You are hereIs Jerry Prevo mishandling the Anchorage Gay Ordinance issue?
Is Jerry Prevo mishandling the Anchorage Gay Ordinance issue?
By Dan Fagan
Publisher
The Alaska Standard
On Monday Dr. Jerry Prevo was a guest on my show to talk about the proposed Anchorage Gay Ordinance. I will have to admit I experienced some discomfort with the interview. My fear is those of us opposing the ordinance are so obsessed with winning the debate we are sending the gay community the wrong message.
Click on the link below to hear the audio clip.
So - the changes to the ordinance would also add the phrase "veteran's status" as a group that can not be discriminated against. Do you have a problem with this type of "forced equality" or do just object to the "forced equality" of homosexuals, bisexuals, and transgender folks??
garden sheds
Thank you for the great web site - a true resource, and one many people clearly enjoy
classifieds |article |s-cape adjustable bed
Every FREAK in the world will run to Alaska to get RIGHTS for their WACKO live styles!
I guess it's people like you that caused the gays in our community to go for equal rights. I don't blame them. Your comment is disgusting.
your lifestyle may seem "wacko" by others. Then where would you go?
I just can't believe that people fear gays and lesbians so much. And the only real defense for why they're against these people is because they're affraid what they might do if a gay ordinance is passed. That's such cop out! Straight, god fearing people do some sick things, too.
Imagine how it once felt to be black and in love with a white person. It's the same thing. And imagine if we all had phobias like the Prevo's of the world. I sure the hell wouldn't rent to anyone that goes to his church. Why don't we just make it easy on societiy and help prolong discrimination. Let's not rent to gays, blacks, hispanics, short, and fat people. Let's just teach our kids that if they don't follow the bible, they will burn in hell. I feel sorry for the 3 billion people that growup without religion. Or do I?
It must be tough to be gay and believe in God.
This proposed ordinance is absolutely NOT about the gay community wanting acceptance from religious folks (be they Christian, Prevo-ite, or whatever). ASK a gay person who supports this ordinance, and they will tell you. This ordinance is equivalent to RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. People want not to be discriminated against because they're lifestyle is different when it comes to housing and jobs. Should that lifestyle interfere with their applicability -- fine. ANY real attorney who looks at this ordinance and the current legal precedent will tell you that employers and landlords are free to refuse employment or housing to gay people if something other than the mere fact of their being gay interferes with their applicability.
I have no idea what motivates Prevo to do what he does. Maybe he is paranoid, or maybe he is just evil. But he knowingly distorts the truth for political purposes that DO NOT affect his religion. This ordinance absolutely allows dissent. But just as no Christian would want to be discriminated against by a possible employer or landlord because the employer or landlord hates Christians, likewise no gay person wants this to happen (And to take the current ordinance one step farther, you can't currently discriminate against Pagans or Satanists either, because they are just as protected as Christians. Who would you rather discriminate against, a gay person or a Satanist? Well, the Satanist is already out of the question.).
No one here is asking for anyone to accept gayness, or approve of homosexual behavior, or not speak out against homosexual behavior. NO ONE. This is simply about rights. About discrimination. Say what you want, please DO, but just don't refuse to hire or rent to someone because you disagree with them. That is all. And if what I say sounds wrong to you -- please at least consider the analogy with religion, and the fact that CREED is among the already protected factors in the current ordinance. HOW exactly is creed any different from sexual orientation in this circumstance, and would you be willing to lose such protection? Both are choices and both are characterized by behaviors. And neither should be a basis for discrimination when it comes to housing and employment.
As much as I want the right to be able to choose who I want to rent to, or whatever, I think that things were going just fine before this ordinance came about. Now it is just raising a big stink and making people fight. Couldn't we have just left it alone? Like in the military: Don't ask Don't tell. Then we wouldn't have had to listen to Prevo spread his gospel of judgementalism and exclusion. I happen to agree with what the Bible says about homosexuality, but it says the SAME thing about adultery, stealing, lying, cheating, pride, greed, and a lot of other things. Homosexuality is one of many sins, and don't try to tell me that Prevo doesn't indulge in ANY sin!!! Like Jesus, I say, "He who has no sin among you throw the first stone." And no stone was thrown...they all put down their rocks and went home. This is from John 3:8-11. I know Prevo would mention the fact that Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more, but he would say the same thing to every one of us for every kind of sin.I hope a lot of people will read the four gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke & John. This is where we meet Jesus and learn his ways. And his ways are not like Prevo's.
