Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Wash. initiative nonesense

Expand Messages
  • Gregory
    Ram, Thanks for a thoughtful follow up to the issue here. I think in some places younger generations are more charged on some issues than others areas of teh
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 8, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Ram,

      Thanks for a thoughtful follow up to the issue here. I think in some
      places younger generations are more charged on some issues than
      others areas of teh nation. In WI last year colleges were bursting
      with energy and votes on the marriage amendment. I also understand
      that gay acceptance has reached such a level that it all is just
      taken for granted. That can be a good thing. But rights given are
      also rights than can be taken away.

      Black America has the civil rights they rightfully enjoy because so
      many Americans of all colors fought together, and in some cases died,
      to see those rights enacted into law. When we honor the life of Dr.
      King his words need to be a reminder to all of us, black and white,
      that the work for civil rights are not yet complete in our country.
      Martin Luther King said "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice
      everywhere."

      Today the great fight for civil rights is with those pressing to end
      discrimination against gay America. I have no doubt that if Dr. King
      were living today he would give voice to ending this hatred and
      discrimination. I am sure he would understand that only bigotry
      drives the "don't ask, don't tell " policy that keeps qualified and
      skilled people from openly serving in the armed forces. I am
      convinced that he would advocate for the equal treatment of gay
      people in relation to marriage. And I am utterly convinced that King
      would have firm words for those within the African-American community
      that do not understand their role, duty, and responsibility to fight
      today for others in securing civil rights. (The vote in African-
      American sections of Milwaukee was troubling on the marriage
      amendment.) King would not be one of those who would pull the ladder
      up until everyone had made it to the `promised land' of full civil
      rights.

      "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" was not just a
      phrase for another era, another fight. It is a truism that all need
      to be mindful of as we continue to secure a better and more just
      nation.

      Gregory




      --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, "Ram Lau" <ramlau@...> wrote:
      >
      > The whole gay rights movement is a non-issue to my generation. Keep
      in
      > mind that any given generation's conservatives are more liberal than
      > the previous generations. For example, my guess is that even the
      vast
      > majority of conservatives don't believe in lynching blacks anymore.
      > Let me point out that it was then-Senator George Allen (R-VA) who
      > co-sponspored an anti-lynching bill back in 2004.
      >
      > Anyway, it appears to me the "Plessy v. Ferguson" days of the gay
      > rights movement are pretty much over. However, there was a
      > half-century gap between 1896 and 1954, when the Brown v. Board of
      > Education case finally came up. In this day and age, I'm optimistic
      to
      > see that the episode takes a lot less time to come full circle. The
      > conditions of the gays in 2007 is not nearly as bleak as the plight
      of
      > the blacks a century ago.
      >
      > So where do the presidential candidates stand on the issue in 2008?
      On
      > the Democratic side, most of the mainstream candidates are at least
      > for civil unions, if not same sex marriage. That's where the country
      > is at the moment. Giuliani is also for civil unions, and McCain
      seems
      > to be for some sort of limited civil unions:
      >
      > http://mediamatters.org/items/200611270007
      >
      > As Media Matters noted, on the November 19 broadcast of This Week,
      > McCain denied both that he was "for" civil unions and that he was
      > "against" them. Host George Stephanopoulos specifically asked
      McCain:
      > "Are you against civil unions for gay couples?" to which McCain
      > responded: "No, I am not." Seconds later, however, Stephanopoulos
      > asked: "So you're for civil unions?" to which McCain
      responded: "No."
      > McCain said that he instead "believe[d] that people ought to be able
      > to enter into contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways
      that
      > people who have relationships can enter into."
      >
      > McCain was a respectable candidate in 2000. He was.
      >
      > Ram
      >
      >
      > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Kelly"
      > <richwkelly@> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > > So which of the many Democrats already running for President
      > > (in Feb. of 2007, by the way) will take up the cause? Which
      > > one will see the great wisdom of said proposal, to punish
      > > and penalize the majority of voters to make a point. As
      > > for these various remarks on so many marriages not being
      > > perfect, your argument really is with human nature, the
      > > idea that perverse love is somehow purer, nobler, is just
      > > so much hogwash.
      > >
      > > Richard Kelly
      > >
      >
    • Gregory
      Was writing too fast this AM..so on reading my thoughts should have mentioned black, white, and brown, in terms of securing rights. I work better with coffee!
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 8, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Was writing too fast this AM..so on reading my thoughts should have
        mentioned black, white, and brown, in terms of securing rights. I
        work better with coffee!

