ash didn’t keep the referenced letters. (Reading them was unpleasant enough the first time.) In her defense, she didn’t foresee a website on which they might be appreciated. In this case, she was refuting the grounds on which defending traditional marriage was based, as she notes within:
Tuesday’s paper devotes one page to four letters on the issue of the proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in Illinois. Three of them, deliberately or ignorantly, miss the point.
One does so by overlooking the fact that while the majority does rule in matters such as elections, minority protections are one of the proudest hallmarks of our democracy. The other two do so by substituting the Christian bible for the Constitution.
Do you smell something rotten in Springfield, Auburn, and Olney? It’s not the stench of sin but – denials to the contrary – of intolerance and homophobia.