"Gays" and the "Far Right" are human beings, too! Prevo's previous rantings have never affected me before but, simply put, my shackles are up this time. THIS is why the "Far Right" is so "Far Wrong" for the vast majority of American people - they can be offensive to both common sense and common decency! The Far Left is mutually offensive - treating all humans as separate "sub-groups" that need to be "protected" or "paid back" for the wrong-doings of generations future and past. The attempt to judge and legislate the morality of who you choose as a sexual partner AND tie it together with human rights is a failure. Always, first is the human right. We all have the right to be, believe and live the way we choose (as long as we do not impose our beliefs on others and do not violate the right of other society members to live in safety). Each of us has inalienable rights - one of those is our beliefs. That goes for BOTH sides of this argument! No one is right and no one is wrong - that's what makes our freedom to hold belief one of the most beloved of Human Rights in the United States.
We have societal laws that we've approved and enforce that protect us from deviance and harm, while at once protect the law-breakers' rights as human beings. Just this morning, I saw a man, who dressed in a woman's bathing suit, was hauled off to jail with charges of public indecency - the ultimate cross dresser arrested under our societal laws. He looked better in his bathing suit than I would look in it with the exception of the white socks and work boots! He was not arrested on charges of being homosexual (he might not even be!!). Cross-dressers, whether you believe them to be immoral or not, exhibit only socially unacceptable behavior. Cross dressing should not be against the law - would you arrest a descendant of a Scotsman for dressing in a kilt every day when he came in to teach his elementary class?
When are members of our society going to stop placing MORE importance on a perceived "minority" human being's rights? All of the currently protected "minority" rights place the white, American male in the true minority class. There are more in the protected classes than in the class they are trying to protect against!
I, as a woman, don't feel that I'm discriminated against by homosexuals, Latinos, Pacific-Islanders, Native American's, non-Native American's, Asian-descent, senior citizens, youth or men. Coming from an Amish background, I understand the concept of religious persecution. I understand the concept of human slavery: war prisoners, conquested countries, poverty class or "just because" has gone on since the beginning of time. It was acceptable at one time in the United States, just like it was in China, Egypt and the middle East, South and Central America, Europe, Africa, etc. Society has decided that it is unacceptable and we have instituted laws to protect all persons in the United States from slavery and genocide - but not against the belief behind the actions. Our civil war determined how the United States felt about slavery and human rights. We've (collectively) decided that it is unacceptable to enslave, for any purpose (e.g. child, women/sex, racial work, etc.), human beings in the United States. We truly are ALL "created equal"; UNTIL we start placing more importance on the "right" of being women, men, Latinos, etc. Why give preference to any group? We are all human; born with no more or less rights than any other human. Human right's activists seem to contraindict the very term - they don't protect human being rights. They attempt to legislate preference and division of the human race.
When will the American "preference" of a sub-group of human beings stop? There is no group more unpreferred and unprotected than the American "white" male - either homo- OR hetero-sexual - but I don't see any of the Far Left or Far Right going to bat for that truly "minority" group! Why should any one (or many) group have more "protections", rights or advantages than others? We should not have to "repay" any group of humans for the past offenses of our ancestors who had a different societal belief system than our current belief system Our ancestors, whether they came to the United States for opportunity, as slaves, as religious refugees, as racial refugees, gave us free citizenship as their gift to future generations. We have the obligation to, personally, make good on our ancestor's stuggles and sacrifices to worry about the "level playing field" afforded us ALL. No preferences, no advantages, no protections to one religion, lifestyle, sex, creed, color, or choice. You can't legislate belief - consider the nutcase (albeit Mensa member!) that just shot people in our nations holocaust museum. His beliefs are socially unacceptable, but he will not be arrested for his beliefs - he will be arrested for his socially unacceptable actions. Arrest "people" for violating my human rights - don't arrest "people" for their beliefs. I don't CARE what other's beliefs are; I care about being able to live my life freely and safely.
Can't we all just be across-the-board equal (with exception of our beliefs) and play in the same sandbox?
He and his Christians dont want to be forced to let GAYS get married in their CHURCH.
Why would any gay want to be married in that place with that preacher?
First of all: No one had actually suggested legalizing gay marriage in Alaska (not that they shouldn't...)
Second: Legalizing gay marriage is a purely legal issue. No clergy member will be forced to sanctify or perform the marriage. Just as a Rabbi is not currently forced to wed an atheistic couple. The only person forced to do anything will be the official who signs the documents. The issue has nothing to do with religion, which is precisely WHY it should be allowed everywhere in this country.
Why should Jerry Prevo and his Christians be forced to let Gays get married in their church?
