How do you feel about the "Family Values" "Anti-Gay" ballot? (El Paso: lawyer, construction)

[Twain Shakespeare]

If this has been talked about already, I apologize, but I couldn't find it.
How do I feel about it? I am ANGRY ANGRY ANGRY ANGRY ANGRY !!!!!

[mistabinks]

they should have had a lawyer properly draft the letter in the first place. now its going to be boggled down in litigation. i am not sure where i stand on the issue. there was a great voter turnout. i can't say i'm bothered if the public showed up and voted.

[fakeguy]

Oh boy this could get ugly...

I think it was more religious views than wording or anything else. El Paso is too religious for this and since most of the voters are older it had no chance.

[mistabinks]

Originally Posted by fakeguy

Oh boy this could get ugly...

I think it was more religious views than wording or anything else. El Paso is too religious for this and since most of the voters are older it had no chance.

No, in this instance, the wording was a major issue. Regardless of their views on gay benefits, you had all current and retired city employees voting becaue on the impact of retired employees and not voting based on the issue. The wording was a major problem.

There was a big spike in voters. This time it wasn't only the older voters who made the decisions for El Paso. That is a good sign.

Again, I am not sure where I stand exactly on the issue. But if there is a large voter turnout, and they vote against extending benefits to gay partners, is there anything wrong with that? I may not like it. You may not like it. But majority rules. This wasn't a case of five thousand people showing up to vote and making the decision for all of El Paso. There was a great turnout.

[Twain Shakespeare]

Thank you for this mornings feed back. I will not be posting my own sentiments until I can control my anger, and I do not want this to get ugly. (Thanx for the caution, Mista blink.
If someone thinks I should be Killed, a quick URBOD (U R Better Off Dead) will suffice. Let's keep it polite. I apologize in advance if I offend.

[fakeguy]

Originally Posted by mistabinks

No, in this instance, the wording was a major issue. Regardless of their views on gay benefits, you had all current and retired city employees voting becaue on the impact of retired employees and not voting based on the issue. The wording was a major problem.

There was a big spike in voters. This time it wasn't only the older voters who made the decisions for El Paso. That is a good sign.

Again, I am not sure where I stand exactly on the issue. But if there is a large voter turnout, and they vote against extending benefits to gay partners, is there anything wrong with that? I may not like it. You may not like it. But majority rules. This wasn't a case of five thousand people showing up to vote and making the decision for all of El Paso. There was a great turnout.

I agree with you on the wording the could have and should have done it better but that wasn't the only problem IMO. Guess what the people I saw on interviews said was their reason? Im not sure on the turn out numbers but IMO even if they changed the wording I don't think it would have a chance.





*Highlighted IMO before this gets crazy...

[mistabinks]

I agree with both your points fake guy.

[1979]

Could someone elaborate more on what this ballot question was..?

[alov0303]

Originally Posted by 1979

Could someone elaborate more on what this ballot question was..?

Proposition: Benefits controversy hits ballot - El Paso Times

[alov0303]

Originally Posted by fakeguy

I agree with you on the wording the could have and should have done it better but that wasn't the only problem IMO. Guess what the people I saw on interviews said was their reason? Im not sure on the turn out numbers but IMO even if they changed the wording I don't think it would have a chance.





*Highlighted IMO before this gets crazy...

wording or not - it was intended to block benefits to same sex domestic partners which is wrong. Also, if we want El Paso to be considered as something other than a second rate city, then we had better not vote like it is. So lets tabulate our national exposure for the year:

Positive:
- Fort Bliss growing - added jobs, but no real industry created.
- Gov. contracts for highway construction - again temporary gain
- Second safest city - though everyone I speak with outside El Paso never heard of this statistic but asks about Juarez. Example, Sun Bowl 2010. Juarez Scaring Some OU Fans Away From Sun Bowl; CBS Sports Ranks Game High - News Story - KVIA El Paso


Negative:
- bullets from Juarez on american soil - though we remain second safest city
- homosexual couple refused service at a restaurant
- only "anti-gay" ballot during the election El Paso voters rescind domestic partner benefits for city workers
- totablbeauty.com Ugliest Men in America - we made light of it here: https://www.city-data.com/forum/el-pa...-nation-2.html but the stats were: "nearly 15 percent of the dudes...have less than a 9th grade education... The city also suffers from a notably high rate of obesity, 32 percent are in below average health and 30 percent do not exercise regularly..." The Paso Del Norte Health Organization (PDNHO) agrees“33% of El Pasoans were overweight vs. 28.6% of the Texas population and that “over half of El Pasoans 45-64 year olds were overweight.”

These are some of the facts I think of when we critisize op's for asking critical questions when they are scared of moving here or just curious about our city in light of national media exposure. My personal opinon, our image isn't completely manufactured - we all take part in it both in our daily lives (education, health, treatment of others, ...) and our public lives (this proposition, how we drive, litter, ...). And, we could do better. Sorry for the rant - this one got to me.