyle) to be troubled, unsteady, riddled with disease, (etc.),” “Marriage ... defined ... between a man and woman ... has been forever and ever.” “Schools are indoctrinating the children,” “The Bible is the No. 1 book, with true stories,” and “Traditional marriage ... worked since time began.”
All of these were an attempt to promote the writer’s opinion by citing unproven data supporting a bigoted view.
In other letters, both Ronald Knief (April 3) and Chris Besonen (April 5) addressed the issue of the right of all to have an opinion and claimed my grandfather objected to the Daily Globe and individual citizens expressing opinions. I think anyone who knows my grandfather knows there are few individuals in this area who value the right of individuals to have opinions more than my grandfather does.
Further, the mention of my grandfather’s teaching position at the conclusion of Knief’s letter seems to imply that my grandfather might have used his position to influence “children” negatively and that is almost bordering on the slanderous.
All have a right to their opinion. My opinion on same sex marriage is that those who object to a person marrying the one they love regardless of gender is baffling. In my opinion, gay rights are no different than women’s rights or civil rights. Each group fights to eliminate unjust laws.
Years from now when same sex couples are finally given the right to marry — which they eventually will — we can look back and see how ridiculous it was to try to prevent their marriage.
At no point does my grandfather suggest that the original letter writer does not have a right to an opinion. At no point does he suggest the Globe should not present differing opinions.