Tell Senator Forrester to meet with his minority constituents or step aside

In light of Senator Forrester's refusal to meet with us, PFLAG and many African American constituents who have contacted me remain steadfast in our effort to reach out to the Senator. We would like to extend an invitation one more time to the Senator and ask him to join his minority constituents in a meeting or forum to discuss diversity and minority sensitivity. See the blog link on Pamshouseblend for the complete story. It's also in the Gaston Gazette.

I have also set up the following Facebook page: "Tell Senator Forrester to meet with minority constituents or step aside". I feel strongly that if the Senator can not meet with minority constituents and explain his recent comments than he needs to step aside and give some one else the opportunity to represent the people in his district. Part of the responsibility of being an elected official is to hear the concerns and needs of ALL your constituents even the ones you don't like, understand or agree with. Working for the people as a government employee is not a free enterprise position where you can pick and choose who you can do business with. We the people demand equal representation and access to our government, that includes the ability to meet with elected officials and seek accountability for their words and actions.

Furthermore the group, "Tell Senator Forrester to meet with minority constituents or step aside", is hosting a week long email and phone campaign to the Senators office. For more information please join the group on Facebook.

Martin Luther King stated, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to freedom everywhere". I speak for my self when I say that good people everywhere in Senator Forrester's district need to speak up and out against his bigoted comments and his refusal to meet with certain constituents. Silence on all sides of the human and political spectrum is an endorsement of his behavior. Let the African American community as well as the LGBT community know that you support them in their quest to, "Tell Senator Forrester to meet with minority constituents or step aside".

Comments

Jim Forrester is very approachable

If a constituent (or non-constituent) wants to talk to Dr. Forrester, all he or she has to do is show up at his office when he has a spare minute. He might not want to meet with a hostile group, but he seems always willing to talk for a few minutes when someone drops by. He is a genuinely nice guy, and if you don't come in with a chip on your shoulder you'll almost certainly enjoy your visit with him.

Now, Rep. David Price, OTOH, is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE to meet with. I'm his constituent, and I've been trying to get ten minutes with him for nearly a year. He absolutely, positively will not talk with me, under any circumstances. (Sen. Hagan is just as bad, but since she has 13x as many constituents it is more understandable.)

Approachable bigot

How do you square the comment "he is a genuinely nice guy" with his outrageous comments about politics, blacks and gays.

Forrester noted that he "is not against homosexuals." He said he has gay patients who see him in his medical practice "and I treat them like everyone else."

Not against homosexuals? Just against them having the same rights as everyone else? Not only is he a bigot, he's also a liar.

Nice guys don't hate, Mr. Life.

for shame

Dr. Forrester said nothing at all hateful. The false accusations of bigotry against him are just shameful dirty politics.

Forrester is a moderate/conservative, and he said that he's glad to see two of the most left-wing members of the NC Senate retire. Me too. So what?

If you said you hope he retires, I wouldn't say you were being hateful. That's just a political preference. But calling him a "bigot" is hateful. Nice guys don't hate, James.

Dr. Forrester is a good NC representative, but

There is is BIG difference between being a NC state representative vs. a U.S. Congressman with regard to contact information and availability. The office of David Price has been extremely available to most constituents and prioritizes the requests/contacts that are made there, which are significant.

Make contact via the internet/email/phone. You will realize a very concerned and available individual if you take the time to do that. Realize, please, that many, many people are doing that same thing...especially in the political and economic atmosphere today. \\

Thank you.

Price's priorities

Re: "The office of David Price has been extremely available to most constituents and prioritizes the requests/contacts..."

Well, then I'm apparently at the bottom of his priorities -- as are an awful lot of his other constituents.

Last Fall, during the recess, when he traditionally has had town hall meetings, he hid from his constituents. He wouldn't meet with me or anyone else that I know, and his office told me repeatedly that he wouldn't even have any town hall meetings -- except for two "telephone town hall" meetings. (Those were bogus; I signed up, and when the robo-caller called me I said "hello," and the machine said, "Congressman Price is sorry that you were not available to participate in his telephone town hall," or something similar, and hung up.)

In fact, Price did have one town hall meeting, in Durham, sponsored by SEANC. But he tried to keep it a secret from everyone except his union cheerleaders. As late as the previous morning, his staff told me again that he would have no town hall meetings except for "telephone town halls." (They lied.) I found out about it, anyhow, and showed up.

But I didn't get to speak to him. I got in line, but there was a huge line of other people wanting to speak to him, and he only took a few questions, and then he left in a hurry.

(Chuck Stone stuck around for awhile afterward, and we had a nice chat.)

Hmmm...gotta take what I said back

Not against homosexuals? Just against them having the same rights as everyone else? Not only is he a bigot, he's also a liar.

Nice guys don't hate, Mr. Life.

Maybe I don't see the BIG PICTURE on Forrester.

:)

I guess not

Homosexual North Carolinians already have the same rights that everyone else has. Dr. Forrester would not change that.

Dr. Forrester is against legalizing "gay marriage," as am I, as are most North Carolinians. That's not about "rights," it is about what's right, and what the law should encourage and condone.

