A FORUM FOR COMMUNITY ISSUES : Platform : Colorado Boycott: ‘Linking Consequences to Oppression’
ELIZABETH MARTINEZ: Los Angeles City Librarian
The American Library Assn. midwinter conference (was) scheduled for Denver at the end of this month. I think we were all anxious to go and participate. Now, we’ll have to find other ways (to do the work).
I know discrimination. I’ve spent most of my life dealing with it and anything we can do to eliminate it is an issue I’ll support. My ethnic background is Mexican-American. Also I’m a woman in a profession where most of the directors are men. I’ve never had a promotion that hasn’t been protested. My whole professional and personal life has been dedicated to including a lot of people and eliminating this evil stuff.
CECILIA V. ESTOLANO: President, Gay and Lesbian Latinos Unidos, environmental policy adviser to Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley
The action (by Los Angeles City Council restricting the city’s commerce with the state of Colorado) is important in linking real economic consequences to paranoid oppression. It’s not just the business that L.A. can bring. It sends a signal to other cities and other entities. For San Francisco to do it is one thing, but for L.A. to do it is another. It’s very important that we all pull together.
Economics matter. The power of the dollar is the most important thing in this country. It’s a similar argument to divestment. We still don’t do business with South Africa. We should feel the same way about places that discriminate based on sexual orientation.
ROBERT F. GENTRY: Laguna Beach city council member and associate dean of students at UC Irvine, sponsor of anti-Amendment 2 resolution
The gay and lesbian community is under attack. We are invisible. That invisibility gives permission to treat us differently than other oppressed groups. It needs to be treated no differently than apartheid.
For a city entity in California, there’s no other option. There is no other way that we, as a governmental body, can express our position about what is going on in Colorado than to pass resolutions and to take a stand economically.
MICHAEL WOO: Los Angeles City Council member, sponsor of boycott resolution
We aim to reverse this regressive and homophobic measure that was adopted by Colorado. Our dollars speak louder than words. The boycott of Arizona (because of the failure to implement) Martin Luther King holiday did result in a reversal of that regressive position.
ERIC WOOLERY: CPA, Anaheim
The state of Colorado had a valid initiative in which the people of Colorado decided homosexuals shouldn’t have special treatment. It’s none of the business of Laguna Beach, Los Angeles, the state of California or any prominent celebrity--unless they live in Colorado. It’s not our business to put leverage on Colorado for something that was put forward on a democratic basis. You don’t see Colorado boycotting California (because of the passage of the gay rights measure, AB101).
LOU SHELDON: Chairman of Traditional Values Coalition, a conservative public policy group based in Anaheim
The Los Angeles City Council has jumped on the bandwagon of political correctness by going on record as supporting the Colorado boycott. It is just this warfare called political correctness that the city council has engaged in. I just think it is a junior high school tit-for-tat.
The city of Los Angeles cannot force the citizens of L.A. to boycott the state of Colorado. But the politicians on the City Council can posture and pander in order to win favor with the homosexual activists and other politically correct so-called individuals from the Hollywood elite.
JAMES A. GRAVES: Managing editor, Diocese of Orange Bulletin
My problem is not with orientation. But I would disagree with the practice of that lifestyle. My concern is if homosexual marriage is on an equal footing with heterosexual marriage, that that will further erode the family unit, which is the building block of society. As the family disintegrates, so does society.
I didn’t see (the Colorado law) as a discriminatory measure, saying gay people were immoral or second-class citizens. I think it was saying that sexual orientation was not to be considered the same as being a woman or being the member of a specific ethnicity. So, I would disagree with Laguna Beach’s decision and Los Angeles’ decision. (But) I would disavow any sort gay bashing, or violence toward anybody whether you want to steal their wallets or whether you think they’re gay. I think that’s absolutely inappropriate.