Subscribe
Shop Local
Magazine
Gas Prices
Today's Poll!Springfield council tables ordinance changes
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (AP) — Springfield’s city council has voted to appoint a task force to resolve issues between supporters and opponents of a proposal to add gender identity and sexual orientation to an anti-discrimination ordinance.
The council had been expected to vote Monday on whether to prohibit discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations based on sexual orientation and gender identity or to put the proposal to a public vote. Instead, it voted 7-2 to postpone action on the ordinance and appoint the task force.
The issue had drawn passionate debate for weeks, with hundreds attending the council’s Aug. 13 meeting and another 150 signed up to speak on Monday.
Supporters and opponents said the delay is a mixed victory, The Springfield News-Leader reported (http://sgfnow.co/PLm8tR ).
Stephanie Perkins, deputy director of PROMO, part of a national network of sexual orientation and gender identity advocacy organizations, said the delay was better than putting the issue to a public vote, where it would likely be defeated.
“It’s discouraging that there will be a time period when people won’t be protected,” Perkins said. “There was something the City Council could have done to protect some of its citizens, but we’re looking forward to a civil dialogue.”
The Rev. Mark Kiser, president of Reclaiming Missouri for Christ, noted that the council appeared ready to approve the ordinance last month but delayed action indefinitely after religious opposition emerged.
“It was a huge victory on Monday, Aug. 27th,” said Kiser. “But there is a great chance that this is going to come up again, so we’ll have to be ready to do this again.”
Opponents had already vowed to gather petitions to repeal the ordinance if it was passed, and some said Monday they wouldn’t support the ordinance in any form.
Live Free Springfield said in a news release that it was “encouraged” by the council’s new direction, saying the move seemed to be influenced by “the impressive response we in opposition have shown in solidarity against this ordinance.”
Kelly Johnson, a member of the Mayor’s Commission on Human Rights and Community Relations, said the sides had reached a stalemate.
“We have some hope for potential dialogue,” Johnson said. “We have room for negotiation and discussion.”
———
Information from: Springfield News-Leader, http://www.news-leader.com
Marry Me
Comments
jpfelix 8 months, 4 weeks ago
So the righteous religious zealots believe it is good to discriminate? In what 3rd world country is this City of Springfield located?
tonto_goldberg 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Missouri; specifically Southwest Missouri.
jcguy25 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Inappropriate behavior according to whom? You?
bertd 8 months, 4 weeks ago
I am a Christian, one who is also a Civil Libertarian. All adults should be free to make choices how to live their lives, free from government intrusion. That includes both gays, Christians, Muslims, etc. Gays are not willing to accept being allowed to make choices for them they want government to force me to accept their lifestyle. They are going to keep pushing politicians until I no longer have the freedom to express my views that the gay lifestyle is not in line with Christian views. Gays cry out for tolerance, but only when it is tolerance of their views, they certainly exhibit no tolerance for my point of view.
spelchek 8 months, 4 weeks ago
Do as they say, not as they do.
tonto_goldberg 8 months, 4 weeks ago
It is time for you to explain some things to us all, since you seem so firm in your understanding of them.
Did any gay person ever confront you and tell you that your point of view is not to be tolerated? I mean you personally, not some television or movie character.
Why do you expect to be able to tell everyone else how they should live?
Did a homosexual or lesbian person ever force you into living their "lifestyle", as you like to call it?
Why do you think your religious beliefs entitle you to force everyone else to live in a way you can approve of?
Why is it so hard to just let someone else live their own life in their own way?
Is your faith so puny that you can't tolerate someone who doesn't share it?
Well?
connor 8 months, 4 weeks ago
As a matter of fact I have been witness to and a victim of a couple of your points. I have had the misfortune to work with more than a few gay couples, all women, and they would routinely spit out vile remarks to the heterosexual women about how they "needed a man" and were unable to perform things for themselves. They verbally attacked the more religious Christian women for their "ancient religion of hate" quite often.
These couples would routinely turn on male co-workers and attempt to get them fired by making up minor infractions and every time someone said anything back to them they would run to HR with a complaint. claiming they had been singled out because of their sexual preference.
