Letters: Benefits issue

Letters: Benefits issue

There are 48 comments on the El Paso Times story from Nov 9, 2010, titled Letters: Benefits issue. In it, El Paso Times reports that:

Tom Brown should be ashamed of himself, but of course, he's not. In his world, he is most likely proud of his disgusting accomplishment to strip the rights of 19 city employees, and their domestic partners, with the ballot proposition.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at El Paso Times.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Hmmm

El Paso, TX

#41 Jan 5, 2011
Sancho wrote:
I will be first in line to sign the petitions to recall all the council members that decide that the voters voice will be denied. What part of "by the people" don't they understand?
Sancho,

Maybe you should pay attention to politics in your own city. You can't vote here nor can you sign a petition. Seriously, ese ... Get a life!
Hmmm

El Paso, TX

#42 Jan 5, 2011
Jitney wrote:
This was never a benefits issue. It is about City Council imposing affirmation of homosexual behavior.
That's right Jitney, just like 80% of people support the repeal of DADT and Congress allowing homosexuals to serve in the military. Wake up and join the 21st century. Live like a caveman in the dark ages under a book that was written during the bronze age, or join the rest of us in the modern world!
ued

El Paso, TX

#43 Jan 5, 2011
Hmmm wrote:
<quoted text>
That's right Jitney, just like 80% of people support the repeal of DADT and Congress allowing homosexuals to serve in the military. Wake up and join the 21st century. Live like a caveman in the dark ages under a book that was written during the bronze age, or join the rest of us in the modern world!
Telling other people how to live is a bunch of BS. Who gave the "Rev" and "Father Rod" the power to regulate morality and scruples as they so desire.If this city can do this to anyone,they got way too much power.What else has God got in store for the people here in El Paso? You going to take my Harley away from me too? If some other country needs a constitution, give them ours, cause we, sure as hell, are not using ours.
We can read

United States

#44 Jan 5, 2011
El Pasoan wrote:
Sancho, the part of our system of government that you don't understand is that the very concept of "rights" is wrapped up with preventing the tyranny of the majority. Bravo, Susie! And thank heaven that we didn't following polling data or have elections to decide if "colored only" water fountains or "no Mexicans or dogs" signs were permissible in our city in the 1960s. Or, perhaps we should have put Don Haskins' decision to recruit and play black kids from the north to a referendum (and not AFTER we beat Kentucky and he became a genius and a hero, but a year or two earlier)?
Susie is not willing to enshrine bigotry into the City Charter, and for that she is to be applauded. I hope Beto, Steve, and the others share her vision and her guts.
This can be spun anyway you want. The reality is that the people voted, their vote should count. The equal rights proponents are trying to make this a gay rights issue. It isn't. Nor were we confused as to the wording or what we voted for. I am employed in the private sector, my significant other, same or opposite sex, does not qualify for benefits, unless we are legally married. This is not a homophobic viewpoint, simply a dose of reality. Why should taxpayers fund benefits for city employees that we ourselves are denied? Any elected official who would try to circumvent the will of the people should be recalled without hesitation.

“You'll love me!”

Since: Sep 10

I promise.

#45 Jan 5, 2011
We can read wrote:
<quoted text>This can be spun anyway you want. The reality is that the people voted, their vote should count. The equal rights proponents are trying to make this a gay rights issue. It isn't. Nor were we confused as to the wording or what we voted for. I am employed in the private sector, my significant other, same or opposite sex, does not qualify for benefits, unless we are legally married. This is not a homophobic viewpoint, simply a dose of reality. Why should taxpayers fund benefits for city employees that we ourselves are denied? Any elected official who would try to circumvent the will of the people should be recalled without hesitation.
It becomes a gay rights issue because gay people can't get married. If gay people could, they wouldn't need domestic partnerships. This was the only means that gay couples had for civil protections and benefits and you stole it.

The fine people of El Paso have once again upheld bigotry. Good job. I hope you're proud of yourselves. Sick.

Since: Jul 08

United States

#46 Jan 6, 2011
Hmmm wrote:
<quoted text>
That's right Jitney, just like 80% of people support the repeal of DADT and Congress allowing homosexuals to serve in the military. Wake up and join the 21st century. Live like a caveman in the dark ages under a book that was written during the bronze age, or join the rest of us in the modern world!
80% of what people, my friend?
We can read

United States

#47 Jan 6, 2011
Coy91 wrote:
<quoted text>
It becomes a gay rights issue because gay people can't get married. If gay people could, they wouldn't need domestic partnerships. This was the only means that gay couples had for civil protections and benefits and you stole it.
The fine people of El Paso have once again upheld bigotry. Good job. I hope you're proud of yourselves. Sick.
Gay people can't get married because that is the law of the land. I personally hope that changes some day, but until it does, we deal with what we have. That is where your fight should be. We are talking about city employees here, and right or wrong, the people have the right to decide where their tax money goes. The proponents have made this a gay issue, as well as some holier than thou opponents have made it an anti-gay issue. In reality, it is, as I said before, a financial issue, that any of us in the private sector deal with all the time. City employees should not be treated any differently.
Ella

El Paso, TX

#48 Jan 6, 2011
Each way I tried to look at it, it didn't make sense. Do all the domestic "partners" to include the heterosexual couples have benefits? Cause if so, I better start changing my attitude towards police officers huh? In case I get sick, just claim we're partners and wa-la!! I have health benefits! Awesome, thanks for the tip.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Canutillo Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
la tuna federal prison camp (Apr '06) Oct '17 Jonas 287
Vinton Music Thread (Dec '16) Jun '17 Musikologist 3
News Five arrested in school cheating indictments in... (Apr '16) May '17 Sniffable farts b... 15
News El Paso early voting for May 6 election dismal (Apr '17) Apr '17 uIDIOTRACEMAKEWOR... 2
News Woman charged with fraud in alleged Ariana Gran... (Oct '15) Apr '17 A fan 14
News Canutillo considers opposing low-income housing (Feb '17) Feb '17 butters_ 1
News Immigrants fear license checks (Nov '06) Aug '16 DC Dave 21

Canutillo Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Canutillo Mortgages