America - Take Note

While our fellow American's from the Gulf Coast area are trying to survive and the rest of America is stepping up to do what we do best in times of need, we all must ask the question -- What if something happened in our neighborhood that would require mass evacuation? After 9/11 detailed hearings were held by Congress and extensive investigations were had to uncover the breaking points in our national support infrastructure as well as provide recommendations to the White House on how to improve our systems. What has happened?

If this were a bio-terrorist attack on a town in the US that would require a similar level of evacuation, how many would die if our government's response would be as it has been in the affected areas of the Gulf Coast. In 2005 in one of the oldest, most historic cities in America, US citizens are dying and their bodies are not even being properly disposed of. Five days into this current disaster and we still have Americans stranded on rooftops in New Orleans with no water or food and no way to get to safety. Four days into the disaster and the head of the government's (FEMA) effort did not even know that there were tens of thousands of people stranded at the New Orleans convention center. Harry Connick Jr, CNN and other media outlets have been able to make their way into the bowels of the city, talk to the survivors and get their equipment there to film the situation yet the United States Government suggested that they couldn't get supplies to those who needed it because they couldn't move around the city.

Attribute it to race and poverty, call it unexpected consequences, call it what you may, but the bottom line is we've been let down and we're in danger. Our Government has said time and again that they are protecting us against terrorism and that we're safer today than we were before 9/11. A true test of this has happened this past week and we've failed. If what we've been told is true about our preparedness in the case of a significant terrorist attack, then the plans, systems, people and processes should have already been in place in New Orleans to save lives and protect our our fellow Americans.

Not only has our support and rescue infrastructure broken down, but our resources are drained. President Bush and Congress CONSCIOUSLY excluded funding for research and investment to protect and re-enforce the levees in New Orleans. Some people have suggested that the residents of New Orleans have to take some of the responsibility for not leaving earlier when they were advised of the hurricane coming. What this perspective ignores is the fact that more than a third of New Orleans citizens live well below the poverty line and have no means of transportation. How were these people supposed to pack up their belongings and leave? Again, where was the government? Blame the Mayor? How could he do more than he was able to when the Federal Government actually cut funding for the Army Corps of Engineers to maintain the levees in his city?

Tax Cuts, Privatization of Social Security, War on Terror, Office of Homeland Security -- can someone please tell me how these have made us a safer nation?

A Letter From A Vermont Mother

The following is a very strong and moving letter written by the mother of a gay son in Vermont........

"Many letters have been sent to the Valley News concerning the homosexual menace in Vermont. I am the mother of a gay son and I've taken enough from you good people. I'm tired of your foolish rhetoric about the "homosexual agenda" and your allegations that accepting homosexuality is the same thing as advocating sex with children. You are cruel and ignorant. You have been robbing me of the joys of motherhood ever since my children were tiny.

My firstborn son started suffering at the hands of the moral little thugs from your moral, upright families from the time he was in the first grade. He was physically and verbally abused from first grade straight through high school because he was perceived to be gay.

He never professed to be gay or had any association with anything gay, but he had the misfortune not to walk or have gestures like the other boys. He was called "fag" incessantly, starting when he was 6.

In high school, while your children were doing what kids that age should be doing, mine labored over a suicide note, drafting and redrafting it to be sure his family knew how much he loved them. My sobbing 17-year-old tore the heart out of me as he choked out that he just couldn't bear to continue living any longer, that he didn't want to be gay and that he couldn't face a life without dignity.

You have the audacity to talk about protecting families and children from the homosexual menace, while you yourselves tear apart families and drive children to despair. I don't know why my son is gay, but I do know that God didn't put him, and millions like him, on this Earth to give you someone to abuse. God gave you brains so that you could think, and it's about time you started doing that.

At the core of all your misguided beliefs is the belief that this could never happen to you, that there is some kind of subculture out there that people have chosen to join. The fact is that if it can happen to my family, it can happen to yours, and you won't get to choose. Whether it is genetic or whether something occurs during a critical time of fetal development, I don't know. I can only tell you with an absolute certainty that it is inborn.

If you want to tout your own morality, you'd best come up with something more substantive than your heterosexuality. You did nothing to earn it; it was given to you. If you disagree, I would be interested in hearing your story, because my own heterosexuality was a blessing I received with no effort whatsoever on my part. It is so woven into the very soul of me that nothing could ever change it. For those of you who reduce sexual orientation to a simple choice, a character issue, a bad habit or something that can be changed by a 10-step program, I'm puzzled. Are you saying that your own sexual orientation is nothing more than something you have chosen, that you could change it at will? If that's not the case, then why would you suggest that someone else can?

