NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/soc/motss/54299

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-30 | 1.8 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!lynx!unmvax!bbx!scott
From: [e-mail] (Scott Amspoker)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Attention Skiers Boycotting Colorado
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 31 Dec 92 02:29:16 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: BASIS International, Ltd., Albuquerque NM USA
Lines: 27

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Walter Smith) writes:
>[e-mail] (Mike Reaser) writes:
>> So Colorado can take away rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution,
>> but no one is supposed to be concerned?  No one from outside the
>> state is supposed to show any displeasure?  Get real...
>
>Get real yourself and look at this from a practical standpoint, instead
>of an emotional, reactionary one.  If #2 takes away rights
>guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, it will be ruled unconstitutional
>and be overturned.  People here were upset when it passed, and I think
>if all the boycott hype hadn't come along, more energy would have
>been spent on the overturn instead of on the boycott.  With any
>luck, the whole thing will be ruled uncomstitutional, and the
>boycott will have been an unnessesary (and harmful, since it
>polarizes people) misuse of energy.

There is a lot more at stake in this boycott than getting Colorado to
repeal CO2.  The forces behind CO2 are going to try the same crap
in other states.  This is not just a Colorado thing and those of
us in other states are mad as hell that Colorado paved the way for
a nationwide attack on the rights of homosexual people.

--
Scott Amspoker                       |
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM |  Too bad ignorance isn't really
                                     |  bliss.  Then it could be outlawed.
[e-mail]                  |