U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-25-2013, 11:28 AM
 
58 posts, read 104,668 times
Reputation: 65

Advertisements

"It's time for Chan to go."

She's stated her opinions on a topic, that the First Amendment protects our ability to do. It doesn't protect the GBLT from hurt feelings. She's stated her opinion on the topic, and didn't shy away from it, which I do applaud. Also, these's statements about wasting taxpayer money - City council in San Antonio don't get paid a real salary per year. I was looking for a source here for this, and the closest I could find was this link. That means she wasted, what, 30 dollars of taxpayer money?

Full disclosure - I don't live in Ms. Chan's district, but am no fan of hers and would vote against her if I was one of her constituents, due to the Wal-Mart/Hardberger park wheelings and dealings she took part in. I'm just sick of seeing/hearing about this "non story" in the name of political correctness, agenda pushing, and political lynching her foes are doing to her.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-25-2013, 12:12 PM
 
4,268 posts, read 8,355,736 times
Reputation: 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by optichris View Post
"It's time for Chan to go."

She's stated her opinions on a topic, that the First Amendment protects our ability to do.
Not necessarily.

2006, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410. (relevant portions quoted elsewhere)

Quote:
Originally Posted by optichris View Post
Also, these's statements about wasting taxpayer money - City council in San Antonio don't get paid a real salary per year. I was looking for a source here for this, and the closest I could find was this link. That means she wasted, what, 30 dollars of taxpayer money?
Her staff are paid full salaries. Her offices are paid for, she is working in public space. It's not about "wasting taxpayer money." It's the fact that she was speaking in her official capacity as a public official. This is what distinguishes her statements from protection by the first amendment.


FTR - I initially didn't feel a resignation was called for (and nor, as far as I know, have any of the *current* council members called for her resignation) and feel the voters can decide. However, given her personal attack on the family of a former council member, I believe she's crossed a line. She took her opinions from "general" to personal. Illegal? No. Inappropriate? Yes. I'm still not sure I'd insist on a resignation - I'm not in her district and it's up to her district members to decide, IMO. But I think she went too far.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2013, 12:28 PM
 
441 posts, read 791,449 times
Reputation: 353
Heaven forbid Veterans and LGBT having the same rights as everyone else...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2013, 04:10 PM
 
58 posts, read 104,668 times
Reputation: 65
I'll concede those points, Chaka; I didn't take the staffers salaries being paid by the city into account. Again, I'm not a member of her district, and her constituents will ultimately decide if she should leave or not. I heard the audio of her talking about the former councilwoman's family as insulting, she sounded surprised while her staffers brought it up. Granted, I only heard what was on KTSA the other day, but it hardly sounded insulting to me.

"Heaven forbid Veterans and LGBT having the same rights as everyone else..."

SAguy, I didn't take a stance for or against the ordinance, just the discretionary political witch hunt people seem to be having on her based on how she personally feels. I can't seem to find a final copy of the ordinance that is being voted on to even form a true opinion on it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2013, 10:44 PM
 
208 posts, read 221,836 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by optichris View Post
She's stated her opinions on a topic, that the First Amendment protects our ability to do. It doesn't protect the GBLT from hurt feelings. She's stated her opinion on the topic, and didn't shy away from it, which I do applaud.
She is a coward and doesn't deserve to be applauded. She claims that many of her comments have been taken out of context. The more she speaks the worse she looks.
FACT CHECK: Were Chan's remarks taken out of context? Check the tape | kens5.com San Antonio
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2013, 08:16 AM
 
1,175 posts, read 1,172,603 times
Reputation: 1325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom2Feebs View Post
I'm sorry, you must have Christians confused with gay people. Meddling and pushing beliefs and all that.
Are you kidding me? No one is more into others business than Christians.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2013, 05:12 PM
 
Location: New Braunfels, TX
6,257 posts, read 8,986,685 times
Reputation: 6342
Seems to me that a LOT of folks are trying to meddle in other folks' personally-held beliefs.......if we're no longer free to have our thoughts AND express them, we've lost a LOT. And unfortunately, it appears a lot of folks here are fine with that.

