Letters to the Editor
Letters to the
Editor
Out in the Mountains welcomes your letters. Although we will withhold names from printing upon request, the letter must be accompanied by a verifiable name and address in order to be considered for publication. We try to print every letter we receive, but reserve the right to edit for space and clarity. Letters are also subject to the editorial policy stated in the masthead.
California, Here I Go
Since the bigoted “Defense of Marriage” act passed here in California, I have a question. What does it take for all of us gays and lesbians from here to do become citizens of Vermont? We could stay here and make money and pay taxes in a state that seems to think we have a few legal rights. Just a thought.
Tom Pease
Beverly Hills CA
The New Apartheid
Editor:
I’ve already spoken out several times on the issue of same-gender marriage, so I’m not about to applaud the state House of Representatives for their vote to approve the so-called “civil union” bill.
By declaring that marriage is for opposite-gender couples only, the Legislature is establishing a dual system of marital partnership. Such a system constitutes a new form of state-imposed segregation – in this case, based on gender – that is every bit as unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment as the racist Jim Crow laws of the Old South. There is no way that this system can stand up in federal court if it is challenged on those grounds.
I’m no fan of marriage by any means. However, as a man of mixed African American and Native American descent who’s old enough to remember the dark days of Jim Crow, I have absolutely zero tolerance for state-imposed segregation. Therefore, I cannot, in good conscience, allow this new form of apartheid to go unchallenged.
There can be only one single system of marital partnership that will pass constitutional muster. That single system – regardless of whether you call it marriage or civil union – must treat same-gender and opposite-gender couples equally.
Skeeter Sanders
Essex VT
Open Letter to Schiavone
I am sorry to say that you have let me down deeply.
Last year, you told me emphatically that your legislation and your personal feelings were ONLY about protecting the traditional definition of marriage. That you were, in fact, in favor of granting lesbians and gay men the rights and responsibilities of state recognized relationships – as long as it wasn’t called marriage. This is what you said.
You claimed that you were not against lesbians and gay men, that you were not homophobic, that ALL you wanted was to protect heterosexual marriage.
And now, even with one amendment that defined marriage as a thing which involved a man and a woman, you still voted against the civil union legislation.
I’m sorry, but I don’t believe in your support and affirmation of lesbian and gay families.
I believe your thinly clouded pleasantries, in the end, don’t hide your true nature – which is opposed to the civil rights for lesbians and gay men. In this bill you had the opportunity to demonstrate your courage to grant rights and responsibilities to lesbians and gay men, while still protecting the traditional definition of marriage.
Hiding behind desire to give these rights to other household configurations just doesn’t cut it. What you are really afraid of is expanding our state’s definition of what it takes to make a family. Love makes a family, George, and it sure would be nice if you could open your heart a wee bit more to support state recognition in support of loving, committed relationships.
I am angry because you say one thing and do another. You are very slick, in all of your doublespeak – I just wish you would have the courage to stand up and say either lesbians and gay men should NOT have rights and responsibilities as a couple recognized by the State of Vermont – or that they should – and instead of fighting so hard AGAINST civil rights – fight for the civil rights you think ought to be extended to our lesbian and gay Vermonters. You say you support such rights, but I’ve not seen anything to show that support.
I’d say if (however well intentioned) it looks like bigotry, quacks like bigotry, swims like bigotry, then by golly it must be bigotry.
Jan Passion
St. George VT
Love, Understanding, and H.847
Editor:
I hope and pray all Vermonters can agree that full civil rights should be available to all citizens.
Around this issue, many have claimed to know what God wants, throwing out Biblical passages in support of their claims just as supporters of slavery and segregation did, not so long ago. Bibles were waved against women’s right to free speech, to speaking in public at all, to their right to vote. Biblical quotes are still used against women’s equality, against Jews, against interracial and interreligious marriage, and against countless other groups and actions. All have been with the same claim, that the Bible quoters know what God wants.
I am amazed at such certainty about divine purpose, especially when it centers on cruel misinformation and demands to restrict the rights of others.
