[Durham INC] INC War Funding & Gay Marriage Resolutions

Tue Jul 12 15:41:52 EDT 2011

This is a *state* constitutional amendment being put forth by the *NC* state
legislature which we are represented in by *local* representatives.  INC has
weighed in on issues going before the general assembly on many occasions.

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Darius Mercedes Little <
duke1law at netscape.net> wrote:

> Exactly - which is consistent with what I stated, for the record.  This is
> about a greater poloicy and procedure within INC; which I think it important
> to pin-down, as we seem to all be desirous of increasing involvement within
> the group to more neighborhoods.  As we continue to grow, more people will
> have more concerns.  This is the crux of my concern - big picture thinking.
> Thanks Bill.
>
> - DML
>
>  --------------------
> Darius M. Little
> Executive Business Consultant  and
> Strategic Marketing Analyst
> (c) 919-641-4124
> (web) www.linkedin.com/in/dariuslittle
>
> Manta Business Profile/Report:
> http://www.manta.com/c/mtlwj1m/little-s-business-consulting
>
>
> "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall
> receive." [Matt 21:22]
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TheOcean1 at aol.com
> To: duke1law at netscape.net; allen.joshua at gmail.com
> Cc: inc-list at durhaminc.org
> Sent: Tue, Jul 12, 2011 3:13 pm
> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] **INC War Funding & Gay Marriage Resolutions**
>
>  As I see it, the question is: Should INC only take up local issues, or
> are national issues also INC territory?
>
> While historically INC has kept its focus on local only issues, there
> really isn't anything in the by-laws that says we can't take on national or
> global issues, too.
>
> It's a good question.... for purposes of discussion, we should talk about
> that without the specific resolution on the table on top of it. Let's
> separate the discussion to the generally, should INC be involved in national
> issues, so that our thoughts on these two resolutions aren't mixed in.
>
> Just an idea,
>
> *Bill Anderson*
>
>  In a message dated 7/12/2011 12:36:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> duke1law at netscape.net writes:
>
> Dear Fellow  INC'ers:
>
> I hope all is well and that everyone is enjoying this weather.
>
> The purpose of this communication is to highlight my previously expressed
> concern as it relates to the resolution on "War Funding" dollars; which was
> presented to us at the last INC Meeting. Furthermore, I'd like to add that
> the new proposal which has been brought before us, from Duke Park --relating
> to a "Gay Marriage Resolution"-- lends more support to my original position
> that INC is not the appropriate venue for which to address a lot of these,
> social issues.
>
> First of all, let me begin by stating that my strong opposition to both of
> these resolutions is procedural.  While I personally do not endorse gay
> marriage, as a Christian who has his own areas that need constant improving,
> I don't cast stones, or stand in judgment of others. I leave the judgment as
> to the behavior of others, to God as my bible says all have fallen short and
> in life, we typically judge others rather firmly: based upon "what" they did
> (without looking at "why" they did it). Yet, when we, or someone we like, or
> care about, stands in judgment, we want others to understand "why" something
> happened, not to look at the act alone.  We're all inconsistent!  So, as a
> human, my job is to do my best, each day and be a blessing to others in the
> ways in which I am gifted.  Now, to the War dollars:  I, along with everyone
> else on earth, realize that the dollars going to support the War, could be
> utilized in our State Governments and trickled down to our local
> governments.  So, I'll firmly say I support ending the war and bringing our
> dollars home.
>
> Having said all of that, my opposition to both of these resolutions stems
> upon the fact that, as stated in my initial email:  I do not believe, based
> upon the Mission Statement of INC, as well as the Precedent which has been
> established by leadership, that we can remain consistent and fair in policy,
> by allowing eithr of these resolutions to be presented, and approved by our
> General Body.
>
> Some have expressed the accurate belief that 'War Dollars' (public tax
> dollars), as well as 'Gay Marriage' (Social Justice: I'm not going to say
> Civil Rights b/c I don't feel the framers of our Constitution were thinking
> of Gay Marriage when they were creating such tenants; but that's a
> discussion for dinner) are issues which affect "neighborhoods" due to the
> fact that they are popular stances, about which all individuals have an
> opinion.  I agree, they are issues worthy of discussion in any public,
> communal capacity.  However, the INC Mission Statement specifically
> expresses the following: * "Our mission is to promote the quality,
> stability and vitality of Durham's residential neighborhoods."*
> **
> Neither of these resolutions' passages will directly result in the specific
