[Durham INC] INC-list Digest, Vol 81, Issue 14

Tue Sep 13 12:47:14 EDT 2011

Christine,

It is implicitly insulting when you suggest that one group be singled 
out for denial of full civil rights in the state constitution. At least 
it is insulting to members of that group. You are implicitly saying: 
this group of people is not entitled to the full spectrum of civil 
rights accorded to citizens by the US & state constitutions. If you want 
to belong to a church that does not recognize gay marriage as a 
sacrament--by all means do so. If you want to put the rights on any 
group of fellow citizens and human beings up for vote by referendum, 
that is an implicit denial of their rights and humanities. On my part, I 
feel insulted by a proposal to amend the constitution that essentially 
says: "You, gay and lesbian person, are implicitly less of a person, 
less worthy of full civil rights, less "created equal" than the rest of 
us citizens." And we're going to vote on it just to rub your nose in it.

As a citizen, I should be entitled to access the full spectrum of rights 
this state & country accords its citizens. ALL of them.
Since when is it American to put the rights of citizens up to popular 
vote? That is why we have a Bill of Rights--to state our national 
commitment to the equality and full civil rights of all Americans. At 
least that's what they taught in the civics, social studies, and 
constitution classes when I was in school.

Kelly

On 9/13/11 12:00 PM, inc-list-request at rtpnet.org wrote:
> Send INC-list mailing list submissions to
> 	inc-list at rtpnet.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	inc-list-request at rtpnet.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	inc-list-owner at rtpnet.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of INC-list digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>     1. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (Christine Chamberlain)
>     2. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (Will Wilson)
>     3. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (bragin at nc.rr.com)
>     4. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (Christine Chamberlain)
>     5. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (Erin Kennedy)
>     6. Re:  A Model of Positive Advocacy (Richard Ford)
>     7. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (Christine Chamberlain)
>     8. Re:  Fwd: Support the marriage amendment (Joshua Allen)
>     9.  -Unity- (Darius Mercedes Little)
>    10. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (Deborah Christie)
>    11. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (Matt Dudek)
>    12. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (Matt Dudek)
>    13. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (bragin at nc.rr.com)
>    14. Re:  -Unity- (Christine Chamberlain)
>    15. Re:  -Unity- (Darius Mercedes Little)
>    16. Re:  -Unity- (chloe palenchar)
>    17. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (Christine Chamberlain)
>    18.  (#2)Re:  -Unity- (Darius Mercedes Little)
>    19. Re:  Support the marriage amendment (bragin at nc.rr.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 05:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Christine Chamberlain<christinebbd at yahoo.com>
> To: "INC-list at rtpnet.org"<INC-list at rtpnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] Support the marriage amendment
> Message-ID:
> 	<1315918314.53899.YahooMailNeo at web38306.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> This is it in a nutshell, tolerance doesn't have to mean agreement.?
>
> And because I beware of those who hold opinions as though they were possessions, I've come to the conclusion that scientific evidence is the answer to many questions regarding homosexuality and heterosexuality.? And the evidence just isn't there to support the homosexual belief they are 'born that way'.
> ?
> Thank you for the opportunity to state my belief.? I'm sorry it doesn't agree with yours, I do support you as a friend, neighbor and I wish you well.
>
>
> Christine Chamberlain
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Reyn Bowman<reynbowman at gmail.com>
> To: Christine Chamberlain<christinebbd at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "INC-list at rtpnet.org"<INC-list at rtpnet.org>
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 8:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] Support the marriage amendment
>
>
> Dig a little deeper and you'll find plenty of objective studies - beware also of those who hold opinions as though they were possessions - you'll find fairness and acceptance not in exclusion or anti-pluralism but in tolerance of differences.
>
> Tolerance doesn't have to mean agreement?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:<http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20110913/38fce614/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 09:06:24 -0400
> From: Will Wilson<willwilsn at gmail.com>
> To: Christine Chamberlain<christinebbd at yahoo.com>,
> 	"INC-list at rtpnet.org"<INC-list at rtpnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [Durham INC] Support the marriage amendment
> Message-ID:<4E6F5550.20405 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> First, science doesn't address social values or civil rights. Whether
> being gay or lesbian is some combination of genetics and environment is
> irrelevant: Black/white marriage laws were overturned because they were
> wrong, not because black/white marriages were founded on choice or genes.
>
> Second, the appeal to "sound science" on this issue amuses me. This same
> group denies the human basis to climate change and the reality of
> evolution through natural selection. This topic has a clear scientific
> underpinning? Seriously?
>
> Again, this is an issue designed to split Democrats and energize
> conservative Republicans. Let's focus on jobs and social justice.
>
> Will Wilson
>
>
> On 9/13/2011 8:51 AM, Christine Chamberlain wrote:
>> And because I beware of those who hold opinions as though they were
>> possessions, I've come to the conclusion that scientific evidence is
>> the answer to many questions regarding homosexuality and
>> heterosexuality.  And the evidence just isn't there to support the
>> homosexual belief they are 'born that way'.

-- 
Dr. Kelly Jarrett
Associate Director, Duke Islamic Studies Center and
Duke University Middle East Studies Center
2204 Erwin Road, Box 90402
Duke University
Durham, NC 27708

919/ 668-2143
kjj1 at duke.edu
http://www.jhfc.duke.edu/disc/
http://www.jhfc.duke.edu/mideast/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20110913/a11cd646/attachment.html>