Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > Civil Rights & Abortion
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Civil Rights & Abortion Discuss Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far at the Political Forums; Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far I certainly understand the anger fomented by one individual's generous contribution ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2010, 02:33 PM
cnredd's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Gender: Male
Posts: 51,857
Thanks: 1,946
Thanked 31,590 Times in 18,471 Posts
Default Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Quote:
I certainly understand the anger fomented by one individual's generous contribution to the clearly mean-spirited campaign of Proposition 8. But, I'm not so sure I agree with the message being sent by gay and lesbian activists in the case of 96-year-old Lorenzo Hoopes.

The civic-minded Oakland citizen - with more than 50 years' experience in public service - is currently the target of gay-rights activists who say his $26,000 contribution in support of the 2008 ballot initiative that reversed the state's same-sex marriage law makes him unfit to hold public office.

And to make their point, critics have launched a campaign to block his reappointment to the board of directors of the Paramount Theatre, a city-owned landmark in downtown Oakland.

On its face, the campaign to remove Hoopes from an inconsequential seat on an inconsequential public board appears to be as mean-spirited as the same-sex marriage ban itself. Hoopes, who is Mormon, wasn't on anyone's radar screen until after the ballot initiative won voter approval in November 2008.

Since then, his reappointment has become such a hot-button issue that Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums withdrew Hoopes' nomination from the Oakland City Council's agenda package this week. A Dellums' spokesman said the mayor wanted more time to consider the reappointment. Given his support for same-sex marriage, Dellums will likely withdraw the Hoopes nomination, said one mayoral aide. As mayor, Dellums has appointment power to all city boards and commissions.

Hoopes' opponents believe that anyone who played a role as significant as he did on the ballot initiative should not be allowed to serve in any public capacity. His contribution was the largest by any Oakland resident.

But it's even more than that: They want Hoopes to feel the same public humiliation felt by the gay community as the result of a vicious series of televised campaign ads paid for by people like him.

Let's take it one step further. Does the appointment to a public board of anyone whose personal views collide with those of same-sex marriage supporters instantly become a local referendum on same-sex marriage?

I sure hope not
.


If during Hoopes' 20 years on the board he had expressed homophobic beliefs that clouded his ability to serve, it would be a different matter entirely.

The fact is that Hoopes, a former Safeway executive, has been an active participant in civic affairs for more than 50 years, and that record alone underscores a strong personal conviction and commitment.

"I love him," said Leslee Stewart, the theater's general manager, who repeated the phrase to emphasize her point.

...Like 2 out of 3 Oakland voters, I voted against the same-sex marriage ban. For me, it was because it nullified rights already conveyed on California citizens, and that was wrong.

But at the same time, I need to know that the guy next to me, who voted for it, won't be marginalized, ostracized or excluded because of it.

The appointment of Michael Lighty, the first openly gay member of the city port commission, on Tuesday night says a lot more about Oakland politics than the debate about Hoopes' continued public service.

The nation's changing culture is proof positive that Hoopes' standard of marriage is no longer the only valid viewpoint of society's ultimate union, but in a democracy based on individual religious and political freedoms, seeking to exclude - or completely ban - others for not sharing your politics is just as wrong.
I agree with the last line for the most...

If this was someone who had served on the board as a crusader of any "anti-" behavior, I might question their agenda...

But this guy's been around for a half-centery and displayed NONE of that...

This is blantant revenge for having a belief that has nothing to do with his appointment (AND shared by the majority)...
__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2010, 02:37 PM
Kizzume's Avatar
Meow.
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,359
Thanks: 2,004
Thanked 2,096 Times in 1,229 Posts
Send a message via AIM to Kizzume Send a message via MSN to Kizzume Send a message via Yahoo to Kizzume Send a message via Skype™ to Kizzume
Default Re: Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Just a quick question: How would you feel about this if it had been someone who contributed to an initiative that would have banned interracial marriage?

