Slippery-slope logic doesn’t work here Re: “Next up for Maryland legalization — polygamy,” Feb. 28
Gregory Kane’s column about same-sex marriage “opening the door to polygamy” was appalling in its poor reasoning and simplistic labeling of “liberals.” Kane parrots the tiresome slippery-slope argument but fails to cite a single example of polygamists using the logic of same-sex marriage supporters in any of the states that allow same-sex marriage or other unions.
Furthermore, he ignores the obvious fact that one of the attorneys who argued for the repeal of Proposition 8 in California was Ted Olsen, a prominent conservative who represented President George W. Bush in Bush v. Gore. The fight for same-sex marriage is a civil rights issue that transcends the tiresome Left vs. Right paradigm.
The fact that Kane resorts to a nonexistent bogeyman scenario to defend inequality gives reason to wonder if he is in fact a “homophobe” as he so vehemently denies.
Matt Virgile
Washington
No new gas tax, curb existing spending
Re: “Gas tax holds the line as roads crumble,” Jan. 23
Maryland taxpayers anticipate a $1.6 billion structural deficit, with no Obama stimulus money to defer the growing problem another year. Gov. O’Malley has said publicly “no new taxes”; privately he will allow state legislators to implement the gas tax without resistance. This increase, while seemingly modest, will adversely affect all taxpayers and further depress job creation.
Before we consider any additional tax hikes on Maryland residents, our legislature has a responsibility to cease and desist the introduction of new spending programs and cut existing programs we can no longer afford. Difficult changes must be made by leaders who are not beholden to special interests and worried about re-election. Apparently the governor and legislature have never seen the organizational chart “Overview of Maryland State Government,” which clearly illustrates they work for us, the Maryland taxpayer.
George W. Combs
Annapolis
Freshmen dorms for congressmen
Recently, it came to light that 50 congressmen, mostly freshman and all male, were sleeping in their offices to save time and money, unable to support two households on $174,000 per year. Rather than penalize these representatives for their frugality, creativity, and dedication, why doesn’t Congress take this opportunity to acknowledge and address the problem and provide legislators in both chambers dormitory-like housing, low cost or as a “perk” of the job?
Unused office buildings could be converted to residential units; spare capacity on military bases in the region could be utilized as well. This would level the playing field expense-wise for this “necessity” once a congressman or senator arrived in town, and perhaps attract more people “like us” to serve by lessening the financial pressure to “sleep with frienemies” — no pun intended — just to pay the bills.
Karen Ann DeLuca
Alexandria
