Organization: Virginia Department of Health
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 13 Dec 1992 15:13:00 EST
From:         "Michael A. Kline" <MKLINE@VDH.BITNET>
Subject:      Colorado Vote-1

    Colorado Vote, Part 1
    Preferential treatment of homosexuals, visit Colorado--------------->

    Pat: In Colorado, the controversy over legal protection for
homosexuals, to give them a preferred legal status, has implications
nation wide. CBN News reporter Richard Hunt, from Colorado.

    Richard Hunt: The state of Colorado finds itself on a bumpy road as a
result of November's passage of Constitutional amendment number 2, which
forbids protected legal status for homosexuals. 3 Colorado cities,
Denver, Boulder, and Aspen, already had ordinances on the books making
homosexuals an officially recognized group, with protection from
discrimination in areas like employment and housing. Amendment 2 will
invalidate those local laws and will prevent future special status and
protection state wide.

    Renee Meinert was typical of many who voted in favor of 2.

    Renee: Pretty simple to understand. It's a, "Should somebody be given
minority class or special rights or protections because of their sexual
activities?" and it's a simple answer. "NO!"

    DH: Surprised by the 53% voter approval of the measure, some
homosexual rights supporters want to punish the centennial state. Efforts
are underway to retaliate against Colorado for voting against homosexual
rights, and the plan is to hit the state where it hurts the most, right
in the economy.

    By far, Colorado's most vulnerable economic category is the
multi-million dollar tourism industry. This Rocky Mountain State is
chocked with resorts, restaurants, and other places to spend money. Singer
Barbara Streisand called for a boycott against Colorado, claiming "The
moral climate there is no longer acceptable." Streisand revised her stand
when it was determined a boycott would be felt hardest in the towns which
had already legally supported homosexual rights.

    MAKS> Here's another example. Colorado DID have 3 cities that did
protect homosexuals. The state takes away those rights and at the front,
homosexual supporters decide to hurt the cities that stood on their side.
And they say that Christians bury their dead...

    Also joining the fight against Colorado, has been the city of
Atlanta which passed a resolution forbidding travel to, or the use of
city funds in, Colorado. Amazingly some Denver reporters trying to obtain
information on this development, found Atlanta officials would return
their calls, but only collect, for fear using city funds to phone
Colorado might violate the ban.

    A number of other cities are said to be examining Atlanta's stand
with an eye toward black listing Colorado. And already, some tourists
business has been lost. The Coalition of Labor Union Women opted out of
the convention, as have, the National Education Association, The National
Council of Social Studies, The National Organization of Women, and The
American Association of Law Libraries, and Exchange Incorporated, a San
Francisco based software company, reversed plans to relocate to Fort
Collins, Colorado. Measurable loss to the states economy so far, is some
$10 million.

    MAKS> I hope no one would be surprised that the reaction of these
organizations... Well at least some of them... (NOW)

    Some Colorado media compare the potential economic damage to the
economic torture neighboring Arizona went through, when voters there
refused to approve a state holiday to honor Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Estimates suggest Arizona lost 1/2 billion in business including the 1993
Super Bowl.

    Some who were disappointed to see Amendment 2 pass, believe
Coloradians may have been ignorant or mislead when they voted. Rabbi
Steven Foster of Temple Emanuel in Denver.

    Rabbi Foster: I think many people didn't understand what they were
voting about. I think that some people believe that the gay and lesbian
community had requested this referendum which is not the case.

    RH: Rabbi Foster, who sits on the Colorado Civil Rights Commission,
says voters got another wrong message.

    Foster: Civil Rights is not special rights. Civil Rights law is not
intended to give a special right to anybody, it is intended to level out
a playing field.

    RH: Rabbi Foster says that he perceives an invidious kind of attitude
on the part of some behind the amendment, suggesting they are in reality,
anti-gay.

    On advice of their attorney, executives of Colorado For Family
Values, the amendment sponsor, were unable to talk with us on camera, due
to the current litigation. However, Bob Linder of Colorado Springs, a
member of CFB, feels critics are just offering excuses.

    Bob: I think most of the time, when somebody doesn't like the outcome
of a particular vote, they will allege that those things actually do
happen, that it was so confusingly worded that the voters are stupid
enough that they can't read and understand for themselves.

    RH: And there is evidence that Colorado voters don't believe that
they were hoodwinked... but, that's the next part...

    MAKS> Good place to break. This is long enough.

    In His Love,
    Maks
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU