The Truth…Former Mayor Ford on EOPA, LCIC, UAW and more…
This week’s Sojourner’s Truth is online and our former Mayor and current School Board member Jack Ford shares his thoughts on a myriad of topics in the My View feature. While I recommend reading the piece in full, part that caught my attention:
One of the local press guys undermined the concept by calling it “unigov” too much rather than a joint venture which is what it really was.
So now we see Oregon Mayor Mary Brown taking on County Commissioner Ben Konop over LCIC’s search for a new economic guru. We probably will never have a real shot at regionalism until we have a major crisis in this area and I mean MAJOR!
You should know that you pay extra taxes for all of the duplication that goes on in Lucas County. We do not need 28 economic king pins in Lucas County – the 22 cities and villages, the Regional Growth Partnership, the Port Authority, the UT economic leader and so on. Plus with Federal Express leaving for Wood County and Marine Stamping closing (a lot of Toledoans worked there) and the third shift going down at Jeep, what economic stuff is really happening? Yet you pay for about two dozen economic leaders. Think about it.
This Strikes Us tackles the issue of health and points out some sobering statistics when it comes to health statistics and African Americans. I’m not really sure how to take Lafe Tolliver’s guest editorial that’s titled, “Domestic Registry? Watch Out For Falling Brimstone!!”. At first I thought he was writing satire but in reading the whole piece, I think he’s serious. Among the many other articles Man Up Committee: It Takes a Village to Raise a Child caught my eye.
I’d also like to thank the Sojourner’s Truth and Fletcher Word for linking Glass City Jungle on their website, it is a huge honor to be listed there.
Maybe I’m being picky, but I thought the Mayor of Oregon was Marge Brown – not Mary… Is Mary her given name and Ford is just being polite or is this an editing problem?
November 28th, 2007 at 8:47 pmOr maybe it is an editing problem because the last paragraph contained this:
“Last week I said that The Blade was a big dinner in the 2007 municipal elections…”
I think he means Winner…
November 28th, 2007 at 8:50 pmYou know, I made that “winner” in my mind rather than noticing the errors until you pointed it out. Funny how that happens.
November 28th, 2007 at 8:55 pm“Regionalism” would definitely benefit the region, but it would take true leadership and a strong commitment to get’r done. In other words, not gonna happen.
November 28th, 2007 at 9:24 pmI like the sentiment that everyone is responsible for maintaining for their health to some degree. “This Strikes Us” gives sound advice that everyone can use. There should be far more attention paid to living a healthy lifestyle by everyone. In England (which has National Healthcare), the doctors get bonuses for getting their patients to lose weight and quit smoking. Imagine that!
As far as the domestic registry editorial, the Bible has been used to justify countless atrocities such as the holocaust and slavery, why not use it to justify continued discrimination against homosexuals.
Kudos to the City of Toledo Youth Commission! I wish the “Man Up Committee” continued success!
Craig,
I don’t quite believe that you meant to imply that the domestic registry was a purely homosexual thing, but that’s the way that it came across.
In fact, I don’t recall it being referenced to anything other than domestic partners, if memory serves…
To my thinking, domestic partners doesn’t necessarily mean that there is anything more than just that; a domestic relationship, for whatever reason…
November 29th, 2007 at 10:36 amHooda,
Did you read the editorial? Here’s a sample:
“One would think that with clear Biblical prohibitions on gay marriages and a homosexual lifestyle not being approved the Word of God (see: Romans 1:26- 28; I Corinthians 6:9-10; Leviticus. 20:13; Leviticus 18:22) that the above-named churches and others would have been emboldened and rallied to the ramparts and issued public declarations regarding this insidious registry.”
That’s what I was referring to. The registry could be used for unmarried couples “living in sin”, I suppose, but Lafe Tolliver, Esq. doesn’t seem to have a problem with that.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:20 amI watched the Bishop on Conklin & Company, but haven’t had a chance to do the notes, the Bishop did focus on both the unmarried couples and the same sex couple aspect. The earlier focus by many who were opposed was based on the same sex aspect with the belief that it was some sort of way to demand marriage rights for same sex couples. I agree with Craig that unmarried couples who could legally marry but do not that could also benefit from the domestic registry did not enter into Tolliver’s guest piece. You’d think that would also be a sin as well, if one were only concerned with the biblical aspects, yet again, I can’t really talk about that given that I’ve violated Leviticus 18 more than once.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:16 pmThe aforementioned Mr. Tolliver should have been more specific in his accusations against the list of churches he provided. His comment that some refused to take a stand gives the impression that ALL did so, which is not the case. I have spoken personally with pastors who have, indeed, spoken out against the Toledo Domestic Partner Registry. These pastors were clear in their opposition to any legislation that violates the clear teachings of the Bible. While that includes homosexual activity, it also includes other pre- and extra-marital sexual activity. The only sexual activity that God has said He blesses is that between one man and one woman married to each other. All other sexual activity is condemned by Him.
When one takes a step back, and looks at the result of each type of sexual activity, one can readily see that God’s directives have the optimum result for society at large, and individuals as well. You can’t read a magazine or newspaper anywhere in the world without seeing yet another article on a study showing the benefits of traditional marriage.
Study after independent study over the past several decades shows the same result: Society’s lowest common denominator is the traditional family unit (biological parents married to each other, raising the children together). When this basic unit is intact, society flourishes. When this unit is damaged or neglected or ignored or replaced by something else, society suffers.
This holds true through any and every demographic slant you want to throw into the mix: income levels, country of origin, religious/non-religious beliefs, ethnicity and cultural differences, etc. etc. etc. The fact remains – society is healthy when traditional marriages are healthy, and vice versa.
It is therefore proper to extrapolate that a healthy society that flourishes is a benefit to the individuals within that society. The reverse would also be true.
For Carty to state that the Domestic Partner Registry would be a good thing for Toledo clearly shows his unbelievable ignorance of the facts.
December 3rd, 2007 at 9:36 am