I'm not saying what they did was right, but let's try to bring this into the perspective of how strongly the people are against Proposition 8.
__________________

Meow meow Lady Elaine meow.


Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2010, 03:24 PM
cnredd's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Gender: Male
Posts: 51,857
Thanks: 1,946
Thanked 31,590 Times in 18,471 Posts
Default Re: Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzume View Post
Just a quick question: How would you feel about this if it had been someone who contributed to an initiative that would have banned interracial marriage?
First, it's apples and oranges...

If the guy was preventing something during his appointment that's ON THE BOOKS as being legal (interracial marriage), there's an issue of obstructing the law...

If the guy was preventing something during his appointment that's NOT ON THE BOOKS as being legal (same-sex marriage), he's not obstructing the law in any manner...

This guy was doing none this irrelvant of the legality...

But I'll play along...

I would A) disagree with them ...and B) See if their belief would directly effect their duties & obligations...

If someone had an issue with their tax returns, I can still them being the Secretary of Transporatation or Secretary of Defense (within reason of course; not blatant deceit)...

But if someone had an issue with their tax returns, irrelevant of the reasoning, I can NOT see them as being the Secretary of Commerce or Secretary of Treasury ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzume View Post
I'm not saying what they did was right, but let's try to bring this into the perspective of how strongly the people are against Proposition 8.
I AM bringing this into perspective...

These people are so strongly in disagreement they're willing to hurt lives and destroy people...

You and I have had our disagreements...

How would you feel if I went around to other public outlets and wrote "Kizzume believes blah, blah, blah! You should boycott his website, negatively review his music, and if know him, his family, or his friends personally, be sure to badmouth him due to his personal beliefs!...Make sure you get in touch with his boss and inform him of Kizzume's disgusting opinion so he'll be fired or not reappointed as well!"?...

I'm guessing you'd think that's a wee-bit out of line, eh?...
__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2010, 09:16 PM
dabateman's Avatar
Buckle-up Buttercup
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,121
Thanks: 2,113
Thanked 8,454 Times in 4,955 Posts
Default Re: Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

I agree with the last line for the most...

If this was someone who had served on the board as a crusader of any "anti-" behavior, I might question their agenda...

But this guy's been around for a half-centery and displayed NONE of that...

This is blantant revenge for having a belief that has nothing to do with his appointment (AND shared by the majority)...
His beliefs have EVERYTHING to do with his ability to serve... That's the whole point of elections.
__________________
Continue that line of reasoning, Muffin... I'm judging you. Harshly.



You get the respect you give. And if you're a Republican, you b*tch about paybacks being a b*tch. So sorry you're mad your guy is getting the respect you gave ours, Snowflakes.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2010, 09:28 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,725
Thanks: 9,755
Thanked 14,847 Times in 8,985 Posts
Post Re: Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Quote:
But at the same time, I need to know that the guy next to me, who voted for it, won't be marginalized, ostracized or excluded because of it.
So in a vote that marginalized, ostracized, and excluded gays, the people who voted for that want to be sure they won't be treated similarly...


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
First, it's apples and oranges...

If the guy was preventing something during his appointment that's ON THE BOOKS as being legal (interracial marriage), there's an issue of obstructing the law...
Um...
EXCUSE ME???

Gay marriage WAS legal on the books.
And let's not forget HOW it became legal and on the books.
THE SAME WAY THAT INTERRACIAL MARRIAGE became legal and on the books.

Interracial marriage was recognized as a constitutional right via a court case.
Gay marriage was recognized as a constitutional right via a court case...


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
I would A) disagree with them ...and B) See if their belief would directly effect their duties & obligations...
I would say it brings into direct question his capability to uphold equal rights...


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
These people are so strongly in disagreement they're willing to hurt lives and destroy people...
I'm sorry, but please put down the violin and STOP with the melodrama...
Are you saying that if a man loses an election or is not selected for an appointment, that person is "destroyed"?

