Analyzing Ashburn
Re “State senator says he is gay,” March 9
When state Sen. Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield) came out of the closet, he said he voted against gays because he felt that's the way his constituents would want him to vote.
State Sen. Roy Ashburn; the Armenian genocide; E-Verify's error rate
Letters to the editor
Let's say you can understand that. Can you also understand him presenting himself falsely when he ran for office because that's the way his constituents wanted to see him?
Alan Burnett
Burbank
Let me get this, er, straight. Ashburn's consistently anti-gay voting record had nothing to do with the fact he was a closeted gay man, and his voting pattern reflected the will of his constituents.
I hope someday he may be able to understand exactly how his hypocrisy negatively affected the gay community that he was secretly exploiting.
Bob Merliss
Palm Springs
Re “The gay anti-gay legislator,” Editorial, March 10
The Times' reluctant recognition of Ashburn's honorable actions on gay legislation is puzzling. What greater service can a representative perform than to promote the will of his constituents?
I agree that a legislator need not consult polls before every vote, but gay marriage is not a simple issue. It would radically change the definition of marriage, a bedrock of our society.
The politicians you should take to task are state Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown and San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders. Brown had a duty to represent the voters in court in support of Proposition 8 but opted to oppose it. Sanders represents a conservative city that supported Proposition 8. Yet Sanders, acting on personal beliefs (his daughter is a lesbian), recently testified in the federal court case to overturn Proposition 8.
David R. Gillespie
Bonita, Calif.
The genocide resolution
Re “Making sense of genocide,” Editorial, March 8
As a former Turkish citizen of Armenian descent and the daughter of genocide survivors, I applaud your editorial. It is a much-needed attempt to put history and morality in the driver's seat.
Turkey has consistently threatened the U.S. with negative consequences if the genocide resolution passes. History has also taught us that Turkey will often side with its Muslim neighbors rather than extend us a helping hand.
History should be an accurate account, where truth should prevail.
Alice Ketabgian
La Cañada Flintridge
Today, Turkey is seeking membership in the European Union and a venerated place among nations. Distorting decades-old archives and recalling its ambassador to the U.S. not only won't help Turkey achieve its goals, it will further alienate the country from the world community.
Turkey should follow in the footsteps of Germany, which gained accolades for acknowledging the Holocaust. After 95 years of denial, it is time to come face to face with tragic and horrible historic fact and recognize the systematic annihilation of the Armenian race as genocide.
Harmik Gharibi
Glendale
The Times offers a non sequitur: that in order for Turkey and Armenia to reconcile their differences, the U.S. Congress should pass the Armenian genocide resolution.
Your editorial correctly points to recently signed Turkish-Armenian protocols to improve their relations, which also foresee a historical commission on the tragic years of Turkish-Armenian history. Contrary to The Times' contention, this is not settled history.
Members of Congress who are pushing this resolution are not righting a historical wrong -- rather, they are mollifying the radical voices in the Armenian American lobby. Many members correctly acknowledge that this resolution would harm not only Turkish-Armenian rapprochement but also U.S. relations with Turkey, a key strategic and economic partner.
Rather than trivialize genocide by using it as a political football, Congress should support the process between Turkey and Armenia and put the issue where it belongs.
G. Lincoln McCurdy
Washington
The writer is president of the Turkish Coalition of America.
Errors and employment
Re “E-Verify: ‘E’ is for error,” Editorial, March 9
The Times is right to conclude that E-Verify should not be expanded nationwide.
However, the assertion that "E-Verify is not misidentifying legitimate workers in troubling numbers" glosses over the fact that an error rate of even 1% on authorized workers could translate to job losses for hundreds of thousands of people.
Consider the case of one Southland resident and naturalized U.S. citizen who was twice mistakenly identified by E-Verify as not authorized to work. As a result of this glitch, she was suspended from her job for two weeks and forced to borrow hundreds of dollars to pay her bills and feed her four children.
With unemployment rates hovering in the double digits in California, we can ill afford to add more employment hurdles like these.
Marielena Hincapié
Los Angeles
The writer is executive director of the National Immigration Law Center.
FEATURED
MORE:
Advertisement
