An apology of sorts....and hopefully an olive branch.

[Liberal Veteran]

First let me say that I apologize for letting this get personal and saying some things that may have bruised some feelings. People say things or imply things they can be considered dismissive, if not hurtful when expressing themselves on matters that they feel passionate about or are being told they should be passionate about. I strayed from dispassionate reason several times and crossed a line that I should not have crossed. For that I apologize. It is not the kind of person I want to be or the type of example I want to set. You can chalk it up to an excess of defensiveness, belief in my own position, or hubris.

I haven't altered my opinion in this debate and I stand by that. I have never been one to bow to peer pressure. I didn't do it as gay youth growing up in a Southern Baptist church and that hasn't changed except that I am perhaps more aware of the feelings of those around me and try to make to hold true to myself while acknowledging the very real feelings of others. I can accept and acknowledge that some people are extremely upset, perhaps a great deal more than I truly can truly relate to, but I don't feel the imperative to alter my own feelings on this matter.

I was going to take a break from the board and let this matter blow over, but I'm going to stick around because I don't feel my own voice should be co-opted through silence. I don't like the Warren pick, but as I have said before, I don't feel passionately enough about this particular issue to do much more than express my disappointment and hope that where my passion does lie, the things that are I feel are important, that this is the worst we get from the incoming administration that I support as a human, an American, a gay man, and as a Democrat.

In the final analysis, we are keepers of our own conscience and I can't really apologize that I don't feel the same sense of betrayal or outrage that many feel. I can apologize for not being more sympathetic to differences of opinion even if I cannot bring myself to be empathetic.

What we should remember is that we are all individuals and we should respect that while we are natural allies, we are not necessarily monolithic or speak with one voice on all issues. We are supposed to be better than that. The tone of this discussion has often veered from expressing our opinions to denigrating one another. I've been right in the thick of that.

What I would like to say is that is I have learned to trust my opinion and my conscience and it doesn't make me any less gay or a supporter of full equality for gays. It most certainly doesn't make me an apologist for hatred or bigotry or self-loathing or uncomfortable in who I am as a human being.

None of us should be going to a place where we denigrate each other without due cause. Words can hurt and they can't be unwritten or unuttered, so I make this promise to you to be more careful about my own words and not take a matter further than it should be among people who are allies in the same cause if not necessarily the individual battles. It's a matter of mutual respect for one other and we should be more inclined to give it to each other even though we aren't always in 100% agreement.

I guess the bottom line is that we should respect that we can have differences of feelings and opinions without resorting to casting aspersions on each other's motives. Words aimed at fellow DU'ers like childishness, hissy fit, homophobia, unfeeling, or implications that others are less devoted to the overreaching agenda that brought all of us here, don't do much for us except cause hurt feelings and bruise the spirit.

[AtomicKitten]

1. A letter in the SF Chronicle today.

* I agree with the disgrace of not joining the UN declaration to decriminalize homosexuality. Obama can remedy this and I believe he will.

There are bigger issues than Rick Warren
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/20/ED8M14RAUR.DTL

Editor - I'm gay and I really don't care about the choice of Rev. Rick Warren to lead an inaugural invocation. Was it from a LGBT political perspective a tone-deaf choice? Yes. Is it the end-of-the-world for gay people everywhere? No way. This guy will be leading a prayer, for crying out loud, not writing policy. So can we cut the histrionics.

While I appreciate the operatic perspective which some people can bring to a dialogue, this is an inauguration for all Americans. All. Evangelicals included.

What more gravely concerns me is the United States' refusal to sign a United Nations declaration to decriminalize homosexuality. When 70 countries consider me a criminal, that concerns me. If I am executed for being my natural homosexual self, then, trust me, that is the end of the world.

LGBT people are often seen as "the other." We do it in reverse. We lost Proposition 8, in part, because we did not reach out to those perceived to be "not like us." We also represented ourselves on-camera only with palatable (STR8) stand-in surrogates. Without showing who we are, it is hard to erase our past social invisibility. We're not real to a lot of people. Therefore, our real need for equal civil rights needs to be explained. Ignorance does not erase itself.

I agree that it is time for gay people to stand up. I also agree that it is time for gay people to reach out beyond our comfort zones. But I think it's important we keep our eye on the prize.

CARL BECKER

San Francisco

On edit: K&R. I enjoyed you sharing some introspection.

[AZBlue]

5. This is a MUCH bigger issue, IMO.

Thank you for bringing this up.

[AtomicKitten]

6. It's huge

Junior broke every agreement and treaty we had. Clinton couldn't even get Congress to look at the Kyoto Protocol.

This UN drive will save lives globally. It is critical America jump on this and lead.

There is much work to do. Katrina and Darfur. For a start.

[AtomicKitten]

2. kicked

because an apology should be read

[KittyWampus]

3. family members know exactly what buttons to push to piss each other off

[AZBlue]

4. K&R

Thank you for sharing your insight.