The Thought Police are alive and well........
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2013, 05:42 PM
 
580 posts, read 1,275,817 times
Reputation: 936
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasRedneck View Post
Seems to me that a LOT of folks are trying to meddle in other folks' personally-held beliefs.......if we're no longer free to have our thoughts AND express them, we've lost a LOT. And unfortunately, it appears a lot of folks here are fine with that.

The Thought Police are alive and well........
This really isn't about thought police. Chan's situation is different, given that she was in her workplace, with people she was supervising, working on official business. Plus, she's an elected official, and people are keenly interested in her opinions on issues, given that she has to vote on them. Her case is also special because a number of her constituents heard her state the exact opposite views on multiple occasions, which makes her look disingenuous.

What's more important for the rest of us (i.e., non-elected officials just trying to get by) is to be polite and tolerant. The ordinance is about letting all sorts of people just live the same way the rest of us do, without worrying about whether they'll be tossed out of their apartment, fired from their job, or refused service at a restaurant if someone figures out they're gay (for example, by hearing them reference their partner in casual conversation). Those are the issues--not "free speech."

I also think that if one is truly polite, and also a good listener, they can pretty much talk to anyone about anything, even their belief (for example) that homosexuality is sinful. I've had plenty of interesting conversations with people like this, and you can always tell if they're motivated by compassion or hate.

It's about approach: Are you intimidating and ridiculing someone--or even threatening them? Or, are you just expressing your opinion--and willing to hear theirs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2013, 07:34 PM
Bo Bo won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Tenth Edition (Apr-May 2014). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Ohio
16,814 posts, read 33,124,702 times
Reputation: 13587
Latest email from Elisa Chan:

Quote:
Dear D9 Residents and friends,

I would like to thank all of you who have called and sent e-mails of support to my office during the past week. Your support has helped me get through this trying time.

While we may not always agree with each other on every issue, I hope you agree with me that we should all have the right to our own independent opinions and beliefs. It is also important that we respect each other's privacy and diverse viewpoints.

Last week was a very rough and diffcult week for both my staff and me. But I face all challenging times as a test; a test to my ability to overcome obstacles and a test to my determination to prevail. Over the last couple of days, I've also given great thought to the meaning of friendship, loyalty, character, courage, and conviction. However unpleasant, this experience will better prepare me for the future.

We cannot let last week's incident side track what is really important. Instead, we need to focus on the proposed Non-Discrimination Ordinance and really understand how it will impact each one of us in San Antonio.

Next Wednesday, August 28th the entire City Council will be formally presented the Non-Discrimination Ordinance for the first time. As this is the Council's first opportunity to discuss the ordinance's final draft as a group, I am sure that many of us will have questions. I encourage all of you to come and listen to this session, however, public comment will not be permitted at this meeting. As such, if you have any questions about this ordinance, please send them to my office and I will do my best to incorporate them into my list of questions.

This discussion session will start at 2 PM in the "B" Session room in the Municipal Plaza Building. Seating is limited and is first come, first serve.

Again, I thank you for your continued support and input.

Respectfully,

W. Elisa Chan
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2013, 02:25 AM
 
172 posts, read 284,734 times
Reputation: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dastexan View Post
On an unrelated note, is San Antonio EVER going to redistrict?


I mean since the population is booming toward the north and now far west, shouldnt there be a more equitable division of city 'leadership'?

When was the districts last redistricted? I cant recall when.

And after doing my own research it seems as though it is happening, though the maps on the city's website are not surprisingly not working.

Anything that doesnt move the general shape to the north is stupid. Reading a few articles, it seems as though this retarded city could use more districts and since we dont pay city council anything, it wouldnt in theory cost too much at all.

But it wont happen because that would either a. make too much sense or b. shift power away from the minority districts.
SA needs a hybrid system like this 4 city council members elected At Large, but must reside in their districts, 4 Single Member Districts to be elected only by voters in that district, and Mayor. Result? You get 2 Council Members for each district. Plus it shrinks the Council down from 10 to 8.
I proposed this in Austin several months back before the council when they had the 10-1 vs. 8-2-1 debate, along with stricter term limits, time to bring back the 2, 2 year terms that were in place back in 1991.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:35 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top