A popular theme in your letters is that Vermont has been infiltrated by outsiders. Both sides of my family have lived in Vermont for generations. I am heart and soul a Vermonter, so I'll thank you to stop saying that you are speaking for "true Vermonters."

You invoke the memory of the brave people who have fought on the battlefield for this great country, saying that they didn't give their lives so that the "homosexual agenda" could tear down the principles they died defending. My 83-year-old father fought in some of the most horrific battles of World War II, was wounded and awarded the Purple Heart.

He shakes his head in sadness at the life his grandson has had to live. He says he fought alongside homosexuals in those battles, that they did their part and bothered no one. One of his best friends in the service was gay, and he never knew it until the end, and when he did find out, it mattered not at all. That wasn't the measure of the man.

You religious folk just can't bear the thought that as my son emerges from the hell that was his childhood he might like to find a lifelong companion and have a measure of happiness. It offends your sensibilities that he should request the right to visit that companion in the hospital, to make medical decisions for him or to benefit from tax laws governing inheritance.

How dare he? you say. These outrageous requests would threaten the very existence of your family, would undermine the sanctity of marriage. You use religion to abdicate your responsibility to be thinking human beings. There are vast numbers of religious people who find your attitudes repugnant. God is not for the privileged majority, and God knows my son has committed no sin.

The deep-thinking author of a letter to the April 12 Valley News who lectures about homosexual sin and tells us about "those of us who have been blessed with the benefits of a religious upbringing" asks: "What ever happened to the idea of striving . . . to be better human beings than we are?"

Indeed, sir, what ever happened to that? "

HRC Press Release on Supreme Court Nominee

JUDGE ROBERTS THREATENS TO TIP THE COURT TO FAR RIGHT

Statement by Joe Solmonese, President, Human Rights Campaign

The rights and freedoms of millions of Americans are at stake as the Supreme Court hangs in the balance. President Bush nominated Judge John G. Roberts; now it’s the Senate’s and the American people’s turn to do their job. The delicate balance on the Supreme Court is in danger of breaking. If Roe v. Wade falls, so could equality for millions of Americans.
With the Roberts nomination, the right to privacy and the future of a fair-minded Court are in grave danger. Judge Roberts has disputed the right to privacy laid out in Roe v. Wade, and urged that the case be overruled. Reversing Roe could undermine fundamental rights to privacy and liberty that are the legal underpinning for the freedom of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans.
Judge Roberts has advocated for prayer in public schools and for weakening the wall between church and state. He should make clear whether or not he would distort religion for misuse as a proxy for discrimination. Americans deserve a justice who will uphold the separation of church and state.
The unique powers of the Supreme Court, including the power to revisit previous Supreme Court decisions, mean that Judge Roberts’ record should be subject to rigorous inspection. We will be working closely with our coalition partners to ensure that Judge Roberts gets a thorough vetting.
The Human Rights Campaign is the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender political organization with members throughout the country. It effectively lobbies Congress, provides campaign support and educates the public to ensure that LGBT Americans can be open, honest and safe at home, at work and in the community.

© 2005 The Human Rights Campaign. All rights reserved.Human Rights Campaign1640 Rhode Island Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036-3278Phone: 202/628-4160 TTY: 202/216-1572 Fax: 202/347-5323

www.hrc.org

Terry Shiavo and Congress Intervention - The Ultimate Irony

Throughout the past year, President Bush and most of the Republican Congress campaigned against "activist judges" imposing their moral beliefs on the American public and the "sanctity" of marriage. Now, they want to pass a law that puts Federal judges in the position of overriding the wishes of the spouse of a dying woman - Terri Schiavo. Ms. Schiavo has been on life support now for over 20 years, due primarily to human intervention through the application of man made life support systems. Forcing her continued sustenance through life support systems seems to be diometrically opposed to the "playing God" argument that so many try to make when debating this issue.

Additionally, while all of this debate is interesting, what about the "Sanctity" of marriage and the use of "activist" judges to push ones morality? Denying Terri Schiavo's husband the "right" to make decisions in the case of her incapacitation strikes at the very core of the sanctity afforded the institution of marriage. Furthermore, since the so called Christian moralists disagree with the husband's decision they now turn to the very branch of our government they've been complaining about for the past year -- the judiciary -- to intervene and make a decision that is fundamentally the responsibility of the individuals spouse. How come it's ok for the courts to intervene in this case but when the courts rule in favor of gay marriage they're accused of promoting their personal morality? I'm totally baffled over this one......