GREAT GAY ISSUE
I just read "The Gay Issue" (Cover Story, Oct. 25) of CCP and LOVED it! Thank you for profiling so many interesting neighbors and friends who happen to be gay, and for putting together such a wonderful issue. And thank you, especially, for the thoughtful and thought-provoking message inside the front cover. Indeed, we need a little more love in our hearts.Lisa Thomson Ross
SIGNS SIGNS EVERYWHERE SIGNS?
This letter is in response to "Who's intolerant," a letter-to-the-editor published in the Oct. 29 Post and Courier. In the letter, Ms. Zerbst accused opponents of Amendment #1, the Family Discrimination Amendment, of removing signs in support of the amendment. Quite the opposite is true.
Those of us who have spent our time and energy placing "vote no" signs all over the state are troubled by the fact that almost all of the 10,000 signs that have been placed have been removed in a matter of hours. Our only reaction to their signs has been to place our own signs beside them. In fact, volunteers witnessed someone removing a "vote no" sign and replacing it with a sign from the other side. When confronted, the offending party stated that he owned the property. Our volunteers reminded him that the space was, in fact, public property, and they had every right (let alone, permission from the county) to place the signs there. The offender could not defend his actions and abruptly walked away.
I can think of three cases in which signs were removed from the front lawns (private property) of our allies. All over the state, our allies are being forced to take their signs into their homes at night because our challengers are removing them. Just yesterday, our volunteers in Columbia found a "vote no" sign that had been ripped to shreds. We have a picture of it. Let me remind those immoral offenders that removal and destruction of political signs from public property is a federal offense. Beyond those incidences, I have been personally harassed and attacked for displaying a "vote no" sign in my own yard.
The actions of some folks who support this amendment are inexcusable. This behavior is neither Christian nor moral. To borrow from Ms. Traci P. Zerbst, who says: "it seems obvious to me which side is truly 'intolerant.'" Well, it seems obvious to me which side is acting immorally.Melissa S. Moore
ALTERNATIVES TO ENGELMAN
Having read all about the hijinks of School Board member Sandi "CPT" Engelman, I think it's time for the voters of Charleston County put this public embarrassment behind us and focus on the alternatives. Gregg Meyers and Susan Simons have been consistent supporters of quality education in Charleston. They should be re-elected. Ruth Jordan is one of the more attractive alternatives to takeover Mrs. Engelman's West Ashley seat, and Toya Green is an outstanding candidate for downtown. I hope that all of us who care about the future of public education will vote for these well-qualified and well-mannered candidates on Nov. 7.Jeremy Nimtz