        Gregory


        --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, "Gregory" <greggolopry@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > Ram,
        >
        > Thanks for a thoughtful follow up to the issue here. I think in
        some
        > places younger generations are more charged on some issues than
        > others areas of teh nation. In WI last year colleges were bursting
        > with energy and votes on the marriage amendment. I also understand
        > that gay acceptance has reached such a level that it all is just
        > taken for granted. That can be a good thing. But rights given are
        > also rights than can be taken away.
        >
        > Black America has the civil rights they rightfully enjoy because so
        > many Americans of all colors fought together, and in some cases
        died,
        > to see those rights enacted into law. When we honor the life of
        Dr.
        > King his words need to be a reminder to all of us, black and white,
        > that the work for civil rights are not yet complete in our
        country.
        > Martin Luther King said "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice
        > everywhere."
        >
        > Today the great fight for civil rights is with those pressing to
        end
        > discrimination against gay America. I have no doubt that if Dr.
        King
        > were living today he would give voice to ending this hatred and
        > discrimination. I am sure he would understand that only bigotry
        > drives the "don't ask, don't tell " policy that keeps qualified and
        > skilled people from openly serving in the armed forces. I am
        > convinced that he would advocate for the equal treatment of gay
        > people in relation to marriage. And I am utterly convinced that
        King
        > would have firm words for those within the African-American
        community
        > that do not understand their role, duty, and responsibility to
        fight
        > today for others in securing civil rights. (The vote in African-
        > American sections of Milwaukee was troubling on the marriage
        > amendment.) King would not be one of those who would pull the
        ladder
        > up until everyone had made it to the `promised land' of full civil
        > rights.
        >
        > "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" was not just
        a
        > phrase for another era, another fight. It is a truism that all
        need
        > to be mindful of as we continue to secure a better and more just
        > nation.
        >
        > Gregory
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, "Ram Lau" <ramlau@> wrote:
        > >
        > > The whole gay rights movement is a non-issue to my generation.
        Keep
        > in
        > > mind that any given generation's conservatives are more liberal
        than
        > > the previous generations. For example, my guess is that even the
        > vast
        > > majority of conservatives don't believe in lynching blacks
        anymore.
        > > Let me point out that it was then-Senator George Allen (R-VA) who
        > > co-sponspored an anti-lynching bill back in 2004.
        > >
        > > Anyway, it appears to me the "Plessy v. Ferguson" days of the gay
        > > rights movement are pretty much over. However, there was a
        > > half-century gap between 1896 and 1954, when the Brown v. Board of
        > > Education case finally came up. In this day and age, I'm
        optimistic
        > to
        > > see that the episode takes a lot less time to come full circle.
        The
        > > conditions of the gays in 2007 is not nearly as bleak as the
        plight
        > of
        > > the blacks a century ago.
        > >
        > > So where do the presidential candidates stand on the issue in
        2008?
        > On
        > > the Democratic side, most of the mainstream candidates are at
        least
        > > for civil unions, if not same sex marriage. That's where the
        country
        > > is at the moment. Giuliani is also for civil unions, and McCain
        > seems
        > > to be for some sort of limited civil unions:
        > >
        > > http://mediamatters.org/items/200611270007
        > >
        > > As Media Matters noted, on the November 19 broadcast of This Week,
        > > McCain denied both that he was "for" civil unions and that he was
        > > "against" them. Host George Stephanopoulos specifically asked
        > McCain:
        > > "Are you against civil unions for gay couples?" to which McCain
        > > responded: "No, I am not." Seconds later, however, Stephanopoulos
        > > asked: "So you're for civil unions?" to which McCain
        > responded: "No."
        > > McCain said that he instead "believe[d] that people ought to be
        able
        > > to enter into contracts, exchange powers of attorney, other ways
        > that
        > > people who have relationships can enter into."
        > >
        > > McCain was a respectable candidate in 2000. He was.
        > >
        > > Ram
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Kelly"
        > > <richwkelly@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > So which of the many Democrats already running for President
        > > > (in Feb. of 2007, by the way) will take up the cause? Which
        > > > one will see the great wisdom of said proposal, to punish
        > > > and penalize the majority of voters to make a point. As
        > > > for these various remarks on so many marriages not being
        > > > perfect, your argument really is with human nature, the
        > > > idea that perverse love is somehow purer, nobler, is just
        > > > so much hogwash.
        > > >
        > > > Richard Kelly
        > > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.