Two sentences, Two lies

Homosexual North Carolinians already have the same rights that everyone else has. Dr. Forrester would not change that.

Gay and lesbian North Carolinians are taxed at a higher rate when they receive domestic partner benefits from the private employers in NC that offer it.

Senator Forrester's amendment -- that he introduces every year -- would strip away even that second-class citizenship.

This has been explained to Forrester. I've tried to talk to him myself over the years. He is mostly certainly not approachable when the topic turns to civil equality.

Forrester is a liar. Anyone who repeats his lie is too.

 

you've got it backwards

Special benefits for same-sex domestic partners are discriminatory, because they mean that, for example, two homosexual men sharing living quarters have financial advantages over two heterosexual men sharing identical living quarters. You would increase that discrimination, by providing tax benefits for the homosexual men which are unavailable to the heterosexual men.

The only difference between their circumstances is that the men who declare that they are a homosexual couple get the financial bennies, and those who don't, don't. Surely you can see that that's discriminatory.

I don't really see how you can fail to see that. However, experience teaches that I probably won't convince you. Nevertheless, I wish you wouldn't reflexively classify people as liars, bigots, haters, etc., just because you fail to agree with the logic of their positions. It really makes constructive dialogue pretty close to impossible.

If I were Dr. Forrester, I wouldn't want to meet with a group of people who behaved like that, either.

Backflips in bigotry! On display now!

That's just stunning right there.

by providing tax benefits for the homosexual men which are unavailable to the heterosexual men.

Civil marriage and the assorted tax benefits aren't available to whom again?

Heteros can and homos can't. You just lied again.

You are a liar. Just as Forrester is.

If "homosexual lobbies" really ran Raleigh -- as Forrester said, and knows full well is false -- then we would have civil marriage equality in this state.

Keep speaking lies. I'll keep calling you on it.

 

let me try to explain this again

I am heterosexual, and single. If I take in a male roommate, whose employer offers "domestic partners" benefits, I won't qualify.

But if I were homosexual and did exactly the same thing, and he declared to his employer that we were in a sexual relationship, then I would qualify.

How can you not see that is discriminatory?

No? Then try this. Suppose I took in a male roommate who lied to his employer and claimed that we were in a homosexual relationship, and on that basis I qualified for partially-subsidized health insurance, through his employer's group plan. Time passes, and I'm diagnosed with a horrible and expensive medical condition. The insurance company discovers that we're heterosexual, rather than homosexual, and disallows coverage because I have defrauded them. The facts are that my roommate is a dear and lifelong friend, and we've been roommates for years, but we are heterosexual, rather than homosexual, so I should not have had access to that insurance plan.

If we were homosexual, then there'd be no problem. Since we are heterosexual, I'm going to be bankrupted by my medical expenses. (Note: this is still hypothetical; don't worry, my health is fine.)

Can you not see how that is discriminatory?

Somehow I doubt it. I feel like I'm talking to a wall (with a continuous-loop, name-calling tape recorder in it). :-(

What if they were married?

Oh, that's right. They can't get married in North Carolina, can they? What were you saying about having the same rights?

Sham marriages

can happen between people regardless of whether the individuals involved are gay or straight. That is no reason to rule out marriages for just one group.

And you come here spewing that equal rights for gay people is the REAL discrimination and then make a sad face when no one agrees. Don't expect to find sympathy for bigotry here.

Proof that bigotry and stupidity go together

While Jake and scharrison's points are spot on, your insane example still fails the to win the argument.

Accepting your example as valid...

DP benefits are taxed as income. Straight married couples don't face that issue from the IRS. DP benefits take a bigger bite out of the employee's paycheck than opposite-sex marriage benefits.

It doesn't matter if you're in a sham opposite-sex marriage or a friendly roommate hetero-domestic partner situation. The marriage benefits under current tax law take less money from an employee than DP benefits.

That said, I'm more than willing to offer DP benefits to everyone: hetero, homo, bi, trans, or a-sexual. Aside from moving toward LGBT equality, offering more DP benefits will expand the health insurance pool and bring costs down. But that's a discussion for a different thread.

 

like talking to a wall w/ a continuous-loop tape recorder in it

"liar, hater, bigot, insane!" <click!> <whirr...>
"liar, hater, bigot, insane!" <click!> <whirr...>
"liar, hater, bigot, insane!" <click!> <whirr...>

Name-calling is not dialogue. I can see that I'm wasting my time.

Facts not in evidence: You're lying again

I haven't used the word "hater" in this thread.

Further, you assert that my previous three paragraph response, on the different taxes on DP benefits for anyone and straight married couples, somehow isn't dialogue.

Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland is playing everywhere soon. Enjoy life down the rabbit hole for a couple of hours, but do join us again in the real world.

Recalling your words:

Homosexual North Carolinians already have the same rights that everyone else has.

No. They don't.

DP benefits, no matter to whom they are offered, are just one clear example written into the tax code.

 

You are indeed wasting your time

Your comments are is occasionally amusing, but not at all productive. You're welcome to leave whenever the spirit moves you.