They never actually got anyone fired because HR knew what was going on but they also never got in trouble themselves because HR was afraid of them.
If anything it was the best argument I ever saw for allowing gay couples some form of recognized "marriage" because then they would have been split up as a company policy. Of course I am sure gay couples would be exempt from the mundane rules associated with marriage if they ever get it. You know to help reduce the years of oppression and all that they went through.
tonto_goldberg 8 months, 3 weeks ago
The problems you describe are real but if you had actually read my comment you would have used a different first sentence. You and I are writing about entirely different types of problems associated with gay persons living and working in a straight world.
I am also grateful that I do not work where you do. Your HR department is reacting to problems but seems clueless about the nature of the problems. This could be due to inadequate pre-employment screening or the lack of a coherent company policy against harrassment and retaliation.
bluesfan13 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Sounds a lot like the behavior of many "normal" office employees I worked with. People are mean, selfish creatures when they either have power over you, or are jealous of what you have. Their actions have nothing to do with them being gay, or trying to "force their lifestyle" on you, they were just mean petty people.
JMO 8 months, 3 weeks ago
I agree with you bluesfan13. I think gay or straight, these two would have still be itches-bey. And I think such behaviour runs with minority status, whether it be race, sex, age or whatever. I've seen management reluctant to do anything to a problem employee because they were afraid they'd play the race card. Here they were afraid they'd play the gay card. Thankfully, those people are the minority of the minorities.
jcguy25 8 months, 3 weeks ago
So on your same line of thinking, the 14th amendment is forcing a white supremacist business owner to do business with other races of people?
cinkisses 8 months, 4 weeks ago
I have never heard an advoacate for equal rights for homosexuals claim that they want the government to tell you that you have to accept their lifestyle. You are free to not accept or believe anything that you want. I havn't heard one person picketing to make all marriages same sex. Turn your cheek and look at it from their point of view, if you were told you were not allowed to marry someone that you loved, because other people had a different point of view, you would be livid and in the same position that they are. Dicrimination is wrong regardless of what you hold as your persaonl and religious beliefs. Preach from the rooftops if you think that it is wrong, no one is going to stop you.
JMO 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Sorry...I read down a bit further and realized I had asked the same question Bluesfan did.
tonto_goldberg 8 months, 3 weeks ago
You aren't a civil libertarian if you want to use government power to enforce your religious code on other people. It's really that simple.
spelchek 8 months, 4 weeks ago
"Why is it so hard to just let someone else live their own life in their own way? " -- I believe that's the point to they're trying to make. It goes for both sides of the argument. You seem to be validating bertd's comment.
tonto_goldberg 8 months, 4 weeks ago
Here's what bertd posted:
" Gays are not willing to accept being allowed to make choices for them they want government to force me to accept their lifestyle. They are going to keep pushing politicians until I no longer have the freedom to express my views that the gay lifestyle is not in line with Christian views. Gays cry out for tolerance, but only when it is tolerance of their views, they certainly exhibit no tolerance for my point of view. "
I am asking if any of that has ever really happened to him. I could ask you the same, but I did not.
soxfan 8 months, 4 weeks ago
so you want me to show respect the way you have sex--why?
don l
tonto_goldberg 8 months, 4 weeks ago
Reasonable people don't want to know anything about how you or anyone else has sex. At least you are not a fan of that dreaded C-word team.
muleman 8 months, 4 weeks ago
What you do in your bedroom is your business, meaning I dont want to hear about it, read about it, or be asked / told to accept it
Sequoia 8 months, 3 weeks ago
You wouldn't be "told to accept it" if gay people had equal rights. Then you wouldn't hear anything about it.
Quit whining about tolerance. The issue is not tolerance, but using the power of the state to punish or discriminate against gays on the basis of moral belief.
Maybe there are gays who don't "tolerate" your anti-gay views... but no gay person is attempting to use the power of the state to discriminate against you or remove legal protections. Anti-gay people will always be able to believe and say what they want. Sure, some other will say anti-gay views are ignorant, but private criticism is not the same as government discrimination.