The divine principle which our religious movement supports, the one we believe all of the great Hebrew prophets endorsed, including Jesus of Nazareth, and all the great world religions support, in their finer moments, is the principle of love and understanding. We mean by this not simply tolerance of diversity but active support for any situation in which the spirit of love can be enriched. A committed relationship, with or without children, gay or straight, is certainly one such situation we believe we ought to support.
I hope and pray that all Vermonters can agree that civil support for all families should be available to all Vermont citizens.
Regardless of how you may think your legislators have decided, and even if you have already talked with them, please let them know how you feel, today. They need to hear the message of love and compassion as often as possible to help them to counteract the sad and frightening voice of ignorance and fear.
Rev. Dr. Nancy Jay Crumbine
Norwich VT
Respect Different Religions, Lifestyles
I am writing in response to Reverend Leslie’s “Faith Matters and Justice Matters” column in the March 2000 issue of OITM. I am disappointed and offended at the thoughtlessness exhibited in her February 2 letter to the House Judiciary Committee (I would rather presume thoughtlessness than that she intentionally used an anti-Jewish slant in her letter).
I wonder why a member of the clergy would find it necessary to be disrespectful of another religion to argue that the House of Representatives should grant civil rights to lesbians and gay men. The sentence that Jewish “laws were designed to keep the ancient Jews holy but not necessarily moral” had no place in the letter. What authority was being cited or paraphrased? At the least, it seems arrogant for a Christian minister to claim to know the purpose of Jewish laws and to somehow presume they are not part of a moral code.
In my opinion, a stronger and far more positive letter could have been written by citing the original law and explaining it in context, rather than just dismissing it out of hand as an ancient injustice. (Commentators have indicated that the law referred to was in response to surrounding cultures’ sexual-religious rites – Everett Fox translates Leviticus 18.3, an introductory verse to this section of Torah, as “What is done in Egypt, wherein you were settled, you are not to do; what is done in the land of Canaan, to which I am bringing you, you are not to do; by their laws you are not to walk.”) An even better letter might have acknowledged the prohibition against gay male sex (as well as the prohibition directly after that against eating from a fruit tree until the fifth year), but pointed out that what was under consideration by the Legislative Committee was a civil and not a religious matter.
There has been more than enough rhetoric surrounding this civil rights issue based on fear and ignorance. It would be better for everyone if we could strive in all of our interactions to promote understanding and tolerance for people who are not of the majority culture, rather than be seduced into finding “others” to scapegoat.
Sherri Kasten
Montpelier VT
A Taste of Home
Editor:
I was so proud and happy to find your publication on the Internet. I now live in Chicago, but I am still proud to call Burlington my favorite place to have lived. I was encouraged to see that OutRight Vermont is still going strong in the state for issues of Queer and Questioning youth and their allies. I was one person whom can proudly say that OutRight help mold me into a proud adult. My partner and I will be making the trek to Washington DC to march for equal rights in April. Like many others, marriage is of importance to us. I hope to find and see friends and former neighbors when we get there.
I’ll be a constant reader now.
Jerimie J Monahan
Chicago IL
Raise the Minimum Wage
Editor:
Fair-minded Vermonters (and legislators) should support the Livable Wage Bill (H.837). Nobody who works full time should live in poverty. A ‘livable wage’ is simply necessary for basic needs. Twice now I’ve listened to struggling workers testify at the statehouse, like a mom whose teenager makes more at McDonald’s than she does as a teacher’s aide. When employers won’t pay livable wages, taxpayers then foot the bill for food stamps, health care, heating assistance, child care, etc.
Many businesses claim they can’t pay more and still operate. But are jobs really worthwhile if profit comes from impoverishing workers? The Legislature’s Livable Wage Study found that minimum could easily be increased to $7.00, but business interests lobby, arguing that minimum is for entry-level workers. Two thirds of those earning under $6.50 are over 30 years old. They’re not teenagers living at home.
60,000 Vermont families do not earn enough to get by. H.837 would increase the minimum to $6.25 (still not enough), and increase the Vermont Earned Income Tax Credit from 25% to 32%. Please, let your legislators know you support this bill, and urge them to go further. It’s an economic boom, remember? If not now, when?
Dawn Stanger
Teamsters Local 597
Underhill VT