Missouri’s Billy Long voted no on gay marriage. He hosted my same-sex wedding shower

Hypocritical candidate

Rep. Billy Long recently said, “I act the same when somebody is watching or somebody is not watching.” Days later, the U.S. Senate candidate and my family “friend” of 20-plus years voted against protecting my family’s right to marriage with the Respect for Marriage Act.

Long and his family co-hosted my same-sex wedding shower in 2018. However, he refused to be in any pictures with us. My family disinvited him from the wedding. Shortly after, Long invited my wife and me to lunch. We reluctantly accepted, mistaking it for an apology.

On the contrary, he excused his behavior by telling us about all of the LGBTQ people he knew (not many) and asked to be re-invited to our wedding. We did and he attended.

It’s time we recognize his public stance on marriage equality for what it is: not truly held belief, but cynical political hypocrisy.

If the Respect for Marriage Act does not pass, LGBTQ couples could see massive losses of freedom, from medical decision-making to personal finances. My wife and I are hoping to begin the adoption process soon. If same-sex marriage is banned in Missouri, we might be excluded.

Billy Long does not stand by his beliefs. He votes party line.

- Ellen Neville-Verdugo, Springfield

Other way around

According to Mike Pompeo, voting yes on the constitutional amendment on the Aug. 2 ballot would allow the people to decide about abortion through the Kansas Legislature, which is controlled by right-wing extremists. (July 27, 14A, “Mike Pompeo: Vote yes on Kansas abortion question”)

Voting on the amendment is how the people will decide the fate of abortion. Considering that about two-thirds of the people are in favor of women’s access to abortion, it is obvious the Legislature doesn’t reflect the will of the people.

The only way to protect women’s rights is to vote no.

- Debbie Hansen, Olathe

Amendment’s truth

Kansas voters, here’s a good question: What is the purpose behind the anti-abortion amendment if not to ban abortion by stealing women’s reproductive rights?

Forced-birthers disingenuously say the amendment is needed to provide safety and disclosure regulations. But in a recent TV ad, one of their supporters correctly admits that these “commonsense” items are covered by existing Kansas laws. So if forced-birthers already have the protections they claim to seek, why do they need a constitutional amendment?

What they won’t tell you is that they need the amendment because they are not content with what they already have. They want a total abortion ban with no exceptions for rape, incest or health. The amendment would allow them to do that if they can get it passed.

Don’t be fooled by those who say that claims of abortion bans are “scare tactics.” The truth is that if passed, the anti-abortion amendment along with subsequent legislation already proposed would steal women’s reproductive rights in Kansas. There’s a simple solution: Vote no.

- Scott D. Roby, Lenexa

Important ‘both’

The “both” being “valued” in the proposed “Value Them Both” Kansas constitutional amendment are church and state, not the individuals who must make difficult, highly personal decisions about abortion.

I grew up in Kansas, and I hope Kansans still believe in personal privacy, liberty, responsibility and autonomy, rather than giving politicians a green light to impose their radical, dogmatic and partisan views on others.

- Peter Sloan, Kansas City

Buck’s many gifts

Anyone who had the pleasure of meeting Buck O’Neil was treated to an experience they will never forget. I have never met another person who was as famous as he was but never made anyone seem insignificant.

I worked at Leon’s Thriftway supermarket. Buck would come to our store around Christmastime and give our customers $100 bills. He always had time to talk to everyone with that smile that was like Santa himself. He was a regular customer who always had time to talk baseball to me and anyone who happened to be in the store.

What a remarkable man whom I was blessed to meet.

- Michael Luster Sr., Kansas City

Free publicity?

When I saw Wednesday’s front-page story about Eric Greitens, (“Greitens’ lost chapter”) I was reminded of the free publicity the mainstream media gave Donald Trump in 2016, exposing his warts and all.

Enough of the electorate had his name stamped of their brains for him to win the election. Is The Star repeating the sins of the past?

- Shel Roufa, Leawood

Hard choices

With climate change back in the news, I believe a little common sense is in order. We should look at new construction. The more hard surfaces we add, the more flooding occurs from grassland being removed. Concrete and asphalt both retain heat.

We should prioritize redeveloping depressed areas and be more responsible before building more.

- Craig Slaughter, Kansas City

Terrible trade

Common sense says that trading a Russian terrorist dubbed “the Merchant of Death” for a basketball player who forgot to leave her marijuana at home and an accused spy is completely ludicrous. (July 28, KansasCity.com, “Kremlin poker-faced on US swap offer to free Griner, Whelan”)

If convicted Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout were set free, many innocent Americans could be killed. The questions to be asked are: Is one basketball player’s life more important than hundreds of American lives? And have President Joe Biden and his staff lost all sense of logic and reason?

- Lynn Pierce, Independence