Why Doesn't Dave Wilson Get a Hobby?

For a man who disapproves so strongly of homosexuals, Dave Wilson sure spends a lot of time worrying about their affairs. Wilson has lead efforts to deny benefits for City of Houston homosexual employees, created a committee to ban same sex or unmarried couple's benefits, and, most recently, distributing a whopping 35,000 fliers voicing his opposition to mayoral hopeful, Annise Parker because she is a lesbian. I wonder if he still has time to go to church so he can tell God about all the "good" he is doing.

Wilson States,"Is this the image Houston wants to portray?" Well, it's about time Houston portrayed an image other than oil refineries, crime and, if Wilson had his way, bigotry.
I grew up in one of the many suburbs in Houston, and from my experience, change isn't something firmly grasped by the hands of many of it's citizens.

Wilson claims that "Just because Annise Parker is a lesbian doesn't qualify her to be mayor of Houston," but in what way would that disqualify her? Perhaps he fears Houston's skyline will be painted in rainbow colors and doused in glitter.

Of course, everyone has the right to their opinions and beliefs no matter how unjust they may appear. Wilson fears ("fears" being the operative word) the affects of homosexuality. His two gay uncles both died of AIDS, and that may have some bearing on his anxieties towards the gay and lesbian community.

Nonetheless, unwarranted spreading of hate propaganda and claims that "...homosexual behavior, to any society that has embraced it, has led to the extinction of that society," are just absurd notions. Perhaps the people of Houston recognize the absurdity and hopefully regard it when deciding if they side with or against Annise Parker. Perhaps the people of Houston will decide their opinions on values of merit. Why must candidates or elections be decided upon race, sexual preference, age, religion or gender? It's as if there is a checklist you must pass before you are even regarded by your political merits.

Parker may very well become a "poster child" for a gay and lesbian movement towards politics. I say, good for her. There is a large gay and lesbian community that is just as much a part of Houston and it's culture as Bible-beating super-conservatives.

Dave Wilson may not have the type of mind you can change or even open, but as a straight, semi-christian man myself, I say, "What is to fear, realistically?" You can't be changed or converted unless you want to, and if your convictions are so strong, then they wouldn't waiver in the presence of something new or different.

The article that hector wrote about convicts getting H1N1 shots brought up some good points, but on the whole I disagree with the article.

Firstly, pregnant women need the vaccination, period. If they happen to be incarcerated makes no difference, but to say that all convicts get preference because there are many pregnant women inmates would be wrong. The elderly, pregnant women, and children need the vaccine first without a doubt.

Another point I discovered was hinted at, but never reached it's destination. Convicts cannot just go out and receive the shot if they so choose. Yes I feel this is a valid point. But if that was to justify giving preferential allotments to inmates it would prevent citizens who have chosen to respectfully regard the laws from doing the same. If there is such a limited amount to be given you cannot prevent an un-incarcirated individual from receiving the shot by giving it to someone who is in jail. You just don't punish the innocent for the gain of the guilty.

Which brings another point to mind. I do believe it is unsafe for prison guards and prisoners who will be released to not be vaccinated, of course. Thus reducing the risk for people associated with the prison system as well as the rest of society who comes in contact with them.

Basically, I understand the view of the article but couldn't disagree more, respectfully. The statements made do ask a good question but do not find the right answer. Prisoners should not be denied the shot all together . But rather receive rationing for the average number of at risk individuals, those that work in the prison system and those being released. But if a healthy rapist gets the sot before a 6 month pregnant women who still hasn't received hers, tat would be wholy unjustified, unsafe, and unconscious of the rights and privileges that morality and law abiding earns you.

Another Brick

A press release from the office of Gov.Rick Perry ob October 31st,2009 illustrated an urgent threat to Texas. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has enlisted the town of Presidio,TX as a proverbial dumping ground for the nation's illegal aliens.
The Alien Transfer and Exit program may very well be detrimental to our state's resources and security. While I agree,vehemently that the illegal alien problem in thee state as well as the nation needs to be solved, this notion of transferring all I.A.s to Texas does not take into mind the effects on our state. Our border security can not handle the amount of illegal aliens crossing into Texas successfully as it is. While becoming the port of exit for the entire U.S. we also simultaneously become an overwhelming port of entry. This strategy forces strain on local law enforcement and will prove costly to taxpayers. The idea may ease the burden on other states but only at the cost of increasing ours.
This brings to mind the though of taking responsibility for driving an inebriated friend home. But instead of taking them home, driving them to another friend's home and leaving them to finish the job, unconcerned with the inconvenience placed on an undeserving party.
ATEP was put into affect November !st of this year, leaving us to pick up the bill and brunt of the consequences. This only reassures the fact that a cure for the I.A. epidemic must be discovered and administered correctly. To solve our problem we must first resolve the underlying issue, because passing the buck just will not cut it.