And on another note, you want to talk about "hurting lives and destroying people"???
Let's talk about the Republican opposition to laws that would prevent people from FIRING gays just for being gay...
Let's talk about the Republican position of supporting the military law which excludes gays from the military...
Seems like there is a "dose of their own medicine" situation going around...


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
How would you feel if I went around to other public outlets and wrote "Kizzume believes blah, blah, blah! You should boycott his website, negatively review his music, and if know him, his family, or his friends personally, be sure to badmouth him due to his personal beliefs!...Make sure you get in touch with his boss and inform him of Kizzume's disgusting opinion so he'll be fired or not reappointed as well!"?...
I think you need to recognize a SERIOUS distinction here...

If somebody feels they don't approve of gay marriage, that's their opinion.
They're entitled to it.

If they take that "personal belief" and take it into PERSONAL ACTION to discriminate against a group of people's rights, that's an entirely different thing...


If a person doesn't like gay marriage, don't get gay married.
You try to prevent ME from enjoying one of the rights of this country, that is something else entirely different...
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2010, 12:26 AM
cnredd's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Gender: Male
Posts: 51,857
Thanks: 1,946
Thanked 31,590 Times in 18,471 Posts
Default Re: Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
So in a vote that marginalized, ostracized, and excluded gays, the people who voted for that want to be sure they won't be treated similarly...



Um...
EXCUSE ME???

Gay marriage WAS legal on the books.
And let's not forget HOW it became legal and on the books.
THE SAME WAY THAT INTERRACIAL MARRIAGE became legal and on the books.
You're missing it...Does the day end in "Y"?...

What one believes and what one DOES IN THEIR APPOINTED POST can be 2 very different things...and I'm sure it happens a gazillion times a day...

I'm sure there are judges all over this country that have contributed to pro-life organziations for the last 30 years and THEN went to the bench and overruled pro-life positions because of the LAW...

Just as there are plenty of Libs in office that want to ban guns yet hand out licenses every day because it's the LAW...

It's when their beliefs inject themselves into their obligations is where the issue should lie...NOT beforehand...if a judge OVERRULED the law because of his/her personal beliefs, THEN you have every reason to be pissed and that person should be denied re-appointment...If a Liberal OVERRULED the law and refused to hand out gun licenses because of his/her personal beliefs, THEN you have every reason to be pissed and that person should be denied re-appointment...

But punishment simply for HAVING the opinion is unfair...and disgusting...

When you posted your response with my words, you neglected to add this line...(intentionlly or unintentionally)...

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
"This guy was doing none this irrelvant of the legality..."
That means that even though I found a difference between the first topic (interracial marriage) and the second topic (same-sex marriage), NEITHER APPLIES because the guy did NOTHING in his appointed position to help OR harm the law in his appointed position...and that's during his whole 50 years in that position when the law was changed multiple times...

He never did it...Never...NEVER...Ne...

................................................ve r...
__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2010, 12:53 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,725
Thanks: 9,755
Thanked 14,847 Times in 8,985 Posts
Post Re: Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
You're missing it...Does the day end in "Y"?...
What one believes and what one DOES IN THEIR APPOINTED POST can be 2 very different things...and I'm sure it happens a gazillion times a day...
I'm sure there are judges all over this country that have contributed to pro-life organziations for the last 30 years and THEN went to the bench and overruled pro-life positions because of the LAW...
Just as there are plenty of Libs in office that want to ban guns yet hand out licenses every day because it's the LAW...
It's when their beliefs inject themselves into their obligations is where the issue should lie...NOT beforehand...if a judge OVERRULED the law because of his/her personal beliefs, THEN you have every reason to be pissed and that person should be denied re-appointment...If a Liberal OVERRULED the law and refused to hand out gun licenses because of his/her personal beliefs, THEN you have every reason to be pissed and that person should be denied re-appointment...
But punishment simply for HAVING the opinion is unfair...and disgusting...
And there you go again...
You need to STOP calling this "having the opinion", cause that is NOT what this is about...