> addressing of matters which adversely affect the "quality, stability and
> vitality" of the Durham Neighborhoods we represent, nor the Durham Community
> at-large.
>
> I feel emotions ar high, at a time when a lot of National Issues are
> receiving limelight and that peole --with good intention-- are reaching for
> any, and every, avenue by which to have "their" most important issue,
> supported.  That is god.  It's called lobbying.  However, what seperates INC
> from every other social and political entity is the fact that we have not,
> historically, just jumped into every catfight.  We have addressed issues,
> successfully and aggressively, that directly, and in dramatic fashion,
> affect Neighborhoods in Durham.  Neither the War, nor Gay Marriage, are
> issues which are the bedrock of the sustainability of our Durham
> Neighborhoods.  They are good discussion material and teach us a lot,
> however, they are not consistent with what INV addresses.
>
> Now, before anyone feels I am belittling their efforts (I am not), let me
> add the fact that I have brought issues to INC which I felt were important,
> and have been told that they were more social issues, than Neighborhood
> Issues and as such, INC was not the avenue to address them.  These were
> issues related to Fayetteville Street, the African-American Community and
> needs, which I felt were important.  But INC did not address them.  I was
> not offended, and did not interpret these matters as a slight to my
> concern.  I realized that INC's effectiveness would dwindle, if it became
> viewed as an organization that entangled itself in every fist fight.  We've
> been effective because we are unique in our battle selection.  And our
> successes carry weight, in my opinion, only because we choose battles that
> are close to home, which we can have our collective hands on and fight,
> directly.  We leave the larger issues to our City Council, County
> Commissioners, School Board and Durham Legislative Delegation, to lobby; the
> Matricular Consular, for example.  Everything that occurs in Duham affects
> its Citizens, which in-turn, affects every neighborhood.  If we entertain
> and allow the passage of these resolutions, we will open a pandora's box and
> will not, be able to fairly, reject anything that comes before us hereafter.
>
> Now, if people are hellbent on addressing these issues through INC, I'd
> submit there must be a change in ByLaws and Mission Statement.  So, as I
> originally stated: this discussion, again, is procedural.  Is INC equipped
> to address these issues from a standpoint of being "effective" (because
> remember, we are seeking quality, stability and vitality in our battles for
> "Durham Neighborhoods")?  If so, then the Mission Statement needs to be
> changed, to be more broad.  And furthermore, we need to create a policy for
> which issues we entertain, and which we do not.
>
> Lastly, we need to address participation.  According to the Secretary and
> Treasurer, only seven (7) neighborhoods have paid their dues.  So, are we
> going to open the floodgates of issues we address to anything across the
> State and Globe, yet not enforce participation requirements?  I ask this
> because though I've been attending for quite a while now, consistently,
> until I paid dues, and got on the books officially, my participation was
> restricted.
>
> So these are my thoughts and I'd love feedback.  I thoroughly enjoy INC and
> the time we've all gotten to actually get to know one another.  I care about
> each of you, and consider you friends.  These are my opinions and they are
> heartfelt, so I hope that no individual was offended.  If so, I apologize.
> I am simply addressing what I feel are legitimate concerns.
>
>
> Yours,
>
> Darius Little
>
>
>
>
>  --------------------
> Darius M. Little
> Executive Business Consultant  and
> Strategic Marketing Analyst
> (c) 919-641-4124
> (web) www.linkedin.com/in/dariuslittle
>
> Manta Business Profile/Report:
> http://www.manta.com/c/mtlwj1m/little-s-business-consulting
>
>
> "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall
> receive." [Matt 21:22]
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua Allen <allen.joshua at gmail.com>
> To: TheOcean1 at aol.com
> Cc: inc-list at durhaminc.org
> Sent: Tue, Jul 12, 2011 11:35 am
> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] [dukepark] Duke park--requesting feedback on gay
> marriage resolution
>
> I'm glad someone is spearheading this!  I think the resolution is great.
>  It's so important to have many diverse voices heard on this issue.  It's
> awesome to have neighborhoods supporting the gay and lesbian community.
> When lawmakers hear only from the gays and lesbians, it just doesn't have
> the same effect as having neighborhoods and business owners rally with
> support as well. In NY, Republican business owners lobbied the state
> legislator in support of gay marriage, which recently passed there.   That
> made a big difference.
>
>  We will take this up at our next Watts Hillandale board meeting.  Thanks.
>
>
>  --Joshua Allen
> WHHNA President
>
