Comments on: Pilot op-ed: Discriminatory amendment

By: Sunday Surfing I « Blogging the Amendment

Sunday Surfing I « Blogging the Amendment — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 22:36:34 +0000

[...] Vivian Paige reprints her OpEd that appeared in the VA Pilot here. Speaking from her vantage point as an African American lesbian, Vivian comments on the use of the Bible to justify writing discrimination into the Virginia constitution and concludes: “Vote No on Ballot Question 1. We should not allow discrimination against anyone to be written into our Bill of Rights.” [...]

By: vjp

vjp — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 16:53:02 +0000

Carla & Squeaky – please add your names to my Voting NO page (click on Voting NO at the top). Thanks!

By: The Squeaky Wheel

The Squeaky Wheel — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 03:25:43 +0000

David, I get that a lot, but bravo for being adult enough to admit you misjudged. That is just fine and I appreciate the open mind to me. I have always said I am conservative first and a Repblican by default.

I am more libretarian than people might think.

By: David

David — Sat, 21 Oct 2006 15:07:03 +0000

Squeaky, I’m impressed. Apparently I have misjudged you.

By: vjp

vjp — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 20:16:47 +0000

SW – I’m re-reading the piece but not seeing where I said I know it, I said I believed it to be true.

In any event, I’m happy that you are voting NO

By: The Squeaky Wheel

The Squeaky Wheel — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 18:44:14 +0000

Let me clarify. I know you are citing what Mrs. King has said as support to how you believe Dr. King would have voted. That is not lost on me, but I think that one line saying YOU know what Dr. King would do might turn people off. Mrs. King does support your argument and stands on it’s own.

Wanted to clarify because I am not discrediting what you wrote (I agree with almost ALL of it) but was just giving my objective “How is this read by others” point of view.

By: Carla

Carla — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 18:44:03 +0000

Unlike The Squeaky Wheel I don’t have a problem with you extrapolating out from what was known of Dr. King to decide how he would have approached the issue. Throughout all his writings and speeches runs the theme that we are all to be considered as individuals, and that the playing field should be level. People should be judged on their character and public actions, not on their private preferences and associations.

TSW and I do agree that no matter how you stand on gay marriage, there’s not enough there to justify messing around with our constitution.

By: The Squeaky Wheel

The Squeaky Wheel — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 18:36:39 +0000

Kudos to Vivian. I love how the Pilot slams bloggers but then lets you write an op-ed.

Other than speaking FOR Dr. King (I never like when people who are not personal friends of deceased say they KNOW how someone would have thought) I thought you wrote an intelligent, honest and convincing Op-Ed.

I expect nothing less from you. You represented yourself and your cause well. ALL bloggers who have the privilege of knowing you should be proud of you regardless of their feelings on this issue.

For the record, they have to make a better case for me to support CHANGING a constitution and this issue doesn’t do it, in my opinion. Polls say it will pass, but I think that is a bad idea.

By: vjp

vjp — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 16:56:07 +0000

Good point, Doug.

By: Doug in Mount Vernon

Doug in Mount Vernon — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 16:52:26 +0000

Great work, Vivian!

And on imposing a religious view…..it is also increasingly true that many denominations are EMBRACING and SANCTIONING religious marriage for same-sex couples (e.g. Unitarians (for 20+ years now), Quakers, United Church of Christ, even some more liberal Methodist, Disciples of Christ (Ronald Reagan & my family’s denomination) and Presbyterian congregations all conduct same-sex marriages and/or unions).

Thus, to favor one religious point of view over these others is a complete and utter violation of freedom of religion.

I don’t hear this point argued very often.