It’s just not that complicated. Look at the changing demographics in the United States. Then think about what happens when you vote against the first Latina Supreme Court nominee.

Maybe McCain isn’t wise enough to see that reality, so I will tell him a story about a Dominican-born, U.S. citizen cabby from my Harlem neighborhood.

While he drove down Broadway, I asked the cabby if he thought that President Obama was pandering to the Latino communities across the country with the Sotomayor nomination.

“Pero muchacha!” he exclaimed in a true Dominican style. “He is not pandering. He owes us! Everyone knows now that without the Latino vote, you cannot win the presidency. He has to deliver, politically. I am a new citizen, and I voted for Obama my first time. Just like a bunch of us Dominican cabbies. Now this is my country and my politics.”

“And is that the way you guys talk amongst yourselves? That the Latino vote is that powerful?”

“Yep, asi lo vemos. That’s how we see it! But even though we love Sonia, Obama still owes us.”

And what must Obama deliver to satisfy this very politically astute cabby?

“Imigracion! He must solve this immigration problem. Families are divided up. It is unjust. So Obama must understand that is what we want him to deliver now.”

A wise Latino with some wise advice for the president. And for McCain and the Republican Party?

Buena suerte, winning the next elections!

But what is Hinojosa really communicating here? Is she showing her wisdom, or merely perpetuating racial stereotypes about Latinos, and stereotypes about Liberals generally? Here is what she is effectively saying:

1. Votes are more important than principles. “Who cares if McCain is opposed to Sotomayor’s confirmation based on principle? We’re talking about getting votes! What an idiot he is to throw away the Latino vote like that and hurt the Republican party!”  Unfortunately, Hinojosa is teaching her daughter that it’s ok for politicians to pander for votes and to not hold to principles. To put it more bluntly, it’s ok to lie as long as you get what you want. If Hinojosa’s daughter lies to her and tells her what she wants to hear, does she have any grounds to be surprised, let alone disappointed?

2. Race is more important than principle. “Who cares what Sonia Sotomayor believes in, or what legislation she’ll create from the bench, or whether she understands the Constitution, she’s a Latina, I’m a Latina (or a Latino in the case of the cab-driver) and so her being in office is good for me because we’re of the same race.” If it’s ok for the cabby and Hinojosa to be for Sotomayor simply because of their race, are they ok if white people vote for other white people simply because they’re of the same race?

3. Breaking the law is ok as long as you get what you want. As the cabby says “Families are divided up. It is unjust.” Families are also divided up if a father kills someone and ends up in prison. Is that unjust? Why is it unjust if the father chooses to come into the US illegally and the consequence of his choice is that his family is separated? If it is unjust, that implies that somebody has done something wrong. If it is not the father in this hypothetical situation, then who has done something wrong? Is it the US government, for not leaving the border wide open?

If Hinojosa and this cabby are truly representative of a majority of Latinos, then it does not bode well for either Latinos or the country as a whole. Hinojosa is telling politicians that all they have to do to get their vote is to tell them what they want to hear and throw them a bone every once in a while to make the lies seem credible. If Latinos want a better life for their children, they should be teaching them that principles are more important than votes, and the only good politicians is a politician who is willing to lose elections before losing his integrity. They should be teaching their children that it is the content of your mind and not the color of your skin that makes you who you are, and that you shouldn’t trust someone just because they’re the same race as you. They should be teaching their children that in America, they don’t owe anyone else if they succeed, and they can’t blame anyone else if they fail. They should be teaching their children that the rule of law is what makes America great, and when you obey those laws you like and ignore those that get in your way, then you end up with the kind of government you have in Mexico and all the poverty, crime, and suffering it brings with it.

I can only hope that Hinojosa and this cabby are exceptions, and that other Latinos don’t fit the stereotypes Hinojosa is perpetuating.

1. Before anything else, provide your definition of a civil right.

2. Explain where you believe civil rights come from.

3. Explain how gay marriage fits your definition of a civil right.

Comments that stray from the topic of discussion will be in danger of being deleted.

Mexican media have dubbed her the “devil’s advocate” for her role in defending a string of senior cartel figures and their hitmen. Last year, she was detained for 90 days, accused her of being a member of the Gulf Cartel. She was freed without charge.

Throughout her career, she’s survived four assassination attempts and taken 10 bullets, two of them in the head.

Her office is crammed with religious iconography: crosses, paintings of the Virgin of Guadalupe and a four-foot-high wooden statue of Saint Jude Thaddeus. Two bullets are encrusted in the effigy after the last attempt on her life in 2000.

“To win the drug war you have to tell the Americans to take better care of their young people, tell them to stop being so cold and materialistic,” Villanueva lectured. “Then you have to end corruption and that means changing the government cabinets of half the countries in the world.”

