You know, I just don't get the double standard.
We don't talk about the "legitimate concerns" of the drug warriors who
take medicine from the sick.
We don't talk about the "legitimate concerns" of those who want to
continue criminalizing sex workers.
We don't talk about the "legitimate concerns" of the gun control
advocates who would disarm this entire city (except for the criminals).
We don't talk about the "legitimate concerns" of the Islamophobic
pro-war crowd (yet, but given the attacks on Tom Sipos for making the
LPC newspaper too anti-war, it's just a matter of time).
But we do talk about the "legitimate concerns" of those who
intentionally subvert Yes! on Equality's initiative to repeal Prop 8 by
proposing a competing initiative to confuse the voters and ensure that
What makes this issue special compared to the others?
And to address the earlier point that the economy is more important than
a debate on gay rights... Even if that's true, then the LPC shouldn't
be investing its scarce resources in advancing the DPI.
Seriously, I just don't understand all of these arguments for why I need
to stop calling it like it is, which is that the LPC ExCom endorsed a
competing initiative to the initiative that would repeal Prop 8,
inviting one of its sponsors to our last ExCom meeting and its other
sponsor to speak at our Convention in a few weeks, though they say that
they can't support the repeal of Prop 8, because they're too busy
addressing economic concerns. So they're too busy with economic issues
to defend my equality under the law, but they have plenty of time to
redefine marriage as a purely religious construct, even though marriage
existed centuries before organized religion? These same people who for
years said that marriage equality was "too radical" for the LP to
support, now that it's within a couple percentage points of becoming law
at the ballot box, have flip-flopped and decided that marriage equality
isn't radical enough, so we should instead get rid of all marriages in
the state, even if it means a massive federal tax hike for all
opposite-sex couples, a proposition that's not supported by anywhere
near 48% of the voters.
Why am I the only one who sees this as nothing more than a big socially
conservative smokescreen to derail the repeal of Prop 8 now that we're
so close to having majority support? Do their arguments really make any
sense to the rest of you? You don't see them as at all self-contradicting?
Philip Berg wrote: