From: vanm@col.hp.com (Van Martin)
Subject: Re: Amendment 2
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:54:41 GMT
Distribution: co
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

woods@claven.ucar.edu (Greg Woods) writes:
> While I can believe some people might believe that "the majority has no
> problem", I am not sure this is really true. I don't think homophobes
> passed Amendment 2. I think it was mostly people who were deluded into
> thinking that voting NO on 2 would automatically grant special privileges
> to homosexuals. They thought that by voting YES they were voting against
> special privileges when in fact they were voting for legalized discrimination.

  You are entitled to your opinion.  IMO the population-at-large voted
  for/against Amendment 2 based on their opinion of homosexuality as a
  legitimate minority requiring singled-out protection by State law.
  We in the net-world are amazingly poor judges of others' cognitive
  abilities.  Perhaps we think that the pig-farmer out in Wellington
  cannot be nearly as well-informed as I, an intelligent engineer/
  scientist/journalist/et al since they don't have access to all the
  latest hype, drivel and trivia like I do.

  Perhaps people are much better informed than the media had hoped.  I
  say that given the obvious slant to all the media coverage observed
  over the last year.  In spite of the media, Amendment 2 was passed
  in 76% of the counties in Colorado by 53% of the population (the
  margin was > 100,000).

  You chose the PC word homophobe to describe anyone who, with full
  knowledge of the whole Amendment, voted yes.  Again, that is a
  patently arrogant statement from a man who has never met me.  I do
  not fear the homosexual; I don't even fear their homosexual
  behavior.

  What does concern me is the foisting of someone's bedroom habits on
  my church (a church in Minneapolis, Minnesota was fined $15,000 and
  assessed $20,000 in damages, payable to homosexuals who complained
  that, under a "gay rights" ordinance, that the church denied their
  club the "right" to meet in church facilities), my son in school as
  in California (paranoia, you say?  Check out the "Force 10" movement
  for homosexual counselling in schools for yourself) and other
  intolerant handling of MY beliefs.

  Amendment 2 did not create a law that said "Thou Shalt Discriminate
  Against Homosexuals," it only said "Thou Shalt Not Single Out The
  Homosexuals for Special Dispensation Under Our Illustrious Legal
  System."  As a white male under 40 no handicaps (except a lack of
  unthinking tolerance) I see no laws that will allow me to demand
  that the government spend its time and taxpayer dollars on my claim
  of discrimination.  I am one of the masses that has less civil
  rights, the the homosexual community.

  Leave what goes on in the bedroom, in the bedroom and out of the
  courtroom.

  This wasn't very cogent.  Sorry.

Van Martin		
vanm@col.hp.com

All ideas expressed here are my own, 
though you ought to consider that you could be right as I am :-)

"All the ways of a man are pure in his own eyes,
     But the LORD weighs the spirit"  
Prov. 16:2
Newsgroups: co.politics,co.general,co.politics.amend2.discuss,boulder.general,csu.general