Gays may ask you to see things their way. Anti-gays are trying to employ the power of the state to force their view. That's the difference.
Good grief. Only about 3 percent of the population is gay. Just let them get married and have equal rights. Then you won't have to spend one more minute thinking about what those men are doing together. You won't have to think about it at all.
You can just banish all those icky gay thoughts from your pure little mind, muleman:
slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/04/homophobic_maybe_you_re_gay_the_new_york_times_on_a_new_study_of_secret_sexuality_.html
bluesfan13 8 months, 3 weeks ago
So (for example) you can not rent to someone because they act like a thug, not because they're black, but can also not rent to someone who has a homosexual lifestyle just because you don't like gay people? And that's equal rights?
Sequoia 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Allowing gays to have equal rights (the same marriage rights and protections against discrimination that we all have) is not "forcing" you to "accpet" anything. Gay rights just means the government is getting out of the way. You don't have to "accept" it. You just can't use the government to order society the way you want it.
I don't "accept" gangsta rap, reality television, or people who shuffle their feet when they walk. But neither do I use the power of the government to stop them. Sometimes I complain, sometimes I just rise above it. But I don't go crying to the government to protect me from behavior I find objectionable. Not everyone does things you like. Deal with it. Quit whining for the government to protect your precious little beliefs. Are so fragile they can't stand a gay wedding? Why can't you defend your own beliefs? Why do you need to hide behind the legs of Daddy Government? Oh, Daddy, protect me from the scary gays!
Well guess what? Gays aren't going away. They'll just get louder till they get their rights. Let them have equal rights, and we can all chill and let this go.
Let's move on.
bluesfan13 8 months, 3 weeks ago
So you do believe that landlords, business owners, etc. should be able to not do business with blacks, hispanics, Jews, Muslims, etc?
Sequoia 8 months, 3 weeks ago
So you agree gays should have the freedom to marry, even though you don't always like the results, because that is the nature of freedom and is preferable to the alternative?
Grace, you and your church are free to discriminate. The government is not.
jcguy25 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Graceful, just answer the question posed to you from bluesfan. It is a simple yes or no question.
muleman 8 months, 3 weeks ago
What goes on in your bedroom is your business, meaning I dont want to hear about it, read about it, or be told / asked to accept it. That includes why there are 10 cars parked in front of your house every Saturday night and clothes scattered all over your yard every Sunday morning. Or why you buy baby oil by the gallon and keep a big dog and a pony too. And how two blue eyed people have a brown eyed child and another one has orential features. Or how many sex toys are in your nightstand or how many dirty movies you own. As I posted in the beginning, I really dont want to know anything about it. My post never mentioned gays, it applies to everyone.
TickledPink 8 months, 3 weeks ago
So blacks had equal rights when they couldn't marry a white person? Seriously people, replace the word GAY with the word BLACK in all this. You don't have to like it, you don't have to approve of it, but you do have to deal with it. Just as the Civil Rights movement ensured all this for black people, so will this movement ensure it for gay people. Make no mistake, this will happen. It's only a matter of time. Soon you people will be looked upon just as the racists from that time were. With disdain, disgust and possibly a little pity.
BTW Grace - do you realize how many of your posts start with the word "no"? You're a very negative person. I'm sad for you.
JMO 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Sadly, I actually know people who don't approve of interracial marriage. Granted, at this point the ones I know are all quite old so I likely won't know them long, but they're out there. No one says they have to approve of interracial marriage, they simply have to accept that it is legal. Why is it that gay marriage is different? Can any person here explain why allowing gay marriage is forcing the approved view on the people when allowing interracial marriage is not?
I know people who would gladly refuse to do business with blacks or Jews or Muslims. They aren't allowed to do that. Why is it different to be able to refuse gay people?
You insist that being gay is a choice and a "behavior" as opposed to nature. I don't get that. I do not "choose" to be heterosexual - I simply AM. I have no attraction to other women at all. The only way you could "choose" to be gay is if you were bisexual and you decide to limit yourself to same sex relationships. I mean, really? Did you choose to be straight?
