Here it is. Go here and see exactly what the petition looks like that Dr. Angela McCaskill signed. Reading it says that this recent bill (now law) on allowing same sex marriage (Civil Marriage Protection Act) should be voted on by the people of Maryland rather than allow the Maryland legislature to craft the bill and pass it and for the governor to sign it to make it a law. There is nothing anti-gay about it but a support to let democracy take place. It is suggesting that democracy ought to be the route to let the registered voters of Maryland to either approve or reject this (the then) proposed bill (Civil Marriage Protection Act) at the next general election. If it passes, then it goes through the proper legislative channels to be voted on, passed and eventually becomes a law. If the voters reject the bill, they have in place an alternative language to define natural marriage.
Seeing the petition in its full form makes Gallaudet University's appearance of "neutrality" even worse seeing that prejudice and acts of discrimination and bullying are more likely when they put Dr. McCaskill on administrative leave thus violating her civil rights and her first Amendment Right. Whoever began this witch hunt had nothing more than the desire to see Dr. McCaskill go. And if it came from one of the staff or professors at Gallaudet University then that person probably had issues with McCaskill herself in the beginning otherwise a witch hunt against her wouldn't have happened. Maybe it's this person who started the witch hunt ought to be fired for conduct unbecoming?
Hat tip: "Candy"
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
No one is questioning her legal right to sign the petition. The issue relates to her poor judgment, and as a result, the difficulty people will have trusting her in that position.
More ofuscation, huh.
More like plain ol' witch hunt with an ulterior motive rather than seeking a more civil discourse to learn more about the situation.
The poor judgement is actually on MJ and K's own.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-gallaudet-officer-20121016,0,6217907.story
MJ oppresses a lot of deaf people. MJ rejects deaf people who are mainstreamed or small d or have hearing parents. MJ have been bullied many deaf people. She is narcissism. She does not empower ASL. She hurts ASL! She needs to stop revenging many deaf people who are innocent!
Holy mackerel-- now it's campus politics devolving into a potentially expensive lawsuit against Gallaudet. What could MJ have been thinking?
Apparently NOT about the consequences of her actions.
A funny thing happened over at the Gallaudet University Facebook page where Ridor was pissed and said he was the one that provided the petition, blah blah blah. He also seemed to be insulted that I asked him to read it (In reality I suggested people read it). I thought that was silly, it kind of seemed like he wanted credit for posting the copy of the actual petition, so that people can see for themselves what the petition looked like, ya know?
Jeffery Stroud alerted me and provided a link to the pdf of the sample petition that was used for that particular marriage equality law. I did not see Ridor posting such petition at all.
Today, I realized he was referring to a copy of a petition that SHOWED McCaskill's name.
I wasn't interested in that. I was more interested in the wording, the context of the petition itself. Did the petition carry any wording that reflects that is is against marriage equality? No. It does not.
Clearly Ridor was very upset about all of this and did not understand that the petition that Jeffery Stroud shared with me is not the kind he shared with who knows and who knows where he shared it with.
There was never any question that McCaskill signed that petition, the thing that many misunderstood was that they thought she signed a petition that was against marriage equality when in fact she did not. She signed a petition that asks voters if they want that law to decided on a ballot this November 6th.
Candy, lemme get this straight--
R- got upset because he didn't understand that "the petition that Jeffrey Stroud shared with me is not the kind he shared with who knows and who knows where he shared it with".
Am I presuming or what, that it was Ridor who circulated the petition with McCaskill's signature and who shared it with certain individuals whom he knew had a certain political GLBT-slanted influence at Gally?
Or are you still referring to Stroud?
Pls clarify, thanks.
Ann_C
Post a Comment