Ohio's homophobic bastard Secretary of State

The BBQ Pit
1

As many of you know, on Nov. 2, Ohio voters will be voting on Issue 1, a bill that goes way beyond opposing same-sex marriage, threatening many statewide and local protections of the rights of GLBT people, and also unmarried straight people.

I have to note here that even many Republicans (including our Governor and both state Senators) are opposed to this bill, although for purely economic reasons (they don’t want us, they just want our tax dollars).

Lately, we’ve been receiving pre-recorded messages from our Secretary of State, J. Kenneth Blackwell (who happens to be black), urging us to vote “yes” on issue 1. Since the message is pre-recorded (and originating in Virginia), there’s no way to ask the caller to stop calling. There’s no way to explain to the caller that as a gay man, I’m deeply offended by these calls. Urging me to vote against my own civil rights is the equivalent of burning a cross on a black family’s lawn, or painting swastikas on a Jewish headstone.

So in an effort to get him to stop this harrassment, I’m sending him the following letter:

*Secretary of State Blackwell,

I do not appreciate your incessant phone messages, urging the citizens of Ohio to vote “yes” on Issue 1, especially since, according to my caller ID, these messages originate in Virginia, not Ohio. And there is no way to respond to these messages to ask that they be stopped. This is offensive harrassment.

As a person of color, how would you like to receive phone messages urging you to vote against the civil rights of black people? How would you like members of another minority to campaign against your civil rights, and urging you to do the same?

Surely you must realize that as a civil servant, your salary is paid by ALL the people of Ohio, including hundreds of thousands of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people. And surely you must realize that GLBT people have a long history of fighting for YOUR civil rights. It’s sad and ironic that now the thanks we get is for you to campaign for us to be treated as second-class citizens.

It’s very probable that you would not be in office today, without several decades of hard work, dedication and sacrifice by all supporters of civil rights, including those of us in the GLBT community. And now you’re trampling on our civil rights, in order to further your own agenda of ignorance, fear and hatred.

Shame on you!

Because of your actions, I will do everything in my legal and ethical power to get you out of office.

Sincerely,
*

2

What the fuck does that have to with fucking anything?

3

You did read the OP? All of it?

4

I haven’t gotten any calls about Issue 1. But then, I haven’t gotten any calls about anything related to the election yet.

Maybe the callers just haven’t found my number yet.

5

Well did you read the rest of the post, or did you want to be the first to overreact to something that wasn’t there?

Panache, I think the letter is excellent. In addition to the Secretary of State, you might consider sending a copy to a local newspaper.

6

Let me elaborate, the color of a persons skin has fucked all to do with whatever opinion they choose to hold.

7

Let me elaborate further:

Should have been:

As a ** person ** how would you like to receive phone messages urging you to vote against the civil rights of black people? How would you like members of another minority to campaign against your civil rights, and urging you to do the same?

There is absolutely no need to bring race into this situation.

8

No you are wrong.
It has to show how the Secretary of State is asking the OP to vote against his own self interest.

That is like asking a black man to vote to re-instate slavery.

It is not like asking a white man to vote to re-instate slavery.

It is different and it must be stated.
Asking a Gay person to vote against gay rights is particularry galling the OP.

9

No, a person’t ethnicity **shouldn’t **be relevent, but in this case it very clearly is. I’ve been actively in support of civil rights of **all **people, for over 40 years, and now there’s a black man who is urging me to support a violation of my own rights. It matters.

10

Except that one would expect a member of a group that had to fight to gain it’s own civil rights would be able to sympathize with a group that is currently going through it’s own struggle, and wouldn’t be trying to shut them down.

In this case, Group A refers to black people and the civil rights movement, and group B refers to homosexuals.

Both groups share a commonality with in the groups themselves (skin colour, sexual preference), and between the groups (fighting for rights the majority already has).

11

This is a legitimate political issue. If your ire at these sorts of calls extends to all unsolicited political phone calls, I’m with you.

If it’s only “offensive harrassment” because you disagree with the message, and you’d support a phone campaign urging people to vote “No,” then I’m not with you.

12

And the nation breathes easier in knowing that Bricker is down with both sides of another issue.

13

How about if the ire simply extends to the naked bigotry implicit in the bill?

I’m all in favor of protecting the rights of citizens. I’m totally against stripping them away. How either of these goals are accomplished, or what methods their supporters use to promote them, are not really a concern of mine. Assuming, of course, that they aren’t breaking any laws in the process.

It’s a good letter, panache. Definetly send it to the newspaper; someone there might actually read it.

14

Also, should you set up a phone system to urge people to vote “no,” you’re not likely to call the homes of people whose very future depends upon gay people not having rights.

Not that I particularly approve of repeated automated political calls, but in this case I do, believe it or not, think that the side that wants people to have civil rights has the moral leg up over the side that doesn’t want people to have civil rights.

15

No. A vote of “No” is not a violation of anyone’s rights, but a vote of “Yes” is. Surely he realizes that many GLBT people are receiving these calls, and he’s urging us to vote to violate of our own rights.

16

The Bush campaign has a word for that. :wink:

17

And that’s HIS right. Either he has the First Amendment right to urge you to vote the way he wants by making unsolicited calls, or he doesn’t. He doesn’t get the right to make calls only when you approve of the content of the calls or the shade of his politics.

18

Which has what to do with the OP, exactly?

19

Sure, have all the ire you want at the content of the bill… just as long as you’re not suggesting that the right to make unsolicited political phone calls belongs only to one side of an issue.

The OP said of the phone call:

That reads like an indictment of the phone call itself, rather than just ire at its contents.

But it wasn’t certain - I could be interpreting it wrongly… which is why I said I was with the OP in one case, and not in the other.

The OP responded:

Again, the implication is that phone calls urging a vote of “No” would be acceptable, and only the “Yes” phone calls are unacceptable.

That’s not right. You either accept the right of EITHER SIDE to make phone calls, or you support ending all political phone calls.

20

He’s been all over the airwaves lately.
I just tune him out.
In case you were wondering, I’m voting no.