Support our LGBT youth, always

In addition to finding resources to aid disenfranchised LGBT youth (Power to Speak, 5/16), I think one of the things that is very badly needed is family counseling and support.  These children would do so much better in life if their families could find a way to be supportive and stick together.  

Programs offering families of LGBT youth support and guidance would go a long way in keeping these fractured families together and keeping the children safe and off the streets.  There is never a guarantee that parents or family members will come around and accept their children when they come out, but it would help; and I do believe that most of the issues involve ignorance and a complete misunderstanding.

Often, religious people fall back on their bibles and look for judgment and dismissal of their children from that source. But if they read carefully and if they think about it, would their G-d seriously dismiss and reject these children? Save me from such a G-d! No, they must find acceptance in their hearts, and love and cherish their children and help to keep them safe, not send them into the streets.  Let us find/develop some programs to help families accept and support their innocent and wonderful LGBT children.

Loving my own children as I do, I could never understand how someone could turn their own children out for a life choice that threatens no individual in any way and which they would never “choose” — it is who they are, actually, and not a “choice” at all. When my own daughter (in a family group session) told me she thought she was gay (when she was 16 years old) and then asked how I felt about it, I responded: “It does not affect how I love you. The only thing that makes me sad is that your life will be more difficult because people are so non-accepting. But you are who you are and I love you all the more for it.” As it turned out, she later felt she was not a lesbian and married and had children, but nothing about any of that changed how I felt.  Other parents in that group were not so accepting. This was 28 years ago, and while gay marriage bills/rights are making their way into our society, support for struggling families is not.

We are always talking about our family structure and how fractured it has become, especially with the huge rate of divorce. People need to realize that your children are your children, part of your family; and no matter what you do, they will remain your children for always.  What you need to do is be their parents for always. If we really want to keep families strong, then it is up to us to become more accepting and loving of the children who need us most. LGBT is not a disability, but the way it is treated by so many families, it might as well be. We do not turn learning-disabled children into the street; why do we turn our LGBT children into the street?  Can we look at some programs to aid these families in learning how to accept and love and protect their children?  There are programs in place for the kids, but the families need education and support as well.  (By the way, I will definitely attend the Ventura County Pride Weekend in August and hope that your readers will as well.)

Jan Richman Schulman

Why frack?

The fracking question is not IF we should do it, it’s WHY? WHY are we doing it? Why waste this precious resource that, when removed from the ground, slowly poisons everything around it? So the most profitable industry in the history of the world can keep making those record profits by holding us hostage at the gas pump? So we can barrel headlong into a future with no air to breathe or water to sustain us?  Why do it in California, a state that already has water issues and shortages? It’s not as though the petroleum industry couldn’t pay taxes enough to provide the health care necessary to survive the asthma and cancer which that industry creates. It’s not as though there aren’t alternatives. Join a nationwide call to get involved in our future with Jackie Keller of the Climate Reality Project.

M.E. Goodwin

A fracking dilemma

As a result of recent high prices, the environmentally hazardous extraction process of fracking has surged. This technique consumes large quantities of water, threatens contamination of the community’s supply, and leaves behind toxic residue.

The damage can be costly. In Pennsylvania, regulators found polluted water in 161 homes, farms and businesses in the period from 2008, the start of the fracking boom, to 2012. The number of water contamination incidents during that time fivefold grew.

Fracking has been around for a long time but only recently has the practice attracted a burst of new starts. We need to know to what degree we will be damaged by this and whether we want to accept the cost.

Is a smattering of new jobs in a toxic industry worth damaging our environment, particularly our water supply?

Ventura County’s Board of Supervisors recently voted to require information about fracking on land use applications with an eye to tracking how it would be practiced, what chemicals would be used and how the byproducts would be disposed of. Santa Barbara has passed similar requirements. A bill moving through the state legislature would place a moratorium on fracking. We need to let our state representative know we support this.  
Margaret Morris
Editor’s note:Senate Bill 4, authored by state Sen. Fran Pavley, passed on the senate floor, which requires the issuance of public notices, permits and details of fracking chemicals before the fracking process begins. The moratorium portion of the bill was deleted to pass the bill.

