Howard County, MD, Appoints Gay to Human Rights Commission 1992

REPRINTED By REV. LED DOWELL ON JULY 1, 2015
 (c) 1992 by Rev. LED Dowell.  

 

 

Testimony Before The Howard County Council

July 20, 1992

 

Resolution No. 166

Confirming The Appointment of Jan Nyquist

To The Human RIghts Commission

 

Presented by Rev. Lainie Dowell (July 20, 1992)

(Address and Phone No. omitted here)

 

Text of  My Written / Verbal Presentation

 

I am here tonight as a public citizen. I want to first of all let you  know that when I first came into this arena tonight I, also, labored over the question of "for" or "against" this confirmation - the only two choices on your sign up sheet. Compassion led me to check "for" but I also added the words, "with conditions," which meant that I was halted between two opinions. On reflection, in order to alleviate any ambiguity as to where I stand, I must change my position to "against" confirmation.

 

Many people in the near and far reaches of this county no doubt see tonight's hearing as a "done deal" and, so, have been reluctant to come forward, such has been the all-out warring over this issue in our community. Though WHY this IS, remains to be seen.

 

As I see it, the introduction of this particular resolution has evolved out of the expressed wishes of both the Howard County (MD) Executive and County Council to appoint a gay activist to the Howard County Commission on Human Rights. The attendant controversy over this issue within our community, the county leadership, and the Human Rights Commission has made me want to take a closer look at this overall situation. Therefore, my brief remarks to this Council will go beyond the personalities of any candidate so nominated on to the larger question of the Howard County Code itself. For that portion of the audience who may have neither heard nor read this code, it states as follows:

 

"12.201 Section XIV. Sexual Orientation: The preference or practice of an individual as to homosexuality, heterosexuality or bisexuality. This section is not intended to permit a sexual practice prohibited by law (C.B. 2, 1983)." 

 

Now, as I read this County Code, it tells me that this law "is not intended to permit a sexual practice prohibited by law." When you think about it, what does that disclaimer really mean? We need to find out just when and how this law got on the books in the first place and why this law had to have such a DISCLAIMER to make it legal on the books? Furthermore,, there is no such provision in the STATE law. And, so far as I am able to determine to date, this law only exists in Howard County, Baltimore County, Baltimore City, and Prince Georges County (MD). Is there any wonder there is chaos and confusion over this issue of whether or not to appoint a gay person to this Commission? In these troublesome times, we need appointees to be selected who will, for the next five years, be entrusted with meeting the special needs of EVERY PERSON who seeks redress before this Commission without regard to politics or playing games.

 

As to the question of gays, we could no more condone homosexuality any more than we would condone child sexual abuse, premeditated murder, or bestiality. Once you start out with a wrong premise or bad choice, nothing short of scrapping that ideology and starting over will set it on the right path. There is a right and wrong. And this community must wake up to the fact!

 

We should at least be able to understand that the broader issue is one of just HOW FAR a person will be allowed to go with their homosexual LIFESTYLE in this community? We know that ANY gay person who claims to be discriminated against should be able to get relief through our legal system based on the principle that there IS a right way and there is a wrong way to do things.

 

Therefore, Christians will NOT be deceived into believing THEIR premise that no one can judge them for THEIR lifestyle WHICH THEY CLAIM TO BE RIGHT! This country has become lopsided in its thinking. Everything cannot be acceptable. That is why we have disciplines, laws, and law enforcement. Yes. What you do in your own bedroom is none of my concern. But when you try to teach my children that it is all right to cohabit with the same sex, I become VERY concerned.

 

This issue has further divided this county along legal, social, and religious lines. So I say that never again must we allow such laws as pertains to homosexuals to go on the books without giving them our full and UNDIVIDED attention.

 

Thank you.

 

/s/ Rev. LED Dowell

Columbia, MD   

 

Copyright (c) 1992 By Rev. Lainie Dowell. All rights reserved worldwide.

_________________________________

* Emphasis mine. In another REPRINTED ARTICLE, I made it clear that "homosexuals don't want 'civil rights,' they want Special Rights!" Keep in mind this hearing was held on July 20, 1992.
HIT LINK" http://www.voiceink.blogspot.com/2015/06/gay-nominee-to-1992-rights-panel.html