Why Pasadena Has Such A Bad Name
god this is such an embarassment for me; Talton is the representative of my home town district.
"An amendment by state Rep. Robert E. Talton, R-Pasadena, requires CPS to ask potential foster care parents if they are homosexual. If an applicant, answers "yes," then they are to be immediately disqualified from consideration.
Talton, who has failed in previous sessions to get a bill on the foster care applicant/homosexual issue passed, said he decided this session to try an amendment instead.
"Those of us that are in the Christian movement believe it's a learned behavior," he said of homosexuality in explaining his reasons for the measure. After several minutes of debate, Talton's amendment passed, 81-58."
And now, Johnny participates in the democractic process!
Dear Rep. Talton,
I will say at the onset that I am disappointed that you represent my district in Pasadena. Of course, people are entitled to disagree, and in tracking your political positions on issues of relevance to me, the gulf between your views and mine could never be bridged. Still, despite your intensely conservative views, I was shocked to discover that you had sponsored an amendment to prohibit gays from being foster parents. This sort of discrimination (not to mention numskullery) reeks of an ignorant, prejudiced, and intolerant majority bent upon placing its ''Christian'' morals on a society founded upon respect for individual rights and self-worth - whether they be Christian or otherwise. I find it interesting that it is exactly this type of behavior that convinced me to take my graduate-school-educated self out of the backwaters of Pasadena, yet another casualty in the area's brain-drain . . .
In addition, I am confident that you would quickly discover that homosexuality as a ''learned'' behavior is at best, intensely disputed, and at-worst flatly rejected, in bona-fide academic circles. Thus, it is difficult for me to believe that you genuinely approached this issue with an obejctive frame of mind, instead of resorting to conservative, ''fag-hating'' rags masquerading as legitimate academic scholarship. Nevertheless, I hope this was not the case.
And lastly, one of the key principles of a democractic society is the accountability of the representatives to the people. Thus, it would be useful to me if you could cite any research proving that homosexual foster parents result in homosexual foster children that might possibly justify your position on this issue. Or alternatively, research that shows foster children, raised throughout their formative years in group homes with inadequate parental love, guidance, and encouragement, fare better in life, both emotionally and professionally, than those who are placed with homosexual foster parents willing to give them the affections they deserve. Because the root of this issue is not, ''Are the foster parents gay?'', as you seem to believe it is, but ''would this child be better served in a more secure, caring environment?''
Sincerely,
Johnny So
"An amendment by state Rep. Robert E. Talton, R-Pasadena, requires CPS to ask potential foster care parents if they are homosexual. If an applicant, answers "yes," then they are to be immediately disqualified from consideration.
Talton, who has failed in previous sessions to get a bill on the foster care applicant/homosexual issue passed, said he decided this session to try an amendment instead.
"Those of us that are in the Christian movement believe it's a learned behavior," he said of homosexuality in explaining his reasons for the measure. After several minutes of debate, Talton's amendment passed, 81-58."
And now, Johnny participates in the democractic process!
Dear Rep. Talton,
I will say at the onset that I am disappointed that you represent my district in Pasadena. Of course, people are entitled to disagree, and in tracking your political positions on issues of relevance to me, the gulf between your views and mine could never be bridged. Still, despite your intensely conservative views, I was shocked to discover that you had sponsored an amendment to prohibit gays from being foster parents. This sort of discrimination (not to mention numskullery) reeks of an ignorant, prejudiced, and intolerant majority bent upon placing its ''Christian'' morals on a society founded upon respect for individual rights and self-worth - whether they be Christian or otherwise. I find it interesting that it is exactly this type of behavior that convinced me to take my graduate-school-educated self out of the backwaters of Pasadena, yet another casualty in the area's brain-drain . . .
In addition, I am confident that you would quickly discover that homosexuality as a ''learned'' behavior is at best, intensely disputed, and at-worst flatly rejected, in bona-fide academic circles. Thus, it is difficult for me to believe that you genuinely approached this issue with an obejctive frame of mind, instead of resorting to conservative, ''fag-hating'' rags masquerading as legitimate academic scholarship. Nevertheless, I hope this was not the case.
And lastly, one of the key principles of a democractic society is the accountability of the representatives to the people. Thus, it would be useful to me if you could cite any research proving that homosexual foster parents result in homosexual foster children that might possibly justify your position on this issue. Or alternatively, research that shows foster children, raised throughout their formative years in group homes with inadequate parental love, guidance, and encouragement, fare better in life, both emotionally and professionally, than those who are placed with homosexual foster parents willing to give them the affections they deserve. Because the root of this issue is not, ''Are the foster parents gay?'', as you seem to believe it is, but ''would this child be better served in a more secure, caring environment?''
Sincerely,
Johnny So