I'll say it again.
If somebody feels they don't approve of gay marriage, that's their opinion.
They're entitled to it.

If they take that "personal belief" and take it into PERSONAL ACTION to discriminate against a group of people's rights, that's an entirely different thing...


If a person doesn't like gay marriage, don't get gay married.
You try to prevent ME from enjoying one of the rights of this country, that is something else entirely different...


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
When you posted your response with my words, you neglected to add this line...(intentionlly or unintentionally)...
Cause quite frankly, I saw it as irrelevant.
I don't care if his actions were legal.

To say that he has to do something illegal first is setting the bar WAYYY too high.
There are TONS of reasons that people vote other people out of office when NOTHING was done illegally.

So why require illegality here?

Let's put it another way....

Suppose somebody who was in office supported bringing back interracial marriage laws, preventing blacks and whites from marrying.
Are you telling me that you would say "It's legal to support that" and leave it at that, insisting that anybody who saw trouble at the prejudice there is over-reacting???

Or how about this.
Suppose we have somebody running for office who supports same-sex marriage...
Republicans seem to think that's awfully damn important and a pretty serious reason to vote against that person...
Are you telling me that you think those Republicans are "punishing" somebody for their opinion in support of gay marriage?
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 10:21 AM
mytmouse57's Avatar
Aide
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wyoming
Gender: Male
Posts: 289
Thanks: 0
Thanked 158 Times in 102 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to mytmouse57
Default Re: Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Free speech/freedom of expression for all.

How one spends one's money -- in support of political causes -- is a form of freedom of expression. Mr. Hoopes has every right to express himself, politically, in any way he sees fit.

Gay rights activists have every right to protest his holding public office, and encourage efforts to keep him from holding office.

However, I will say this -- making a 96-year-old man who has been a good citizen, with a half-century of public service under his belt -- a target of your wrath is really bad Ju-ju... politically speaking. In the public arena, perception can be 9/10ths of reality. And perception isn't going to shine very kindly on you if you try blasting a 96-year-old pillar of the community type. That's the sort of thing that really pisses people off.

My advice to gay rights activists would be to back off and find a better target -- somebody like a boorish, middle-aged used car salesman who supported Prop. 8 financially.
__________________
The early bird gets the worm -- but the second mouse gets the cheese.

The greatest thing about dogs is that everything they do is the coolest thing they've ever done.

Love might be what makes a family... but it's food that makes them stick around.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to mytmouse57 For This Useful Post:
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 10:26 AM
mytmouse57's Avatar
Aide
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Wyoming
Gender: Male
Posts: 289
Thanks: 0
Thanked 158 Times in 102 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to mytmouse57
Default Re: Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Quote:
Originally Posted by dabateman View Post
His beliefs have EVERYTHING to do with his ability to serve... That's the whole point of elections.
Peoples' "ability to serve" rests upon their beliefs? Wow... that's just like... holy sh*t... the sort of thing Geoge Orwell wrote books about.
__________________
The early bird gets the worm -- but the second mouse gets the cheese.

The greatest thing about dogs is that everything they do is the coolest thing they've ever done.

Love might be what makes a family... but it's food that makes them stick around.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 05:02 AM
dabateman's Avatar
Buckle-up Buttercup
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,121
Thanks: 2,113
Thanked 8,454 Times in 4,955 Posts
Default Re: Tactics against big Prop. 8 backer go too far

Quote:
Originally Posted by mytmouse57 View Post
Peoples' "ability to serve" rests upon their beliefs? Wow... that's just like... holy sh*t... the sort of thing Geoge Orwell wrote books about.
Apparently it does... ask Van Jones.
__________________
Continue that line of reasoning, Muffin... I'm judging you. Harshly.



You get the respect you give. And if you're a Republican, you b*tch about paybacks being a b*tch. So sorry you're mad your guy is getting the respect you gave ours, Snowflakes.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
against, backer, big, far, prop, tactics, too

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0