From: clarkd@CS.ColoState.EDU (dennis clark)
Subject: Re: Colorado Amendment 2: The First Fatality
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 19:09:15 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Computer Science Department

In article <1992Nov12.023819.2789@ncar.ucar.edu> gary@colossus.cgd.ucar.edu (Gary Strand) writes:
>tc> Tom Christiansen
>
>tc> Dying from AIDS, distraught over the death of a close friend, Marty Wayne
>    Booker put a lot of meaning into Amendment 2.
>    For him, it was more than a constitutional ban on laws protecting gays
>    from discrimination.  A powerful symbol, perhaps.  An excuse, maybe.
>    Whatever it was or whatever it meant to the deeply troubled 26-year-old
>    Colorado Springs man, it obsessed him in the final minutes before he
>    took his life.
>
>  This is tragic, of course, but I don't see the relevance of the suicide of 
>  a troubled man with what the true effects of #2 are going to be. 

  Are you being intentionally thick to be the "Devil's advocate" here?  Let's
use a bit of an analogy (wavy lines shift to dream state)...
  You are male, a recent law has just declared that males are no longer allowed
several constitutional rights and may now be descriminated against freely.
How would you feel?  To be admitted - the agressive males will react with 
anger and violence against this outrage - the passive males will become very
distressed and react in a number of irrational ways (like people always do) -
the majority will close their eyes and pretend it didn't happen.  To 
reiterate, what would you do?  How would you feel if your existance has just
been determined to be without value?  How would you like it if the majority 
of the people have just declared you anethema?  Think a bit before you answer.

>  People commit suicide for all sorts of reasons, some "honorable", some not, 
>  some that can be seen as "martyrdom", most not. This particular act is hard-
>  ly what I would expect from an individual disappointed at the passage of #2.
>  To imply, as the article does, and as the post attempts to imply, that #2

  Your opinion of course, but you are not in the head of every person alive 
and you (and I for that matter) cannot determine the feelings of everyone,
and especially the folk who are already disturbed or depressed.  Obviously,
this man was deeply disturbed before #2, and #2 just pushed him "over the
edge."  We cannot blame #2 for anything more that putting salt in the wound,
but that its usually a lot of little things that add up to a big thing.

>  was somehow responsible for this man's death is emotional manipulation at
>  its worst. Quite frankly, I'm irritated and ashamed that his personal trag-
>  edy can be so cavalierly exploited for potential political gain. Aren't 
>  there better arguments available besides this one? It's cheap and tawdry,
>  and hardly respectful of the man.

  Its a shame that more people didn't think using emotional appeals was 
unethical when they were campaigning _for_ #2.  

  Sorry if this sounds like a flame.  But IMHO I feel that people should try
to show a little more empathy towards each other -- and a little less fear,
hate and predudice.  -- This is a general statement, and not directed towards 
Gary Strand. --

>
>--
>Gary Strand                      Opinions stated herein are mine alone and are

DLC
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Dennis Clark  (303)229-4313   telnet 1-229-4313  email dlc@fc.hp.com       |
| Hewlett Packard FWL Perf. Lab, 3404 East Harmony Rd. Ft. Collins CO 80525  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Dennis Clark  (303)229-4313   telnet 1-229-4313  email dlc@fc.hp.com       |
| Hewlett Packard FWL Perf. Lab, 3404 East Harmony Rd. Ft. Collins CO 80525  |
| or for cs stuff... clarkd@handel.cs.colostate.edu                          |
Xref: sparky soc.motss:46432 alt.bbs.lists:1427 soc.bi:14724