Laws regarding discrimination aren't there to make you "accept" a minority group. They are there to prevent them from being refused legal rights, and it applies to all. People can't be refused service for being white, Christian males either.
JCLifer 8 months, 3 weeks ago
I know people who are against interracial marriage, but they are happy to show you their labradoodle dog. Illogical at best.
TickledPink 8 months, 3 weeks ago
The government is doing the will of the people.
THIS is a majority: abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/strong-support-for-gay-marriage-now-exceeds-strong-opposition/
THIS is a majority: w w w.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57442311/polls-on-gay-marriage-not-yet-reflected-in-votes/
This IS the will of the people: w w w.factcheck.org/2012/05/do-most-americans-agree-with-romney-on-gay-marriage/
No one is asking you to attend a wedding between two men or two women. They are telling you (the collective "you") that you are no longer going to deny people basic human rights and dignity just because you don't like it or your religion tells you it's wrong.
BubbaD 8 months, 3 weeks ago
You have no evidence those polls are skewed. You reject them out of hand because they disagree with your pov. Laughable.
BubbaD 8 months, 3 weeks ago
That is no basis for predicting the accuracy of these polls. So besides rejecting fact checkers you reject all polls?
BubbaD 8 months, 3 weeks ago
You wrote: "The evicence that the polls are skewed is the numerous elections that have gone the other way time and time again."
Past performance of some undetermined number and type of polls is no basis for predicting whether any other given poll is accurate. There are however, indeed, ways to gauge the accuracy of polls. You'd like to read that I think that there is no basis for predicting the accuracy of ANY poll. Just so you know, I don't believe that. In fact, the mathematical analysis of accuracy would be the basis for those qualifiers you see on larger polls such as: +- 3%.
You have not, and I suspect can not, specifically raise any of these issues you mention regarding the polls in question. You find it adequate to argue in the general but that is not proof nor is it persuasive.
John 8 months, 3 weeks ago
All polls are skewed, that is why there is a group of psychologists who specialize in polls, however, even they will tell you that ALL bias cannot be eliminated from a poll.
Everyone has a bias toward nearly everything. That bias comes out no matter how hard you might try to suppress it. So, essentially, Graceful is right on the money. The trick in understanding poll data is to know WHO wrote it, WHY it was written, WHO compiled the data, and WHO interpreted the data. Yep, all data has to be interpreted - - there is another source of bias (skewing)
spelchek 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Most gays are liberals (however I know a conservative homosexual), who don't like religion getting in the way of their lives it seems (don't get involved with my government but by God you'd better give me birth control via government mandate). Many comments on this board support my assumption. Isn't it a little hypocritical to vote for those who would take away religious liberties written into the Bill of Rights and then turn around and demand you be a part of that very group?
Sequoia 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Ha! Dude... gays don't need birth control. I don't think they care about that. That's hilarious. Remember: you're scared of gays on this thread. You're scared of libs on that other thread.
TickledPink 8 months, 3 weeks ago
No one is taking away religious liberties. You're free to be a Christian, go to church, pray in public, send your kids to parochial schools, etc. I'm free to be a Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Wiccan or Athiest. Your religious rights have nothing to do with my secular and civil rights. Keep YOUR church out of OUR government,
This is a good article. examiner.com/article/9-historic-quotes-that-show-religion-should-be-kept-out-of-public-schools
I realize it states schools in the title, but it applies to all areas of government.
jpfelix 8 months, 3 weeks ago
This is from someone else in another thread, but it is quite applicable here:
"I thinkl openness and inclusion on the part of everyone is needed. When there is exclusion, than folks naturally assume the worst of others."
lynnea1 8 months, 3 weeks ago
I believe Springfield's city council is ludicrous to even have had to think twice about this. Just 1 question needed to be asked... Is this regulation pertaining human beings? The resounding answer would obviously be YES! Problem solved. Noone should be denied housing or a place to live based on sexual orientation. Im not from Springfield, but Im wondering why this has even been brought up.
