To what does county council member object in LGBTQ resolution?

Published 1:30 am Wednesday, June 8, 2022

In a recent article Snohomish County Councilman Nate Nehring is quoted as saying he would be violating his “personal conscience” by supporting a resolution promoting or celebrating “particular lifestyles” (“Snohomish County LGBTQ Pride proclamation gets no GOP support,” The Herald, May 26)

I would be interested in knowing what, specifically, he finds so offensive about LGBTQ “lifestyles” that violate his conscience. Is it that they get up in the morning, have breakfast, and go to work or school? Maybe it’s when they come home, feed the cat, walk the dog, go to the gym or out with friends, make dinner, watch TV, and go to bed? Or maybe, just maybe, it’s what they do between the time they go to bed and get up in the morning that bothers Mr. Nehring’s conscience so much, but what that has to do with lifestyles, I have no idea.

It amazes me that we elect, and re-elect, government officials who think the LGBTQ people they swear to represent are decadent, depraved, promiscuous sinners, simply because of who they love. Please, Mr. Nehring, enlighten us: What is it about “particular lifestyles” that you find so objectionable?

Steven G. Haynes

Arlington