ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Reader's view: Laws should not prohibit or require beliefs

How do we define what is right and what is wrong? Some folks look to God's law in ancient, complicated doctrine to help them sort it out; but really, it is not that difficult.

How do we define what is right and what is wrong? Some folks look to God's law in ancient, complicated doctrine to help them sort it out; but really, it is not that difficult.

There is one simple universal rule, and it is right there in the New Testament: "Love your neighbors as yourselves." In other words, harm no one else. All our laws are based on this simple directive that can apply to everyone, regardless of their religion or lack thereof.

There are obviously many other passionate and personal beliefs we would never adopt into law because they don't rise to the universality of the cause-no-harm rule.

All are entitled to their beliefs as long as they don't act on them, thereby violating another person's pursuit of happiness.

No law should prohibit beliefs nor should any law require them. If, for example, someone believes Christianity is the one true religion, that Sundays are sacred, that second marriages are adulterous, that women are subservient to men, or that gay people are abominations, no law should prevent those beliefs. That person should not, however, be allowed to force his or her beliefs on others, thereby violating the rule. Isn't that simple? Our laws are supposed to prevent harm.

ADVERTISEMENT

The anti-family marriage amendment actually would cause harm by withholding one of our most precious, legal recognitions of family from an entire group of good people for no rational reason. Please join me in voting "no" on this November's amendment to further restrict same-sex couples' ability to have their families recognized and respected.

Dane Youngblom

Duluth

What To Read Next