Churches are by definition VOLUNTARY associations. Part of freedom and liberty is that VOLUNTARY associations get to freely associate in this country.
There are many churches in America -each with its own creed and set of voluntary rules. If you don't like this Church's set of voluntary rules, then go to another one.
If gay people want to get married in a church, then find a gay friendly church or start a gay friendly church. It is America - last time I checked we can still do this. And it can be done VOLUNTARILY!
Exactly. Last I checked, a church could refuse the right to marry anyone for any reason. I don't see that changing when gay marriage is legal.
Dan, There is no doubt in my mind who seems more scary. Openly gay people, so what? It's the people who aren't open and the preachers who are scary......
Prevo seems very dangerous to me. What will he decide next isn't acceptable. Who will he target next? There is something deeply wrong here. All of the people at the assembly looked identical in their red, sheep if you ask me. Followers, not people necessarily thinking for themselves.
Prevo just likes to make noise and get noticed. He's done it before and he'll do it again. Nothing ever comes of it.
...I wonder why he doesn't lose his tax exempt status.
His "church" is nothing but a cover for his "for profit business" and political machine. He gives all of Christianity a bad name,
Did you read my other post here about Prevo? That's what I think of him. You might not like the first part of my post, but just keep reading. It's the one titled "I wish this ordinance had never...."
And I agree with you. I just think Religious leaders like Prevo and their followers are dangerous. We need to be weary of them. They are the real threat from within to our freedom and liberty.
I also believe if they are going to make political statements, endorse candidates, and speak on legislation they should have their tax exempt status revoked.
They are preaching their morality in a political way and acting politically, so I agree they should not be tax exempt. As to their dangererous qualities, I don't think so, because they really have no power, at least no more than you or I. On the other had, I am VERY afraid of Obama and the Democratically controlled Congress. They are the ones who have the will and the POWER to take away all kinds of freedom. They have already done a lot of that in the less than six months Obama's been in office. Just look at what they've done with the auto companies and financial institutions. Obama is the first president to ever fire a CEO of a free market company. Now he wants to put caps on salaries and drug prices. Yeah, those are both things that reek of greed, but if there's no longer a profit motive, there won't be anyone to do the work. Just read about Russia and the Soviet Union under communism. No food at the grocery store is just the beginning!!!
Hope that the path Obama is taking is going to get us out of the huge hole the Republicans buried us in. Remember that Bush was the first to bail out the financial markets. He was the first to sound the alarm telling us all that we were at the brink of a global economic collapse.
What else would you propose to do? Let the financial markets and auto industry collapse? Because even with our intervention they are still on the brink of disaster, and it's not just here, it's world wide.
Two things that I know. 1) Bush policies ruined our economy and our reputation around the world. 2) Doing nothing about it was not and is not a viable option.
The reason people like Prevo and his followers are dangerous is because the prey on the weak, the scared, the vulnerable and the ignorant. Then they use those people to further their goals, and trust me, anyone that has run for office in this state for the last 20 years knows the power that Prevo has in political terms.
I just don't agree with you on any of these things. Bush pushed the deficit to some billion dollars; Obama has already pushed it into the trillions, with much more to come. You need to hear from both sides of the political spectrum, not just liberal main stream media. You will never know what 's going on in our country if you limit yourself on your news sources. I watch ABC news in the evening and Fox News at night, and I get all kinds of emails from different news sources, like Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, CNS News, Real Clear Politics, townhall.com, etc. As for Prevo, he should be preaching love, not discrimination. I certainly do agree with you on that.
Nearly all the new outlets you mention are either a part of the 5 major media conglomerates or they are closely ideologically/politically associated. Please take a close look at the recent history of the consolidation of media ownership, televised, print and radio, starting in 1998. Then look at Fox's Roger Ailes long history of republican allegiences going as far back as Nixon. Then check out a film called Outfoxed, distributed by an indepentant film company. After this, if you still think Fox News is even close to "fair and balanced" I seriously doubt your powers of observation. Your acceptance and use of the term "Main Stream Media", is an intentially devised misnomer promoted by conservative think tanks to mislead the public into thinking that the actual Corporate Media is somehow liberal, is revealing. Corporate powers that be use this misnomer to club any corporate news group or employee over the head who may step out of line with their conservative ideology. "See, we told you the mainstream media was liberal!"
To me it seems like you're determined to portray yourself as a middle grounder without fully looking at all the news information availalbe. Fox News and the rest of the Corporate Media has pulled and manipulated public opinion so far to the right, the middle ground now seems far left. If you want unfilterd news information go to smaller news/opinion sources unfunded by large corporate interests (not like this one). Consider and weigh their arguements in comparison to the Corporate News Media and you will have a fuller understanding.
