We don’t need Rep. Phil Haire in officeWritten by Admin
- font size decrease font size increase font size
To the Editor,
Rep. Phil Haire’s recnt letter contains the pathetic non sequitur: “to place (the Defense of Marriage Bill) on the ballot in the form of a constitutional amendment is a gross waste of your time and state funds. This is especially true when the papers have articles everyday reporting the loss of state and local jobs.”
Can he possibly explain the correlation between jobs and the sanctity of marriage? If this is a typical example of Haire’s reasoning, we are wasting time and funds on him.
His assertion that the “sole” purpose of the amendment was to “incite political passion and further lead to more societal division” shows his ignorance of history or a deliberate effort to deceive. The Founding Fathers, as well as Lincoln v Douglas and innumerable others, incited political passions to a degree that is exponential in comparison to Haire’s repugnant claim.
Claiming that current statutes legislating marriage are protection enough is absurd. NCGS 51-3.1 banned interracial marriages and was reversed. GS 51-1.1 could as easily be overturned.
Haire tries to justify his position by taking Bible verses containing “love thy neighbor” out of context.
Other Biblical texts are relevant. Jesus explains that it is God, not man who institutes marriage: “Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
When I encounter such Haire-brained and puerile thought, it makes me want to shave my head. Join me. I don’t need Haire, and neither do you.
Timothy A. Van Eck