Ohio GOP wrong to limit voters


Apparently, past efforts to secure desired Ohio voter results through gerrymandering were not sufficient for Republican officials (“Restrictive voting bills signed with lawsuit looming,” Feb. 23). Now Ohio lawmakers have passed two bills that further curtail and penalize Ohio voters when they cast ballots.

The bills disfranchise urban and minority voters who traditionally vote for more liberal candidates.

While Republican supporters claim these new laws eliminate voter fraud, the only visible fraud appears to be in the General Assembly, which used its majority to silence debate before the votes were cast.

Ohio Republicans’ motto seems to be: We have what it takes, to take what we want.


GOP’s bid to limit voting shameful
Our GOP representatives in the Ohio legislature are strategic thinkers. In a series of laws calculated to stack the deck before the 2014 elections, they are systematically limiting access to the ballot box for voters they fear (“Don’t suppress the vote,” editorial, Feb. 19).

Apparently, the GOP believes that if you are homeless, need to vote early because of employment or family constraints, or are elderly, are physically handicapped, have limited access to transportation, or have other life circumstances that prevent you from voting on Election Day, you are likely a Democrat and don’t deserve to be part of the election process.

Sponsors of the various bills that limit early voting hours make a secret of how much postage is required to mail an absentee ballot, and add so many requirements to a provisional ballot that it is almost absurd, self-righteously proclaim they are putting these constraints in place to prevent voter fraud.

Ohioans must demand that GOP leadership show us the data that support restricting the fundamental rights of every voter in this state. Stealing elections by gerrymandering districts and preventing citizens from voting is shameful.

Homerdale Avenue


Faulty logic against gays
Fifty years ago, there probably were letters to the editor saying that a union of a black person and a white person was not a marriage because the Lord put the races on different continents so as not to mix (“Same-sex union not a marriage,” Readers’ Forum, Feb. 2).

Couples who intend to marry must prove they can procreate without assistance, or else their union must be called something else, because according to the letter writer, God says marriage is for making babies.

That logic discriminates against infertile, postmenopausal, and double-income/ no-kids couples, as well as same-sex couples, whose marriages the writer is willing to acknowledge so long as we call them something else. I’ve heard that argument before and recognize it for what it is: prejudice.

Haughton Drive