The Daily Gazette
The Locally Owned Voice of the Capital Region
Advertisement
Promotions

Letters to the Editor for Jan. 20

  • FACEBOOK
  • TWITTER
  • GOOGLE+
  • LINKEDIN
  • PRINT
  • E-MAIL
Text Size: A | A

Attitudes about gay billboards shows why they are needed Re Jan. 11 article, “Critics urge removal of gay signs”: In Our Own Voices, the Capital Region’s only organization explicitly serving the needs of LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender] people of color has been receiving negative media attention for an ad campaign focusing on increasing the visibility of gay men of color. The reaction of some members of the Schenectady community only reinforces the needs ...


You Must Log-In or Subscribe to Continue Subscription Offer Individual stories can be found and purchased from our Archives for $2.00

Advertisement

comments

WordWiz78
January 20, 2011
8:19 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

Arlene, I agree with every point you make, bar one: preschool teachers shouldn't be explaining to their students what it means to be gay at all. Ms. Spicer shouldn't be concerned about what to tell them, because the appropriate answer should be: "That is something you should discuss with your parents." It is NEVER a preschool teacher's place to discuss matters of love, sexual or otherwise, with their students, unless you're talking about loving ice cream or loving mommy and daddy and their family. If the student is insistent and will not let it go (which, given the attention span of the average preschooler, is highly unlikely), the teacher should deflect their attention to other matters and mention it to the parents so that the parents can answer their child's questions.

WordWiz78
January 20, 2011
8:20 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

@ Mr. Lucier: Well, first I'd learn how to spell his name - BARACK - correctly. lol

duke1942
January 20, 2011
11:39 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

Wiz, who are you to correct or criticize Mr. Lucier's version? He may be much more intelligent and it could be satirically spelled! lol

WordWiz78
January 21, 2011
10:46 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

duke, lighten up, man. It was a JOKE. Humor, you know? Hence the "lol" at then end.

Newsworthy
January 21, 2011
10:58 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

Ms. Precopio, speaking of people in their "right mind", how are you able to get into the mind of the Arizona shooter? You seem very sure of your OPINION.

Newsworthy
January 21, 2011
11:19 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

Kernan, your personal example is admirable (I guess) but not a useful comparison (or rebuttal) to Strock's column. Your experience is first-person; you were there. The bible is not. It's pretty safe to say no one is alive now who was present at any of the events in the bible. The bible is a metaphorical collection of tales, passed verbally at first, then translated through different languages of different cultures at different historical times. It's kind of like the game of "telegraph". In addition, organized religion has been used as a means of social and political power for millennia; quite likely some of the writings were "directed" for such a purpose. I'm not judging any religious faith, but faith is based upon evidence and if the evidence is at odds with the world we see, it should be questioned. Biblical quotes are often used out of context, as well, which I believe Carl pointed out. If you believe something merely because it is written in a book, I'll send you a book portraying me as the ruler of the western hemisphere and you owe me half your income. Just kidding, of course.

WordWiz78
January 22, 2011
11:25 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

I take no issue with anyone who wishes to use passages in the Bible (or the religious text for whatever religion they follow) as a moral compass for their own life. Where I have an issue with it is two areas.

The first is when they attempt to use passages from any religious text to tell me how I need to live MY life. Last I checked, we still live in America, which is still, I believe, the land of freedom. Religious freedom was one of the key reasons the original settlers came to this country and founded a new nation. You can view religion however you see fit, but so can I, and just as I have no right to push my religious views on you, the same applies in reverse ("you" being a generalized term here).

The second problem I have with people quoting the Bible to justify things is that they often misquote, paraphrase or use "selective quoting." It's easy to quote "eye for an eye" and ignore "turn the other cheek." Homophobes are very good at quoting Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination." Yet, this is the only place in the entire Bible in which homosexuality is clearly discussed as a sin. Yet, homophobes discuss it as though it is more important than the Ten Commandments or the birth of Christ! Many other things appear in the Bible as accepted practice - slavery, polygamy, "righteous" murder, and incest, amongst others - that aren't exactly considered acceptable today. Just because the Bible says something, doesn't necessarily make it so.

I guess the biggest problem with quoting the Bible or another religious text is that many people do so, not for the purpose of making life better for anyone, but to justify their own hatred, violence, and bigotry.

irene58
January 22, 2011
12:29 p.m.

[ Flag Post ]

No one wants the Sacandaga DREDGED Mr. Ambrosino. Seek your fame and fortune elsewhere.

smith
January 22, 2011
12:32 p.m.

[ Flag Post ]

It's interesting that when someone disagrees with a tenet, those holding the tenet are automatically bigots and haters. I suppose I do dislike the unnecessary things people believe they have a right to that break down social order, spawn greed and dishonesty, and are forced into the minds of our children. It might be a personal right if those that wish to behave counter to good advice were the only ones that payed their hard earned money and suffered the pain for the resulting economic and social breakdown. But that isn't the case.
As for the Bible and homosexuals; you hear more about it because they keep it going. There is no place in the entire tome where homosexual sex is exhibited in a positive light or as a family arrangement. There is nothing keeping them or any sinner out of a church either: What keeps people out is declaring they have no sin; therefore, they keep themselves out--not the other way around--they don't need church. Of course common sense is the strongest case against forcing everyone to accept this as "normal" behavior and force them to fund benefits for a charade that mocks marriage.

WordWiz78
January 23, 2011
10:19 a.m.

[ Flag Post ]

smith, I didn't say that "holding the tenet" makes someone a bigot. Treating someone as inferior because of their lifestyle, race, gender, age, etc, is what makes someone a bigot. Using religion to justify that bigotry is where I have the problem with those people. I believe the two biggest tenets of Christianity are that everyone is equal in the eyes of God - and that would include homosexuals - and that only God has the right to judge people. So, if you're such a superior person because you're a "good Christian," then why is it that you are allowed to break the two most basic tenets of Christianity?

I don't know where you are coming from with the whole "What keeps people out is declaring they have no sin" BS. Stating that homosexuality is not a sin is not the same as someone claiming to be without sin.

No one has been able to give a logical reason why they think gays are inferior to others or why they shouldn't have the same rights. There is no biological difference. The law states all people are created equal. Christianity states that all people are equal in the eyes of God. The only thing making gays inferior to certain people is their own bigotry.

Advertisement