editorial
Letters to the Editor
Published Thursday, 15-Jan-2004 in issue 838
“The issue is not her endorsement of Heidi von Szeliski…”
Dear Editor,
It is sadly ironic that Assemblywoman Chris Kehoe now echoes Republican smears in attacking Vince Hall for “look[ing] like a Sacramento insider” (GLT, Dec. 18, 2003, p. 14). It is Kehoe who has apparently been corrupted by the “insider” political culture of Sacramento party bosses. The issue is not her endorsement of Heidi von Szeliski, though that is surprising and disappointing given the past mutual support between Kehoe and Hall, and Szeliski’s weak ties to the 76th Assembly District and abysmal performance at the candidates debate held by the San Diego Democratic Club. She’s entitled to endorse whoever she favors. What created the rift with the SDDC is how Kehoe (and equally sadly, Sen. Dede Alpert) abused their Sacramento influence, and drove a truck through a loophole in party rules, in an attempt to stack the local endorsement caucus on Dec. 14. That shows astonishing disrespect, and indeed contempt, for the very grassrootsactivists who gave Kehoe her start in politics. Nicole Murray-Ramirez is thus way off-base in suggesting that the SDDC’s reaction shows a lack of “maturity.” Au contraire! If Kehoe can play hardball, why can’t the SDDC?
I have been an SDDC member and supporter of Kehoe since soon after I moved to San Diego seven years ago. I still support her bid for State Senate, and she has been an effective leader for our community and for the state.
But many of us are now bitterly disillusioned at her arrogant, party-boss behavior. For Kehoe, this was a self-inflicted wound. Even after all his years in Sacramento, Vince Hall enjoys deep grassroots support in our city because he respects the local activists who provide the cutting edge for Democratic candidates. There’s a lesson there for you, Ms. Kehoe, and for any other politicians who may forget where they came from, and who got them where they are.
Bryan H. Wildenthal
San Diego
“The strike will be won or lost, not on the sidewalks or in the boardrooms, but in the aisles between produce and dairy.”
Dear Editor:
Every time you make a decision to shop at Ralph’s, Albertson’s, or Vons, you are making a fundamental choice on whether you support the store employees on strike, or the executives that run the respective franchises. This is true whether there is a picket line present or not.
The strike will be won or lost, not on the sidewalks or in the boardrooms, but in the aisles between produce and dairy. It will be decided by how many of us choose to stand by the workers trying to maintain their small lot in life, or the corporate executives trying to maintain their profit margins. You choose by shopping there or not.
Be aware, shop wisely, and choose with compassion.
Don Scott
San Diego
“If courts would have ruled in accordance with what the majority wanted throughout history, only white Christian men would have rights.”
Dear Editor:
I fully agree with your editorial [GLT issue 834, 12/18/03]. I never understood what’s so “sacred” about the benefits and obligations of civil marriage such as taxes, inheritence, property, immigration.
The most vociferous opponents of marriage for same-sex couples are mostly driven by their radical religious beliefs which should not have any bearing on civil matters since the United States is NOT a theocracy. They of all people should know that the King James Version of the Bible has 142 references to “abominations”. Only 2(!) of the 142 refer to “lying with mankind as with womankind”. How can these people be taken seriously?!
Furthermore, early Christian church fathers were OPPOSED to the institution of marriage, teaching the notion that a “good” woman was one who placed faith before family. Marriage did not become a Christian sacrament until the 16th century. To claim that marriage as we know it today has existed for thousands of years is just ridiculous.
Interesting that the loudest voices seem to come from the Bible Belt, those states that for the longest time did not support interracial marriages based on the same reasoning: their personal moral religious beliefs. Remember, back then they portrayed black men as sexual predators.
If courts would have ruled in accordance with what the majority wanted throughout history, only white Christian men would have rights.
And to those people who say that gays/lesbians don’t live moral lives I strongly suggest they buy a Hustler magazine or one of the swinger magazines to see what their fellow straights are really up to! Gosh, I wish people would get real!
Chris Haiss
San Diego
Letters Policy

The Gay & Lesbian Times welcomes comments from all readers. Letters to the editor longer than 500 words will not be accepted. Send e-mail to editor@uptownpub.com; fax (619) 299-3430; or mail to PO Box 34624, San Diego, CA 92163. To be printed, letters must include the writer’s name, address and daytime phone number for verification.

All letters containing subject matter that refers to the content of the Gay & Lesbian Times are published unedited. Letters that are unrelated to the content of the publication will be published at the discretion of the editorial staff.

E-mail

Send the story “Letters to the Editor”

Recipient's e-mail: 
Your e-mail: 
Additional note: 
(optional) 
E-mail Story     Print Print Story     Share Bookmark & Share Story
Classifieds Place a Classified Ad Business Directory Real Estate
Contact Advertise About GLT