I do have a thought on something that TickledPink said and it often resounds around the US; she said, "Keep YOUR church out of OUR government". I believe that the founding fathers would have said it a little bit differently, given the Revolutionary War was so they could be free to worship as they wanted to, rather than the Church of England. I think they wouldve said, Freedom of State and Church, rather than the other way around. Then the statement would be, "keep your government out of my church". Profound, isnt it, how different it is just by switching the two words.....
John 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Actually, the founding fathers DID deal with the subject. They could not conceive of anyone NOT using their faith to frame their decisions (votes). Therefore, they dealt with religion in this manner. The GOV'T shall NOT be involved in your religion.
However, they (founding fathers) did NOT say, keep your religion out of your vote.
There are absolutely NO WORDS in the constitution saying or even intimating, "separationg of church and state."
connor 8 months, 3 weeks ago
This has predictably turned into another wall of liberal smear posts. Once again devolving into asking Grace if she believes in dirty air, starving children and hunting down Muslims for fun.
I can't speak for Grace or others but for me two points stand out.
I simply don't care who someone sleeps with or forms a relationship with. That is between them and our maker but I do feel the institution of marriage is a religious one that they are excluded from so they need to call it something else. Yet it isn't the legal right to a union that I back away from it is the constant and expensive social engineering that always follows any so called "equal rights" moves. Next it will be affirmative action for gay couples, then government assisted financing so they can have model homes to live in, then of course gay themed adoptions with all the attending government departments and agencies to go with them. A couple of Trillion later the numbers won't change so they will determine that yet more money needs to be spent.
American Liberals do not deal in equal rights they deal in massive amounts of wealth redistribution and huge government spending to attempt the ever illusive equal outcome on a mass scale.
Secondly business in itself can be very personal so depending on the circumstances a business owner or entrepreneur should be allowed to chose his or her own partner in the same way he or she is allowed to choose their own relationship. I realize you are trying to make an argument based on scare tactics by implying some store owner will refuse to sell a bag of peanuts to some Muslim fellow but your "rules" you would like to enforce never stop at that bag of peanuts.
jcguy25 8 months, 3 weeks ago
If marriage is a religious institution, then it should have no government related benefits. I.e. no breaks on taxes, no survivor benefits from government pensions, ss, etc. Get your marriage license from the church. Atheists are non religious, but still allowed to marry. Equal rights for gays will not create any additional government agencies, they would just be allowed to use those already in place. Religious views have no place in the argument for equal rights.
Sequoia 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Connor, you're saying you have no problem with gay marriage, but you have a problem with all sorts of things that aren't happening? Affirmative action? Financing? Government officials attending adoption ceremonies? What is a gay "themed" adoption anyway? Adoptions don't have "themes."
What in the world are you talking about? You're making all those things up. No one has ever proposed anything like this. Talk about scare tactics!
If a church wants to marry two gay people, the church has that right. If a church doesn't, the church has that right, too.
If the government gives benefits to some married couples, they should give those benefits to all. Marriage is a good thing, regardless of the gender of the couples.
Now, you can't criticize people for using "scare tactics," then base your argument on things that aren't happening, things that no one has proposed, things that exist only in your mind.
C'mon man. Is that argument the best you've got?
Your post is full of contradictions. A gay relationship is "between them and their maker," but it still apparently depends on how YOU "feel" about it.
You were right the first time. A gay marriage is between the couple and their maker.
Oh your poor feelings. Let me tell you something: It ain't about you or your feelings, bud.
connor 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Ahmmm. This whole discussion is about one municipal government and the actions they may or may not take regarding gay "Rights". So yes we are already talking about commissions, legislation, or money spent on the subject.
It isn't scare tactics it is plain fact it has happened before and we are still paying for it.
As for tax breaks etc. Give em a union with the same government benefits I care not. I only care what it is called. And BTW my taxes got much worse once I got married
JCLifer 8 months, 3 weeks ago
I think some of you folks need to watch this short video to gain a better understanding of the origins of our country:
youtu.be/dlfEdJNn15E
Sequoia 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Lifer, do you really buy Barton's hokum? He's a con artist who separates suckers from their money by telling them what they want to hear. He tells you that all your prejudices and anxieties are actually good and right and holy, and you pay him out the wazoo for it.
