Discrimination Protection To Hit The Ballot In Anchorage
When Andy last checked in, the group called One Anchorage needed to collect 5,871 signatures to get discrimination protection for LGBT folk on the ballot in Anchorage next year. (Anchorage law already bans discrimination on basis of sex, religion, race, etc.) On Thursday, supporters of the ballot initiative walked into the city clerk's office and dropped an enormous stack of papers bearing the signatures of over 13,000 Alaskans.
From the Anchorage Daily News, by way of The Lake Wylie Pilot:
The initiative is similar to a city ordinance that was passed by the Anchorage Assembly in 2009 after weeks of public hearings and debate, but then was vetoed by Mayor Dan Sullivan.
The fight before the Assembly was long and loud, with hundreds of people on both sides speaking out.
"I would be surprised if we saw anything as intense as it was before the Assembly" during the initiative campaign, said Assemblyman Patrick Flynn.
When he vetoed the gay rights ordinance in 2009, Sullivan said he was not convinced there is discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation here.
... but Mayor Sullivan is reportedly supportive of the ballot initiative, because it allows citizens to "weigh in" on the issue themselves. Less sanguine is the Alaska Family Council, a Christianist org associated with Focus On The Family and led by Jim Minnery, the happy looking fellow at right, who promises to give the gays a good fight right up until voting day. Interestingly, the mission of the Council is "to strengthen and protect Alaskan families through public policy education, issue research and grassroots advocacy," which you'd think would put issues of housing and job discrimination solidly outside their charter. Apparently not.
"When he vetoed the gay rights ordinance in 2009, Sullivan said he was not convinced there is discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation here."
Wow. If those weren't political weasel words, then this mayor is seriously obtuse.
Posted by: Acronym Jim | Dec 10, 2011 11:51:19 AM
Um, what's with this guy's eyes? Scary!
Posted by: jamal49 | Dec 10, 2011 2:22:35 PM
So if a gay cross dressing 40 year old man could go to the ladies bathroom with my 5 year old in the stall next to her under this new ideology, we don’t see it as a family issue? This law does have implications that coincide with family values and playing that fact down is intellectually dishonest at best, and typical with this movement. Just because a group of people choose to wear their lifestyles on their sleeves should we have to accommodate them even when we disagree? People have no qualm about bashing Muslims or Christians, but the same people will become hysterical if you even just passively refuse to embrace their gay lifestyle. From what I understand, the discrimination laws that we have now suffice to assure equal and humane treatment to everybody, attempting to specify a new law for a new group opens the door for the next group, polygamist, pedophiles’ and whoever else to start their campaign on the same grounds.
Posted by: Nate | Dec 10, 2011 3:45:13 PM
Nate -
I'm guessing you don't know any gay people. Most gay men do not cross-dress in order to use ladies bathrooms. If a man had such an inclination, its possible he's a transvestite, which is a wholly different thing than a gay man (many straight men are transvestites). Your claim that people make no qualm about bashing Muslims or Christians is unfounded. For evidence, watch Fox News. Many of their pundits can't go 24 hours without proclaiming their victimization as a Christian, yet also expounding on their logic that America is somehow "a Christian nation." I wont even bother getting into that discussion. The point is: many groups like to think they're victimized, and perhaps many of them are, so don't single gays out saying we're getting special treatment simply because you may not like them. Freedom of speech laws do protect most religious people to say their beliefs, no matter how vile or hurtful they may be, for example: Christian Pastor Fred Phelps showing "God Hates Fags" signs at the funerals of hate-crime victims.
In short, you're being paranoid. I realize that people you may not know much about scare you, and perhaps thats your instincts telling you to investigate these gay people more - find out what they really do with their time. You may be surprised. Or not. But perhaps if you're really concerned about your 5 year old daughter in the restroom, you should go in there with her?
Posted by: Andy F. | Dec 10, 2011 5:36:09 PM
Why the article's author chose to use the phrase "Jim Minnery, the happy looking fellow at right..." is baffling. That clearly is not a "happy" face. The smile is about as plastic as they come and the eyes are frighteningly manic which mimics the expressions of most, if not all, the extreme right wingers I've ever seen in photographs.
I agree with JAMAL49 - his eyes are, indeed, very scary!!
Read more: http://www.towleroad.com/2011/12/discrimination-protection-to-hit-the-ballot-in-anchorage.html#ixzz1gB5n497m
Posted by: Steve Krotz | Dec 10, 2011 6:42:17 PM
Is "crazy-eyes" Bachman the trans-mayor of Anchorage now? Wow, those are serious Hannibal Lechter eyes -- the new look of Republican crazies.
Posted by: woodroad34d | Dec 10, 2011 7:38:17 PM
Nate, you as dad or other straight family members are much more dangerous for your children than gay men or transgender people. And many transvestites aren't gay or transgender, but cisgender and straight, for example Rudy Giuliani.
Posted by: Chris AE | Dec 11, 2011 9:20:56 AM
It's a good post ,i love it.
Posted by: Cheap jerseys | Dec 13, 2011 1:42:08 AM