>  On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:43 AM, <TheOcean1 at aol.com> wrote:
>
>> **
>> At the bottom is a resolution that is being test marketed on the Duke Park
>> listserv with unanimous results so far.
>> Please forward to your neighborhoods
>>
>> *Bill Anderson*
>>
>>  In a message dated 7/11/2011 10:44:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> dorseymt at mindspring.com writes:
>>
>>
>>   Support the resolution.****
>> ****
>> Mary on Hollywood****
>> ****
>>  ------------------------------
>>  *From:* **dukepark at yahoogroups.com** [mailto:**dukepark at yahoogroups.com*
>> *] *On Behalf Of ***readlaw at aol.com**
>> *Sent:* Monday, July 11, 2011 11:41 AM
>> *To:* **dukepark at yahoogroups.com**
>> *Subject:* [dukepark] ****Duke** **park****--requesting feedback on gay
>> marriage resolution****
>>  ****
>>   ****
>>   We will take this up at the August board meeting (Tuesday, August 9).
>> If you do not plan to attend and would like to express your position please
>> reply to board at dukepark.org.  ****
>>  ****
>>   Dan
>>
>> Daniel F. Read
>> President, ****Duke** **Park**** Neighborhood Association*
>> *****1424 Acadia St.**, **Durham** **NC** **27701****
>> **readlaw at aol.com** 919-688-0535 FAX 919-682-4955****
>>   ****
>>   In a message dated 7/11/2011 11:12:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> gary_jddurham at yahoo.com writes:****
>>
>>   ****
>>   Hello neighbors,****
>>  ****
>>  I, along with the help of some other neighbors, have drafted a
>> resolution to present to the INC regarding pending legislation that would
>> put an anti-marriage equality amendment to the state constitution on the
>> ballot in 2012.  The legislature will meet in September to consider this,
>> and it is important to show any of our state representitives or senators who
>> may be on the fence on this issue that ****Durham****'s neighborhoods
>> support its gay and lesbian residents.  As this resolution would have to be
>> approved by ****Duke** **Park**** as well as the other neighborhood
>> associations, I am presenting it to the listserv for approval or suggestions
>> for alterations.  It is important to indicate if you do or do not support
>> the resolution so that our representative can determine how to vote on our
>> behalf.  If anyone wishes to forward it to other neighborhood lists, that
>> would be great as I only subscribe to this one.  Hopefully if the resolution
>> has a favorable reception, we can bring it up for a vote at the next INC
>> meeting at the end of the month.  I'll attach and copy the resolution
>> below.  Thanks for your time and support.****
>>  ****
>>  Gary Rosche, W Knox****
>>  ****
>>  Whereas **Durham** has a tradition of being a progressive beacon in the
>> state of ****North Carolina****, ****
>> And whereas the neighborhood associations of ****Durham**** have always
>> served as incubators for the grassroots activism that has fueled that
>> progressive reputation, ****
>> And whereas our own elected officials have shown their commitment to
>> making Durham a welcoming community for gays and lesbians by passing
>> resolutions supporting marriage equality and providing  domestic partner
>> benefits to the employees of the City and the County of Durham,****
>> And whereas ****Durham**** is rightfully proud of its ability to embrace
>> diversity and champion equality for all,****
>> It is therefore resolved that the InterNeighborhood Council of Durham
>> (INC) supports the civil rights of its gay and lesbian neighbors, including
>> the right to marry, and opposes SB 106 and HB 777 which would place on the
>> ballot in 2012 a referendum to amend the North Carolina Constitution to
>> prohibit marriage, and prohibit the recognition of any other form of
>> domestic legal union, between people of the same gender.****
>> ****SB 106:
>> http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2011/Bills/Senate/PDF/S106v0.pdf****
>> HB 777:
>> http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions/2011/Bills/House/PDF/H777v0.pdf****
>>   ****
>>
>>     __._,_.___
>>  Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New
>> Topic
>> Messages in this topic (7)
>> Recent Activity:
>>
>>    - New Members 4
>>
>> Visit Your Group
>>  [image:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkbmRxMzRzBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI4MTg3MDYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDE2MDYxBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMzEwNDM4NjUw]
>> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
>>    .
>>
>> __,_._,___
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Durham INC Mailing List
>> list at durham-inc.org
>> http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
>>
>>
>
>
>
>   _______________________________________________
> Durham INC Mailing Listlist at durham-inc.orghttp://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Durham INC Mailing List
> list at durham-inc.org
> http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html
>
>

-- 
Joshua
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20110712/41029613/attachment-0001.html>