Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 64
  1. #1
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/pol...ch-4745674.php

    Councilwoman Elisa Chan defended anti-gay remarks made during a secretly recorded staff meeting, saying at a news conference Tuesday that she won't change her “values or beliefs for political gain or survival.”

    The statements mark Chan's first public appearance since San Antonio Express-News Columnist Brian Chasnoff reported last week that a former aide recorded the May 21 meeting, in which Chan expressed her unvarnished views on sexuality, from calling it “disgusting” to saying that gays shouldn't be allowed to adopt because it could confuse children and lead to them being “corrupt.”

    Cloaked in an argument about the cons utionality of her statements, Chan said she had an expectation she and her staff would be free to express their personal opinions and thoughts during staff meetings.

    “Political correctness will not win this day; standing firm as an individual in service to the whole community does,” she said. “I stand strong in my First Amendment right to freedom of speech and our right to privacy.”

    She said her confidentiality was violated when then-staffer James Stevens, 28, surrep iously recorded the staff meeting, where the District 9 councilwoman and her staff strategized on ways to oppose updating the city's nondiscrimination ordinance.

    “I know that many people find the comments made in the meeting offensive, but again, it was a confidential meeting set in the privacy of my office where none of us are supposed to worry about what we say,” she said. “These meetings have been and always will be a free-speech zone.”
    Good for Chan I say. While I do not agree with her, I disagree far more with the thought police. If she wants to be a bigot then so be it and trying to act like San Antonio or the rest of Texas is not chock full of bigots through a sort of window dressing does not help.

  2. #2
    Veteran scroteface's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Post Count
    730
    Ill say whatever the I want, you don't have to agree with it. The 2nd amendment and freedom of speech are both non negotiable, you try to with them and the militia marches. We can argue until we're blue in the face about healthcare, taxes, regulations etc but there are a few things that are an automatic call to arms. Try to charge me for free speech and you'll have a harder task on your hands than just coming to arrest me, you'll have to be prepared to fight to the death. No to gun grabbing, no to the thought police, and DEATH TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER!!!

  3. #3
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    the opponents of the ordinance are bigots.

    the city council is elected, and as representatives of ALL the people, is entrusted to make its own rules for membership.

    If the ordinance bans people from the council who are bigots, what's the problem?

    The bigoted people who are banned from the City Council have not had either their hateful speech nor their the hateful religion infringed or banned, and "thought policing" is another strawman. Everybody's free to think what they want, even the bigoted assholes banned from being on the City Council.

    Chan is a bigot, but she sneaked in before any such ordinance was passed. Up to her district to re-elect her, or not.

  4. #4
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    the city council is elected, and as representatives of ALL the people, is entrusted to make its own rules for membership.

    If the ordinance bans people from the council who are bigots, what's the problem?
    This is bull . They are elected by their district to represent just that. All you have here is made up ideological nonsense. If people elect a bigot then that bigots views very much so have a place in their disctricts representation. Repressing minority opinions no matter how repugnant is the issue. If not for that then the likes of you -and me-- would have been snuffed out long ago.

  5. #5
    Veteran scott's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Post Count
    20,555
    She's right.

    Unfortunately, she fails to grasp that the 1st Amendment also protects the right of people to criticize & lambast her over it.

    Even more unfortunate is that the offended parties are not upset that she exercised her 1st Amendment rights, they are offended at her beliefs (which is also within their right).

    Of course, the folks most likely to run to a 1st Amendment Defense are also the ones who believe there is a War on Christmas and feign outrage whenever a store says "Happy Holidays".

  6. #6
    Veteran scott's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Post Count
    20,555
    But ironically, Chan's remarks make the case for why updating the City's non-discrimination policy is important. Potential or current city employees should not be discriminated against because someone thinks their personal lifestyle choices are "disgusting".

  7. #7
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    39,469
    Ill say whatever the I want, you don't have to agree with it. The 2nd amendment and freedom of speech are both non negotiable, you try to with them and the militia marches. We can argue until we're blue in the face about healthcare, taxes, regulations etc but there are a few things that are an automatic call to arms. Try to charge me for free speech and you'll have a harder task on your hands than just coming to arrest me, you'll have to be prepared to fight to the death. No to gun grabbing, no to the thought police, and DEATH TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER!!!
    You have an underground bunker don't you?

  8. #8
    Homer 2centsworth's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    8,677
    This is bull . They are elected by their district to represent just that. All you have here is made up ideological nonsense. If people elect a bigot then that bigots views very much so have a place in their disctricts representation. Repressing minority opinions no matter how repugnant is the issue. If not for that then the likes of you -and me-- would have been snuffed out long ago.
    Respect!

  9. #9
    Veteran
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    8,957
    Councilwoman from District 9?

  10. #10
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    This is bull . They are elected by their district to represent just that. All you have here is made up ideological nonsense. If people elect a bigot then that bigots views very much so have a place in their disctricts representation. Repressing minority opinions no matter how repugnant is the issue. If not for that then the likes of you -and me-- would have been snuffed out long ago.
    You STILL get it all wrong.

    No suppression of bigoted speech, actions, no suppression of religion (unless you're tea bagger, Repug, right wing-ding and want to and do suppress Muslims just because of their religion).

