Like most of my friends and relatives, I am very hopeful and delighted with the prospects of a new direction in Washington. Seeing the diversity of the crowds who are welcoming Barack Obama to the highest office in this country brought tears to my eyes. The only thing that tarnished this shining event for me was the California vote on Proposition 8, which outlaws same-sex marriage.

My partner and I will soon celebrate 30 years together. For all practical purposes we are "married," with all the same issues that my brother and his wife have experienced in their 27 years together. Our relationship certainly hasn't impinged on the sanctity of their relationship or on those of our friends and neighbors. I am thrilled that it's no longer only white men who can aspire to be the president of this country, but I'm dismayed that another group of Americans are being told by the majority that they are not permitted to marry the person they love.

Hearing so many voices from the pulpits in this country condemning relationships like mine while not so subtly telling us whom to vote for is both hurtful and incongruent with the hope that many of us finally felt with this election. If the majority in this country were to have the power in this country to vote on many of our civil rights, we'd still not be permitted to have interracial marriages and we'd still have vast segregated parts of this country.

I have now seen that anyone can achieve his or her dreams in America, but I wonder if I'll ever see a day when every child can grow up to marry the person they love. That really seems like a basic human right.

DICK MARSHALL
Crafton

---

Regarding the Nov. 18 editorial "Republican Future: It Will Take Time for the Party to Chart Its Course": What two-party system country are you referring to? I'd like someone to point me in the direction of our two-party system. I'd sooner find a unicorn.

My former party cheated on me in 1994, lied to me in 2002, abused then left me stranded at the altar in 2008. No more. I'm done forever. There is nothing that a politician calling itself a Republican could ever do to win me back. I am assured by some of my associates that they are finished and made the switch to no party affiliation.

There is only a one-party system, the Incumbency party. The PG continues to endorse nearly unanimously our own incumbents, when it is incumbents in both parties who put us into the mess we are in today.

This country will never see prosperity for the people again until every corrupt PAC-indebted incumbent (and that is nearly all of the senior ones) is thrown out of office. The seniority system in Congress dictates who the committee chairmen will be. These avaricious phonies run the country so that when a new voice cries to be heard, it is shut down on inauguration day. The U.S. voter throws out the gluttonous Republican incumbent mavens and gets back the incumbent likes of Waxman, Frank, Dodd, Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid, Dingell, Miller, Conyers, another Jackson and on and on and on.

The voters of this country refuse to reconcile their 18 percent approval rating for Congress by returning their members to office time after time against their own interests. They truly get the government they deserve. It is tragic that the rest of us must live under it or leave.

G. ROCCO
Rosslyn Farms

---

I've reached my 80th year. I would like to tell the young voters to demand a change in our two-party system. Republicans and Democrats will never work together; one always wants the power.

If we had a people party where everyone votes for the most-qualified candidate, there would be no infighting. They would all work for the good of people and our nation.

After their term is over, they could run again on what they have done. They would have to win on their own, not on the coattails of any two-party system. All would work together for the people -- and really make this the United States of America.

RALPH J. LOSEY SR.
Belle Vernon

---

Judging by the many hate-filled letters to the editor since the election, one must wonder why Republicans are so blind to the truth of their own greed -- when they accuse President-elect Obama of wanting to redistribute "their" wealth.

Is not the near-trillion-dollar bailout of rich corporations by the taxpayers a redistribution of wealth? Are not all the subsidies and tax breaks to the wealthy a redistribution of wealth? Are not all the loopholes by which the rich evade paying taxes more of the same? Should we eliminate schools, the building of highways and bridges, police and fire protection, our military and health benefits? These are just a few of the many services the nation enjoys due to the redistribution of wealth.

A wise teacher once said, "Hypocrites, take the plank out of your own eye before you attempt to take the splinter out of the eye of your brother."

DAVID A. TOMKO
Butler

---

I applaud the Post-Gazette for firmly opposing the regulations on conscientious objection proposed by the Department of Health and Human Services ("Time Wasted," Nov. 21). These regulations are just another attempt by the Bush administration to impose the opinions of a few on the general public and further erode women's access to health care.

As an ob/gyn who advocates for patients each day, I am painfully aware of the hurdles women already have to jump through to obtain the morning-after pill, birth control or an abortion. These HHS regulations have potential to raise the hurdles even higher by allowing health-care providers and hospitals to refuse women information about their options, let alone the actual services.

Why is the Bush administration pushing these midnight regulations -- and ignoring the advice of the American Medical Association, American Nurses Association and American Hospital Association, all of whom oppose the regulations -- instead of spending time on pressing issues like health care for the uninsured? HHS should be focused on keeping Americans healthy, not denying them access to the medical care they need.

LISA PERRIERA, M.D.
Oakmont

The writer is a fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health.

---

Sometimes Allegheny County Council unanimously agrees. While it isn't necessarily good for a legislative body to agree all the time, an occasional unanimous vote sends a powerful message.

On Nov. 5, County Council unanimously passed a resolution supporting the Mon-Fayette Expressway and Southern Beltway and in particular the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission's efforts to seek a private development partner for these crucial projects. I am proud to have introduced the resolution, which was co-sponsored by Charles Martoni, Nick Futules, Amanda Green, Mike Finnerty, Matt Drozd and John DeFazio.

Within four years, 57 miles of the expressway, I-68 in West Virginia to PA Route 51 in Large, will be completed. The 24-mile northern section, the Route 51 to I-376 project -- the most crucial of the expressway sections -- still lacks a complete funding package to move it to construction.

Through these tumultuous times, we need to remember that infrastructure investments can rebuild our economy.

The Mon-Fayette Expressway's PA 51 to I-376 project will not only provide access to development sites in the Mon Valley, it will also address traffic congestion issues that are stifling economic development in Monroeville and limiting access to Pittsburgh's Downtown area. It is noteworthy that the expressway will reduce traffic congestion on the Parkway East by 75 percent.

At $3.8 billion, the Route 51 to I-376 Expressway is an expensive project. In its day, so was San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge. It took community leadership and innovative financing in the depths of the Depression to build what was then the largest suspension bridge in the world. We need to use the leadership of County Council and the often-stated support of County Executive Dan Onorato to dedicate ourselves to this same spirit to lift the Mon Valley and southwestern Pennsylvania out of the economic challenges of our time.

BOB MACEY
Member of County Council District 9
West Mifflin