Best wishes.
The deficit is the least of our problems. Compare that to the very real possibility of tens of millions out of work, with people losing their businesses and homes. Compare that to a world wide economic collapse. I don't know what you do for a living, but it really doesn't matter, because if these measures fail to stabilize the economy, we are looking at a repeat of the Great Depression.
I don't watch TV to get my news, particularly not Faux News. I research issues online from news aggregators and bloggers. I follow a lot of links people provide during discussions like this. Some of them are garbage and others are very useful and factual.
So what do you think should have been the response to the economic crisis?
Why do you call it Faux News? It's the most informative news and commentary in the world of TV. And everyone knows you can't get fair and balanced news on blogs!
All of these financial things are interconnected. You have to be very well educated to understand it all, and even those who are such are not too sure what's going to happen next. I do know that as an ordinary citizen, I don't want to be trillions of dollars in debt to China. (Which we already are).
And, not being an economist myself, I have no idea what should have been done last fall when the markets crashed, and since then. Bush & Congress acted out of panic. What I think will probably result is we will have bailed out a lot of business that will ultimately fail, so our money that we had to borrow will have gone into a useless black hole, and we will still have the unemployment we have now, most likely much worse, plus the debt. We already know what some of the financial institutions did with our money...had big expensive parties at resorts and paid big bonuses. And we don't know what happened to a lot of the money because the banks won't tell us. So Obama wants to fix executive salaries for them, so they want to give the Tarp money back (funny, I thought they needed it to survive), but Obama won't let them give it back. Greedy for power.
So, in my opinion, the only thing we can do is be informed, try to inform others, VOTE intelligently, and write or call our Congress people regularly. And maybe some tea parties and other organized protests. And finally, in my belief system, I say we need to pray for our country and our freedom.
They defended Bush to the bitter end, even when the rest of the world including the majority of Americans knew that he was a complete and utter failure. I don't trust a single thing they say. They are entertainment for the uneducated masses. They use fear tactics in an attempt to influence people into thinking that the American way of life is coming to end because....(fill in the blank). It's like getting your news from the Colbert Report, only not nearly as funny.
You're like every other conservative I've asked that same question to. Don't know... but you all know for certain whatever Obama does is wrong.
I guess we can't agree on much of anything now. Oh well. You are wrong about Fox News. Sorry you've never really watched anything on it. I'm betting you get a lot of your news from the Daily Kos and the Huffington Post. THAT is not news and it's not commentary or debate. It's OPINION.
...you presume too much. I have watched Fox News and felt dumber for it. I sometimes read articles from Huffington, and less frequently the Daily Kos. Do you? Or do you just read or watch sources you agree with? But you're right, if you believe Fox News is fair and balanced I doubt we can agree on much of anything.
But just for the record, I read from sources all around the world. The tool I use most often is Google News to find articles and videos. I personalize it to track some specific topics. It gives me the opportunity to get several different perspectives from a variety of sources.
I'll try Google News and see what I think. As for Fox, the best show to watch is Bret Baier. After he delivers the news, there is a 4 person panel from all political sides to discuss key issues. Just try it a few times!
Never seen his show. Since you asked so nicely, I'll give him a chance. :) That's on at 2pm our time? Is it repeated later?
As a favor to me in return, would you look at this page http://www.foxnews.com/specialreport/index.html and tell what story there is on a progressive rather than conservative topic? Or even, what story gives a fair representation of progressive views on the topics?
Well, I think all the stories are on both sides! Some shows, like Glen Beck, are 100% Conservative, but others, like Bret Baier especially, and many others, are very good about giving opinions on the subjects that are from both sides. That's why they call it fair & balanced. The news is just the news, and it can be delivered any way anyone wants to, honestly, or dishonestly, by leaving things out and by adding things that aren't true. That's why I like Fox...I will get opinions from the other side, and sometimes they make sense to me and sometimes they make my blood boil. That's the kind of news we need...not just one-sided. Glen Beck scares me to death (but he is very smart and a patriot), and O'Reilly really gets me PO'd pretty often. On Bret Baier, it's pretty serene, but sometimes the liberals talking get me going a little, but sometimes they make perfect sense, and believe it or not, many times both sides agree! I also really like Greta VanSustern. Yes, since you will try Bret Baier, I will try Google News. And yes, Bret Baier does repeat several times a day. We alway DVR it, so not sure what other times besides 2 and midnight. Maybe 8pm?