Anchorage Assembly Not Overturning Gay Rights Veto

[CurtCB]

The first opportunity for the Anchorage Assembly to override Mayor Dan Sullivan’s veto of an ordinance banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation went by Tuesday night without action. Sullivan vetoed the anti-discrimination ordinance a week ago. Under city law, the Assembly has 21 days from that time to consider an override. The measure would guarantee equal rights in employment, housing, finance and public accommodations for gays, lesbians and transgender people.

We were having a debate on respecting other people's opinions.

I am sure mayor Sullivan's point of view harms no one, right?

Should we just respect his opinion and right to think as he chooses?

[marshlander]

No, Curt. That is a misrepresentation of the points I expressed on the other thread. Fred can speak for himself!

There is a world of difference between a mayor vetoing a decision designed to improve the safety and quality of people's lives, arrived at democratically by a local assembly and the more abstract world of the discussion of ideas in an academic institution where people are supposed to be being taught how to argue effectively.

This hateful political decision deserves to be met with determined opposition. What shenanigans are going on backstage to prevent the Assembly overriding the veto?

[fredv3b]

Rising to Curts bait...

We were having a debate on respecting our people's opinions

I was having a debate on respecting people's right to hold opinions and to express them, which is a very different thing to respecting the opinions themselves or respecting the older

I am sure mayor Sullivan's point of view harms no one, right?

I am prepared to accept the harm from Mayor Sullivan's right to a point of view and to express it in return for what I see as a much greater good. The real harm arises from Mayor Sullivan's right to, effectively, enshrine, his bigoted opinions into law. I have never defended that right. Let us hope that the silence of the Assembly thus far is due to continuing back room rallying of support for an over-ride motion.

Should we just respect his opinion and right to think as he chooses?

We should respect his right to think as he sees fit and to express his opinion. We should treat him and his opinion with the contempt they deserve. We should do whatever is within our power to see him out of office at the earliest possible opportunity and that the ordinance is passed.

[fredv3b]

Fred can speak for himself!

[CurtCB]

No, Curt. That is a misrepresentation of the points I expressed on the other thread. Fred can speak for himself!

There is a world of difference between a mayor vetoing a decision designed to improve the safety and quality of people's lives, arrived at democratically by a local assembly and the more abstract world of the discussion of ideas in an academic institution where people are supposed to be being taught how to argue effectively.

This hateful political decision deserves to be met with determined opposition. What shenanigans are going on backstage to prevent the Assembly overriding the veto?

Sorry I wasn't really trying to imply anything about anyone.

Look, to me it starts with teachers who tell you being gay is abnormal and rabbis who say "you can be gay just don't be gay, it's a sin" and it ends up here or worse.

They may have the right to think whatever they want, but they don't have the right if what they publicly utter causes harm to me.

So where do we draw the line?

The worst thing in my view that can happen is if homophobia becomes institutionalized. And it always starts with teachers and preachers, people who by what standing they have in the public forum are given authority.

[fredv3b]

They may have the right to think whatever they want, but they don't have the right if what they publicly utter to cause harm to me.

So where do we draw the line?

A good question. I think it depends what you mean by 'cause you harm', I don't think you have the right to not be upset on the other hand I do think you have the right not to suffer injury to your person or property.

The worst thing in my view that can happen is if homophobia becomes institutionalized. And it always starts with teachers and preachers, people who by what standing they have in the public forum are giving authority.

Everyone should always take whatever anyone says with a healthy dose of scepticism.

[CurtCB]

they can deny me heath benefits for my partner
they can deny me to wed the person I love.
If I were on my deathbed they can deny my partner access to my last moments of life.
I could go on and on
That is harm.

[fredv3b]

Indeed that is harm. Those are also actions not words. The harm is from preventing you wed only indirectly from saying you should not be allowed to wed.