The following went out on IWG letterhead listing 3 congregations, 5 religious organizations and 36 clergy from 12 faiths and denominations. If you are in the general Philadelphia area and represent a congregation or religious organization or are clergy, let us know if you want to be added - all faiths are welcome. We will also be happy to help start similar organizations in other areas. December 4, 1996 The Philadelphia Inquirer PO Box 8263 Phila., PA 19101 Dear Editors: The rejection of Hawaii's ban on same-sex marriages was a landmark for gay rights, reproductive freedom, and the separation of church and state. Rather than being a "slap in the face of the American people" or an "offense to the nation's moral heritage," as Council for National Policy members Gary Bauer and Jay Alan Sekulow hysterically opined, the decision recognizes that the state has no interest in enforcing religiously-based rules governing procreation and the definition of gender roles. State-recognized marriage allows individuals to enter into a legally-protected relationship which may or may not accompany a religious relationship. The legal relationship must meet a state definition that is subject to constitutional scrutiny. The religious relationship must meet a religious definition that is constitutionally protected, and which varies widely among American religious bodies. If they were really champions of religious liberty, Messrs. Bauer and Sekulow would join us in celebrating Judge Chang's decision. Sincerely, Barbara Purdom Christopher Purdom Interfaith Working Group Coordinators December 4, 1996 USA Today 1000 Wilson Blvd. Arlington,VA 22229 fax: 1-703-247-3108 Dear Editors: The rejection of Hawaii's ban on same-sex marriages was a landmark for gay rights, reproductive freedom, and the separation of church and state. Rather than "basically redefining marriage" or "tinkering with the definition of marriage" as the Deputy Attorney General Rick Eichor and the Christian Coalition's Ralph Reed suggest, the decision recognizes that the state has no interest in enforcing a religiously-based rules governing procreation and the definition of gender roles, as the Christian Coalition favors. State-recognized marriage allows individuals to enter into a legally-protected relationship which may or may not accompany a religious relationship. The legal relationship must meet a state definition that is subject to constitutional scrutiny. The religious relationship must meet a religious definition that is constitutionally protected, and which varies widely among American religious bodies. If the Christian Coalition really supported religious liberty, as they claim, they would join us in celebrating Judge Chang's decision. Sincerely, Barbara Purdom Christopher Purdom Interfaith Working Group Coordinators