    This is a democratically elected GOVERNMENT of ALL the PEOPLE making a rule that bigots (eg, bigots who justify their Christ-like hate and bigotry with the Bible) are disqualified from a (SECULAR) GOVT position of rule-making authority, the SA city council.

  11. #11
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    44,134
    I live in district 9. I was in 8 but when DOJ redrew the map last year they stuck me in 9. I guess 8 had too many white republicans.
    Last edited by CosmicCowboy; 08-22-2013 at 06:54 AM.

  12. #12
    Spur-taaaa TDMVPDPOY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Post Count
    41,384
    lol chan, chinese i assume?

    fkn dog commie fkn ho from china coming to america to enjoy the freedom but want to deny the freedom to others...i see what they are doing here

  13. #13
    2nd Verse Same as the 1st Oh, Gee!!'s Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Post Count
    8,869
    free speech means never having to say "I'm sorry."

  14. #14
    Veteran
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    8,957
    Chinee undastand movement

  15. #15
    Veteran Big Empty's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    2,314
    lol chan, chinese i assume?

    fkn dog commie fkn ho from china coming to america to enjoy the freedom but want to deny the freedom to others...i see what they are doing here
    I know thats right. If anyone is gonna pass judgement on our american blacks gays mexicans or whites you better be a gah damn full blooded american. she can take her ass back to japan or china or whereever they come from and make some damn egg rolls. my first amendment right to think so.

  16. #16
    Still Hates Small Ball Spurminator's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Post Count
    37,751
    Privacy is not a 1st Amendment Right. There may be an argument to be had about whether this should have been leaked, but it's not a 1st Amendment argument until she's arrested.

  17. #17
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    free speech means never having to say "I'm sorry."
    Free speech means you never have to say your sorry when you don't mean it.

  18. #18
    Veteran
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    8,957
    Shouldn't you say you're sorry or apologize when you mean it and/or to make the person that you hurt feel better?

  19. #19
    e^(i*pi) + 1 = 0 MannyIsGod's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    57,943
    http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/pol...ch-4745674.php



    Good for Chan I say. While I do not agree with her, I disagree far more with the thought police. If she wants to be a bigot then so be it and trying to act like San Antonio or the rest of Texas is not chock full of bigots through a sort of window dressing does not help.
    Who's saying that its not protected speech? Who's asking for her to be thrown in jail? She's free to say what she wants but that doesn't mean saying bigoted things - especially when in a public office where your job is to protect the rights of your cons uents - doesn't carry consequences. It calls into question how fit you are to be a public service. At one time in the past I was an employee of Elisa Chan. I'll just say that there's no way in she's in this job to serve. She's in it to get hers and if that means running over her sexual cons uents then that's what she's going to do.

    The whole freedom of speech defense is a misdirection. No one is suggesting she can't say what she want.

  20. #20
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    Who's saying that its not protected speech? Who's asking for her to be thrown in jail? She's free to say what she wants but that doesn't mean saying bigoted things - especially when in a public office where your job is to protect the rights of your cons uents - doesn't carry consequences. It calls into question how fit you are to be a public service. At one time in the past I was an employee of Elisa Chan. I'll just say that there's no way in she's in this job to serve. She's in it to get hers and if that means running over her sexual cons uents then that's what she's going to do.

    The whole freedom of speech defense is a misdirection. No one is suggesting she can't say what she want.
    They are trying to ban people saying anti- sexual comments in the council chambers.

    I just want to be clear that I think phobia is stupid, baseless and instead based on supers ion. At the same time, I find the thought police to be even more reprehensible. Pretending that people like that do not exist nor that their representatives think that way does not solve the problem. You cannot just legislate away human thought. If anything, pretending like it is not there serves to hide the problem which serves to perpetuate it.

  21. #21
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    "They are trying to ban people saying anti- sexual comments in the council chambers."

    no, the CC wants to ban bigots from being on the CC



  22. #22
    Veteran
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    8,957
    Is phobia the fear and/or hatred of sexuality? If you are phobic, does that mean you are afraid of gay people or just hate them or both? Banning bigots from a city council is a stupid law and a joke because people will lie about their feelings and thoughts. You can't ban that . In America, you can be gay but at the same time don't expect people to be jumping up and down cheering for you and your gayness.

  23. #23
    Veteran scott's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Post Count
    20,555
    They are trying to ban people saying anti- sexual comments in the council chambers.

    I just want to be clear that I think phobia is stupid, baseless and instead based on supers ion. At the same time, I find the thought police to be even more reprehensible. Pretending that people like that do not exist nor that their representatives think that way does not solve the problem. You cannot just legislate away human thought. If anything, pretending like it is not there serves to hide the problem which serves to perpetuate it.
    "They are trying to ban people saying anti- sexual comments in the council chambers."

    no, the CC wants to ban bigots from being on the CC


    Actually, they are trying to update the city's hiring policy to include sexual preference as a protected class.

    Some Christian groups are claiming this will effectively ban Christians (actually, one even said "Conservatives") from being on Council because they won't be allowed to follow the Lord's will and continue their discrimination against gays.

  24. #24
    Veteran scott's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Post Count
    20,555
    http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/loc...ce-4746685.php

    Branch argues that banning discrimination against gay people would in turn unfairly discriminate against people of faith.
    If I can't discriminate against others, then I am being discriminated against!!!

  25. #25
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    "won't be allowed to follow the Lord's will"



    that's ed up, but Bible-thumping will you up.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •