Liberals don't welcome dialogue

I find it ironic that Robert Kahn thinks no one should be entitled to an opinion about other people's consensual behavior ("Let's just be polite," April 28 Perspective).  If he really believes that people should not talk about private sexual behavior in public then I wonder if he agrees that gay pride parades are the ultimate display of rudeness?  How un-liberal of him.

One could agree that private sexual behavior should be private but many gay activists refuse to see the matter that way.  Several aggressive activists constantly drill their private sexual behavior on the culture and on children in public schools.  Some display belligerent attitudes towards anyone who disagrees with them.  This is where we get to the heart of the matter.  What Kahn actually wants is for cultural conservatives to remain silent and for those he agrees with to share their liberal rhetoric to their hearts' content.

Perhaps Kahn is right that politics, sex and religion should not be discussed on a job interview but if we took those subjects away from public debate what would the media have left to talk about?  Gardening?

There is more at stake here than ones' opinion about their neighbor's behavior.  Certain groups are aggressively attempting to change public policy regarding marriage, school curriculum and private organizations such as the Boy Scouts.  Shouldn't people who disagree be allowed to express their opposition?

If Kahn attended the SpeakOut forum, perhaps he would be more informed and tolerant of the cultural conservatives who expressed their opinions regarding gender-identity issues.  The truth is, people cannot help but include discussion of politics, sex and religion when it comes to such issues.  The politically correct crowd is used to the liberal bias and censoring of the conservative point of view in the media.  What made this forum unique is that conservatives were invited, welcomed and encouraged to share their views.  Who would have thought that a college campus would ever offer such an event?

The forum pointed out that there are well-known issues that divide the two sides within North County; many of which are often hotly debated in the letters section of the North County Times.  This forum demonstrated that these issues can be thoughtfully and calmly discussed.  As a result, people on opposite sides got a better perspective of the other side's views and opinions.

I would like to commend Mark Thornhill for his leadership of the conservative side at the forum and for his excellent commentary, "Can we talk again?" (April 28 Perspective).  This captured the significance of the event.

At the beginning of the evening, Thornhill was challenged by the majority regarding his choice of terms.  Once the group got past that disagreement, the dialogue flowed more smoothly.  There were a few attempts to verbally attach Thornhill but professor Mark Mufson did a fine job curbing this and as moderator did a great job maintaining civility among all participants.

At the end of the forum, a few people approached me with some questions.  One female student was apparently moved by the real-life experiences and struggles I had shared regarding an ex-gay friend.  She wanted to know more about the strength and healing he had obtained through his return to faith.  We discussed the meaning of forgiveness and repentance.  She shared some concerns about a lesbian friend and I offered some words of encouragement.  We had a brief but nice discussion.

What a pleasant surprise that after three hours of sharing differing opinions a few from the other side took the time to shake hands with the five or so conservatives and thanked them for attending.  It may only be my opinion but I couldn't help but notice a glimmer of hope shine through for more breakthrough discussion in the future.

Christine Watson

May 20, 2002

North County Times