As usual, columnist Craig Westover is right on top of things. His Nov.16 column regarding gay marriage was on the mark. The opposition seems to come from a self-rightous point of view as presented by Charles H. Darrell in his Nov 24 Viewpoint column.

Here are Darrells's comments and my replies;

"Marriage is both a civil and religious institution." he wrote. But I see that both are separate and each should be left to go it's own way without interference from the other.

"We don't defend marriage in a spirit of fear but in loving obedience," he wrote. They should also show some loving toward the gays, I say.

"In the African-American community we already know it doesn't work" he wrote. It's heterosuxual fathers who leave home who are the cause, not gay marriage, I say.

"O.J. Simpson is innocent" (page 191 of book)

"The minutemen on the mexico coast are racist".

Title of Colme's book. How Left is Right and Right is Wrong. (cute)

"I'm proud to be a liberal. In my spare time I hug Trees. I'd rather hug a tree than ambrace a tax cut we can't afford."

"I feel liberal, oh so liberal. I feel liberal and witty and bright and I pity those conservatives who think they're right".

"uncivil liberties: America's war on Americans" (what's he mean by that)

"Air marshall should have shot to wound rather than to kill" (does he mean little finger?)

"the word right doesn't always mean correct"

"According to conservatives, liberals are a bunch of flag burning, dope smoking,welfare collecting, Jesus hating sexaholics hell bent on the destruction of America"

"Conservatives believe government should be off the back of business but in the uterises of women".

"Conservatives believe in family values, unless the head of the family happens to be gay.

"Bush is racist because he has many more agents guarding the Mexico border than the Canadian border"

The Reverand Al Sharpton sez "Stanley Tookie Williams is innocent because of no DNA evidence" and Alan Colmes agrees.

"There is a thirst for blood in our society".

The subject of this letter is activism, something that is frequently carried out by riot and civil disobedience. The subject of the demonstration is typically based on a popular liberal political agenda and carried out by using inexperienced young people as pawns. These are young people who are looking for a cause and will embrace any cause thet excites them. They will get very passionate about a subject of which they have no understanding and have been informed only enough to meet the needs of their sponsors.

The object of these demonstrations is to force the majority of the people to accept their point of view, with a subsequent change of behavior , in order to meet the standards that they are promoting. I personally resent tjis type of intrusion and would rather communicate by writing letters to the editor and not using all the meaningless used by the anti-war abd anti-world trade activists. Most of their slogans have to do with the intense hate they have for corporations, some thing that they have learned from our politicians who like to buy votes by trashing corporations. One example "Hell no, we won't go. We won't fight for Texaco" I have never heard exactly what they mean by this, they just speak in a series of one-liners. I believe the best way to influence people is by presenting your ideas in a sane and intelligent manner without using force.

Regarding the tax cut of 2002, the detractors say "it's only for the eff'n (very) rich. That's far from the truth as can be demonstrated by comparing the results from the tax tables of 2001 and 2002 using the taxable income as a basis. Tax savings for income of $30,000 is 33%, income of $75,000 is 11.2% abd income of $1,000,000 is 1.5%.

Looking at this it is hard to understand how one can say the wealthiest gain the most. They pay, by far, the most and would naturally save nore dollar-wise than ones at the other end. As it is now, a family of four pays no tax until their pay exceeds $45,000 and also the tax rates are more progressive now than before.

In 2000 the total federal government tax receipts reached a high of 2.053 trillian dollars, dropped to 1.853 trillion in 2002 and have now regained and exceeded losses up to 2.239 trillionand projected to 2.467 trillion at the end of 2005. This is a result of the economy growth rate of 3.7% anually. See www.research.stlouisfed.org/fred2.

If these cuts are not restored many investors are going to say enough, and leave for better investment climates taking their tax base with them. A lower capital gains tax helps stimulate capital formation and investment. All forms of investment are included such as pensions, IRA, 401K, education savings plans and etc. These are investments that include all, not only the wealthy.

There was a time in 1969 when we were resentful of a few rich people, about 150, who paid nothing in incme taxes and therefore we felt we should get even. This phenonemon was created by what we now call "class envy", frequently used as a reason to punish the wealthy. That resenment led to the creation of somethng called the alternative minimum tax, which was designed to keep the rich from living tax-free.

Now that we are a bit older and somewhat better off and paying far more in income tax than we ever thought possible, we find that we must pay the AMT. We can take some solace that thousands of taxpoayers just like us have been snagged by this nasty bit of tax law in recnt years. While only 19,000 owed the AMT in 1970, 2.6 million are paying it now, according to the IRS.

The greatest couse of this problem has been inflation. While the regular tax brackets, exemptions and stadard deductions are adjusted anually for inflation, the AMT brackets and exemptions are not, so many people whose incomes have grown with the economy enter the AMT zone each year. Especially vulnerable are people with income over $75,000 and some large deductions. Most vulnerable are taxpayers with several childres, interest deductions from second morgages, capital gains, high state and local taxes and incentive stock options.