Just out., July 17, 1998, Page 4, Image 4

graaout
4 Jrnat Mat ’ July 17. 1998
A taxing issue
he right to b e let alone is the most comprehensive o f
rights and the right most valued by civilized people.”
Rogers
& Rodz
Attorneys at Law
Call for brochure
Criminal defense by a former judge,
state and federal prosecutor,
and state and federal public defenders
506 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Surte 900, Portland, OR 97204 (503)294-9998
T o the E ditor :
While it is true that gays and lesbians are
denied important benefits by virtue of not being
allowed to marry legally, 1 was sorry to read Will
O ’Bryan’s editorial [“Don’t go to pride angry,”
Just Out, June 19, 1998] in which he criticizes
Congress’ recent efforts to remove the “marriage
penalty” from our tax structure.
This effort is not an attack on gays and les­
bians but rather a step towards a system that sup­
ports a wider variety of family structures.
O ’Bryan writes that “a hetero couple married
one year gets the Congressional tax-code seal of
approval.” This seal of approval is only benefi­
cial, however, if the couple is a “traditional”
family in which one spouse works (traditionally
the husband) and the other stays at home. If
both spouses work and are equal earners, they
actually pay more by being married than if they
remained single. This is the marriage penalty. I
see Congress’ recent efforts to remove this
penalty as a positive development.
O ’Bryan is correct that taxes are an “institu­
tional way of rewarding and punishing.”
Eliminating this marriage penalty would change
our current system from one that has clearly
favored the traditional family structure to one
that also supports equal earning couples as well.
I do not consider this detrimental to gays and
lesbians, but rather a step forward in developing
a system that supports a broader array of family
structures. Someday, I hope this will also come
to include gay and lesbian families.
B ecky S hine
Portland
OPB pledge: JO stays
To
the
E ditor :
Recently, you ran an article about someone
removing Just Out from OPB’s lobby and lunch­
room (“Media Moments,” Just Out, June 19,
1998].
An OPB employee brought this to manage­
ment’s attention and we responded with a
memo to all staff stating that such behavior was
“highly inappropriate” and “will not be tolerat­
ed.” After this e-mail memo, I was heartened to
see numerous employee responses agreeing with
the zero-tolerance message.
I want to ensure OPB’s stance on this issue is
clear. OPB is a forum for sharing ideas from a
broad variety of viewpoints. As a public broad­
caster, we provide cultural perspectives that
would otherwise be unavailable on commercial
television. Our values on air match our values in
the workplace. OPB’s nondiscrimination policy
states we will not “discriminate based on sexual
orientation.”
In June, we recognized pride month with
three programs— Out Loud, The Castro and In
the Life — which we highlighted in our member
magazine. When we received letters complain­
ing about these programs, we responded with an
affirmation of our commitment to balanced pro­
gramming for our entire viewing audience. OPB
is and will remain an arena where a diversity of
ideas and perspectives can be found.
Just Out will stay out in our workplace.
M aynard O rme
President and CEO, Oregon Public Broadcasting
Sense and sensibility
C0rv pride and censorship]
To
the
E ditor :
Since reading the article regarding pride and
Carol Steinel and Howie Baggadonutz ("Pride
and prejudice.7” Just Out, June 19, 1998], I have
spent considerable time thinking about the
impact this type of article has on our communi­
ty. Frankly, I find this an inappropriate venue
for either of these individuals.
Nowhere in the article does it state that
Steinel talked with the (Pride Northwest] com­
mittee in person. Baggadonutz used his position
last year to lambaste [Pride Northwest] publicly
for allowing Coors to be part of pride. If they
were in the practice of censoring people, they
could have easily turned off his mike and let
him rant on without the entire crowd having to
be caught in the middle of his dispute.
Censorship is the act of removing or sup­
pressing anything objectionable. This was not
the action of Pride Northwest. A n individual
asking a performer to consider the audience
having children is not censorship.
The other piece that is difficult is the fact
that the reporter did not talk about the years of
service and support both Janna MacAuslan and
Kristan Aspen have provided this community.
Steinel and Baggadonutz are funny people
and excellent performers. Their material is
often more appropriate for adult audiences in
my opinion. I enjoy laughing and singing along
to Steinel’s songs. A t times, however, in a
venue that hopes to promote families bringing
their children, maybe all of us need to examine
the content of our material. After all, we are
the adults.
D onna L uckett
Portland
To
the
E ditor :
It was with disappointment and no great sur­
prise that I read of the continued infighting
regarding the content and context of the pride
festiv al.
As a former board member of Pride North­
west, I can attest to the tremendous amount of
cooperation, professionalism and spirit required
to pull off a celebration of this magnitude. I can
also testify to the tragic loss of time and energy
directed toward issues that— in all candor—
have little if anything to do with pride.
I respect Howie Baggadonutz’s work as a
board member, fund-raiser and sponsor of pride
events, as well as his views from a perspective
different than mine. Having purposely mixed
professional and civic responsibilities with mo­
ments of personal expression in a public forum,
however, Baggadonutz has little credible claim
to the high road that would justify accusations
of censorship. If the board of Pride Northwest
voted for the Coors sponsorship of the 1997
pride festival over his objections, then the
board must answer to that issue at the regularly
advertised open board meetings. As a board
member, he should have either respected that
position, stepped aside, or raised it at the prop­
er time and place.
As for Carol Steinel, I would agree that the
handwritten note asking her to “do what you
think is right" with regard to her material does
smack of censorship pressure. G ood! I’m no
prude, and I doubt I’d be any more shocked at
what Steinel says or does than she would be
shocked if she knew more about me.
Yet, for the life of me, I have not been able
to reconcile how spewing the lyrics from “ I
Want to Put My Fingers in You" in a public
venue relates to pride. If she insists on thrusting
her idea of pride on the masses, then I look for­
ward to the time when I can answer back with
the time-honored tradition of great theater: a
rotten tomato thrown on the stage.
As a community, it is time we recognize the
difference between making personal points and
furthering just causes.
L arry S haw
Portland