Capps vs. Coyne

One of the commonest phrases heard from conservative politicians is “nobody anticipated.” “Nobody” anticipated the crumbling levees in New Orleans during Katrina, the disastrous consequences of the Iraq invasion, the environmental impacts of oil spills, the widespread infrastructural failures that happen when the funding for public works is pulled, or the horrors of 9/11 (the August 6 PDB notwithstanding).  And “nobody” is anticipating the thousands of large and small repercussions of global climate change, such as invasive insect pests, resurgent tropical diseases, agricultural collapses — and profound consequences for women around the world who are struggling in poverty.


“Nobody,” that is, except environmentalists, scientists and the occasional politician like Lois Capps, who recognizes that an important and essential function of effective government is to analyze and consider the possible repercussions of our laws and policies. By mocking Representative Capps, Paul Coyne shows himself ignorant of the deeper responsibilities of public service. (“Climate change causes prostitution?” News, 5/23)

Warren Senders
Medford, Mass.


DIGG | del.icio.us | REDDIT

Related Articles


As a teacher who has felt the pain of an alleged lesbian student being harassed to death by other students, I can only shout "SUPPORT!!!!" as loud as I can.

As a teacher of AP Environmental Science, I want regulators to follow the precautionary principle and put a moratorium on all fracking, but I also want the two major types of fracking to be treated separately. The chemicals used for gas fracking in Pennsylvania are much different from those used for oil in N. Dakota (or California).

As far as mocking climate science is concerned, the "haters" need to read GRIST's "How to talk to a climate skeptic". It debunks EVERY argument ever published by the Star or any other newspaper. And their major source is RealClimate, a blog by ...real climate scientists.

posted by ENVIROSCIGUY on 6/06/13 @ 06:02 a.m.

Nice letter, Margaret. Do you suppose Aera Energy is listening? They obviously have some of the Sacramento pols in their pocket.

posted by acerbas on 6/06/13 @ 08:22 p.m.

Those of us who agree with these letters need to advocate for two amendments to SB4: (1) add that there should be a moratorium on fracking until adequate and complete general environmental impact reviews prove it is fine for the environment, and (2) remove reference to protection of "trade secret" contents of fracking fluids. These toxins need the fullest transparency. The consequence is a gag on physicians. They cannot tell patient who are poisoning victims or colleagues treating the poisoning what the poison was. DOGGR insists the casings can contain fracking fluids, but look at the failure rates of concrete: www.waterrf.org/PublicReportLibrary/9121...

Sen Pavley has assured that an amendment can be made so that chemicals are not protected as "trade secrets". Citizens must demand there be no secret chemicals that could poison people. She had to compromise to get a bill with any kind of regulation of fracking.

Sen Jackson is more comfortable with fracking; she just thinks we need some regulation.

The reasons for a moratorium are clear from Kimberly Rivers' article in last week's VCReporter. This week's letters to the editor further make a case that it is in our local and global interest to ban fracking.

Take action now to email or phone whoever is your Senator now to demand these amendments to SB4 to assert our right to protect our drinking water, air, atmosphere:
Hannah Beth Jackson--- http://sd19.senate.ca.gov/send-e-mail
Sacto Phone: (916) 651-4019 Oxnard Phone: (805)988-1940
Fran Pavley--- http://sd27.senate.ca.gov/contact Sacto Phone: (916) 651-4027
Calabassas Phones: (818) 876-3352 Phone: (805) 815-3917

posted by CultureShift on 6/06/13 @ 10:28 p.m.

Great post, cultureshift. Thanks

posted by cassandra2 on 6/07/13 @ 09:32 a.m.

Well done "The King" .
Those links you posted are priceless. I urge people to watch and learn. The hypocrisy of the left is always astonishing and illuminating. With the left its always 'emotion' over 'facts'. Kind of like every bad relationship you've ever had. LOL

posted by Scapegoat on 6/08/13 @ 08:39 a.m.

Nice posts, The King.

There is absolutely, positively no evidence whatsoever that fracking causes pollution of water. This is just another attempt by the far left to unduly influence the progress of oil production because this goes against their mantra that we should all be riding bicycles or driving Smart cars or our souls will burn in hell.

I love the bullying of that guy who was asking some legitimate questions at that appearance by the wacky Susan Sarandon, the greedy Yoko Ono (who sold her dead husband's personal items to make a few bucks), and her brainwashed son, Sean. What a bunch of stupid, out of touch, Hollywood elitists. They never fail to embarrass themselves.

posted by rasta_man on 6/08/13 @ 09:01 p.m.
Post A Comment

Requires free registration.

(Forgotten your password?")