Don't be suckers, people.
Gay love and gay marriage is completely compatible with Christian teaching. There is absolutely no Christian teaching that condemns gay love or gay marriage. God is not man or woman. God is not gay or straight. We are all one in God. God doesn't divide us up like that.
Gay life is merely incompatible with Christianist politics.
Some people are confused about the difference between being a Christian and being a Christianist.
Don't get confused. Your soul depends on it.
Sequoia 8 months, 3 weeks ago
He's a snake-oil salesman. He tells you what you want to hear, and you pay him for it.
John 8 months, 3 weeks ago
You are welcome to your opinions, as are others, and, as am I. Yes, the Holy Bible, the very Word of God is absolutely against homosexual acts. You cannot divide the OT from the NT, Jesus Christ himself said that.
Now, if you want to be a homosexual, that is your right. If others want to be homosexual, that is their right. However, I would suggest that you NOT misquote nor purposefully misinterpret the Holy Bible just to make some kind of silly liberal-think.
Sequoia 8 months, 3 weeks ago
Using the teachings of Christ to justify discrimination and bigotry is wrong. If you don't like gay people, fine, but using Christ to justify your fear and anxiety is a serious theological error. It's heresy. You're on the wrong path, John.
Giving people the right to marry the person of their choosing is not "silly liberal-think." True conservatives actually believe that marriage and commitment are good for everyone. By asking the government to draw artificial distinctions between people, that's asking for more pointless government involvement in our lives, which is "silly liberal think" if you ask me.
You're all mixed up. Good luck to you.
dokeus6 8 months, 3 weeks ago
John acts if there is no one on the right side of the spectrum that is a homosexual.
I say what ever floats your boat but don't rock mine.
Auna 8 months, 3 weeks ago
If women's right to the vote, or civil rights laws had been put to a vote, they would've have been passed either. So...we should put ALL human rights issues to a public vote? Great idea. Here's the thing. The constitution and bill of rights states equal rights for all AND separates church and state. Get over it. We are human beings exactly like you. This law has NO bearing whatsoever on churches or private schools (who may be religious) therefore you are free within your beliefs to post signs outside decrying "Homos Be Gone" for all we care! You are free to your opinion, your right to hold a job regardless of your religious practices BECAUSE you live in a country that has amazing freedoms like the U.S. ALL we want is the right to be protected from bigots. Just like you are already protected from bigots who may hate which church you attend, or the color of your skin. That's it. Perhaps you should consider the fact that children are committing suicide at an alarming rate because of brutal bullying and that this protection may actually contribute to community standards being set that might save a child's life.
And for those of you who may have forgotten (I especially consider the last one relevant): "A new commandment that I give unto you, that you love one another" ~Jesus "He who is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone" ~Jesus "Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy" ~Jesus "Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God" ~Jesus "Blessed are those who have been persecuted for righteousness sake, for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven" ~Jesus
spelchek 8 months, 3 weeks ago
"AND separates church and state" -- Wrong. See governments assault on religious liberties via birth control via catholic church. Explain how that "separates" the two.
tonto_goldberg 8 months, 3 weeks ago
It's not a "separation" issue, and your choice of that word pushes the discussion in the wrong direction.
You are the one with the mistaken understanding of religious liberty. If you were a Hindu, your religion would forbid killing animals. Working in a slaughterhouse would be a bad career choice - but would you then try to give packinghouse employees the freedom to not kill animals?
Birth control is a very personal medical issue, not one to be decided by hyperventilating zealots and pandering politicians. How does using government power to enforce the teachings of one denomination improve religious liberty for US citizens? It does not. Rather, it forces all of us to observe your religion, and the use of that force is what the Constitution prohibits.
Paroquet 8 months, 3 weeks ago
I like very much my live & let be attitude. Forcing my way to live and believe is kind of anathema to myself. Gays getting married is no skin off my nose. People that would oppose such freedom aren't very Christ-like.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.