Letters for August 29, 2002

In the “Protecting Marriage” issue, Richard Ziser was quoted as saying: “The definition of marriage has been set in stone for an awfully long time. Natural law just demands it.” Are you saying it isn’t natural for a man to love a man, or a woman to love a woman? It may not be your beliefs, but that doesn’t mean you should be able to restrict someone else’s beliefs or someone else’s love. It disgusts me to see all these billboards and all these stories saying “Protect Marriage.” Gays and lesbians are people, too. Why shouldn’t they be allowed to profess their love to each other in a legal binding marriage ceremony? Even if the “definition of marriage” has been “set in stone for an awfully long time,” Mr. Ziser, times change.

Morgan Vancil
Reno

Question 2 is bigotry
Re “Protecting Marriage” [RN&R, Aug. 15]:

Great cover! It shows Question 2 for what it really is—a war on homosexuals rather than a defense of marriage. Heck, based on divorce statistics, it sure looks like heterosexuals are the ones that marriage needs to be defended against. Why not give gays and lesbians a shot? They could hardly do any worse.

And why on earth does marriage need to be defended against people who WANT TO GET MARRIED? [Gays and lesbians] don’t want to tear down the institution of marriage—they want to join up!

How is defending marriage against homosexuals any different than defending a country club against Jews or defending a neighborhood against people of color? It’s bigotry, pure and simple. Vote “no” on Question 2.

Gary Meyer
Reno

Pro-family values, eh?

Re “Protecting Marriage” [RN&R, Aug. 15]:

While reading the article on Question 2, I was surprised at Richard Ziser’s comment that the Supreme Court of Georgia “saved the day” by keeping a mother from having visitation with her children. That’s a pretty screwy way to be supportive of children and families.

Barbara Clunie
via e-mail

That wacky Ziser
Re “Protecting Marriage” [RN&R, Aug. 15]:

What heterosexual man in his right mind would spend nearly two decades obsessing over homosexuals and their personal lives? It sounds to me like the only thing Richard Ziser is interested in protecting is himself from his true feelings.

Name withheld
Sparks

A Hot August rant
Well, here it is Aug. 11, and Hot August Nights is over with for another year! What I cannot figure out is why, when Reno/Sparks has these special events that require street closures, Reno takes forever and ever to reopen them after the event is over and the people are gone?

Sparks is great, for a change! They put up signs saying a road will be closed, for example, from 6 p.m. till midnight. Most of the time you could set your watch by them because at midnight or sooner, the road is wide open again. As for Reno, they close a road down and then forget to reopen it! I take my wife to work in downtown Reno every morning around 4:30 a.m. during the week. After Hot August Nights, we had to go way around to get there and back.

On Sunday morning at 3 a.m., Arlington, West, Sierra and Center streets were all closed from Sixth Street to either First and or Liberty streets. Fifth Street was also closed from Arlington to Lake Street and, of course, good old Fourth Street was closed from Ralston to Lake.

Some of the casino security officers were saying there was a riot going on, but I did not see it or even hear any on news reports. If there was trouble, the news media did not hear about it.

Gene Newhall
Sparks

It’s not time
The thought of Bob Cashell being mayor is an oxymoron. He would only do for Reno what he has done for the Horseshoe Club, Ormsby House and now Topaz Lodge. He’s nothing more than a wrecking ball. If he becomes mayor, it might be the homeless who get the blame for Reno being … CLOSED.

Baleen Jones
Sparks/Reno