Villanueva gets it. The true cause of the drug war isn’t about supply (the drug cartels), it’s about demand (drug users). End demand, and the industry would fade away. Of course the question is how. Yes, Villanueva is correct in saying that Americans need to take care of their young people, but who is best equipped to care for young people and educate them in such a way that they won’t do drugs and continue to fuel this drug war? It’s not federal drug prevention programs. It’s not state programs. It’s not city government. It’s not the local school board, or your own child’s school. The answer is a loving father and mother, and unfortunately many of our government programs do nothing to create incentives for fathers and mothers to stay together, nor is our culture promoting healthy family relationships. If you want to end the drug war, start by supporting the traditional family, and that will go a lot farther than the billions we spend on programs and clever slogans that in the end cannot begin to replace what every child really needs.

He then compares the Pope’s statement to telling people they don’t need to wear a seat belt when they drive, or labels as hypocrisy the fact that the Pope uses bodyguards when in public and then asks the rhetorical question “So how are condoms any different?”

Well, Mr. Martin, the issue is quite a bit different. Your analogies equate driving or going out in public with sex outside of marriage. But the Catholic Church doesn’t teach that driving or public appearances are sinful, unlike sex outside of marriage, so your analogies fall apart without further ado.

But the real question as the heart of this matter is this; When you teach that behavior A is acceptable and behavior B is not, but then you say “But if you engage in behavior B make sure you do such and such to protect yourself” do you end up indirectly encouraging behavior B? If not, then the Pope’s statement is counter-productive. But if this principle is true, then the Pope’s statement is productive in terms of diminishing cases of HIV/AIDS.

It appears to be the Pope’s opinion that if you tell someone “Don’t have sex outside of marriage, but if you do wear a condom” the message you are really giving is “It’s not that bad to have sex outside of marriage.” The Pope believes that if you send that message, you will end up with more cases of HIV/AIDS, regardless of how people are educated about safe sex and regardless of how many condoms are handed out. You may disagree with the Pope’s opinion that delivering the first message equates to delivering the second, and you may believe that education on safe sex and handing out condoms will decrease cases of HIV/AIDS, but if that is the case you’re making, then make it with facts, rather than assumptions. Maybe a closer examination of the facts would reveal that the Pope “gets it” after all.

“Liberals believe individuals should doubt their own truths and consider fairly and open-mindedly the truths of others.” – My experience with liberals has been that they rarely doubt their own truths, and rarely consider the truths of others. Rather, this seems to be what they preach to others who disagree with them as a way of shaming them into shedding their own beliefs in favor of liberal beliefs. How many of those who were against Prop 8 in California were willing to calmly and quietly discuss the opposing viewpoint and try to see things from their perspective? How many of those who believe Al Gore’s rhetoric about global warming are willing to look open-mindedly at what scientists on the other side are saying? Instead, those with opposing viewpoints are maligned, insulted, scoffed at, and are told that they are equivalent to holocaust deniers or those who opposed civil rights for blacks. When Republicans tried to weigh in on Obama’s stimulus plan and give their point of view his response was “I won” and they were basically told to shut up and get in line.

“Liberals believe individuals should be tolerant and respectful of difference.” – That is, liberals believe others should be tolerant of liberals, not that liberals should be tolerant of anybody who disagrees with their own viewpoints. How tolerant were the Prop 8 protestors who defaced private property and led hateful rallies? How tolerant is Al Gore of those who disagree with him on global warming? How tolerant are the Democrats when Republicans say “Wait, maybe we shouldn’t be bailing out these banks, maybe there’s a better way”? Tolerance, for liberals, seems to be a one-way street wherein they say “Be tolerant of us or else.”

“Liberals believe individuals have a right and a responsibility to participate in public debate.” – As long as they agree with the liberal viewpoint. Otherwise liberals will try to censor them and shut them down, calling what they say “hate speech”.

“Liberals believe ‘we the people’ are the governors and not the subjects of government…” – This seems to depart from Hillary Clinton’s book It Takes a Village and much of other liberal orthodoxy. If this is what liberals believe then why are liberals fighting to overturn Prop 8 in California, which was voted in by a majority of the people? Why do liberals go to the courts to try and get their way, rather than taking their case to the people? Why do liberals favor larger government with more regulations and controls over the individual lives of people?

“It is liberals who have championed…the principle of equal protection for all people.” – Then how come several liberal Democrats, who have recently been exposed as not having paid their taxes properly, have gotten off without having to pay penalties and interest? Why don’t I receive that “equal protection”? Why isn’t anyone championing that policy for the rest of us? Instead, I see liberals getting special treatment because of their elite status.

“Liberals believe government has a fundamental responsibility to help those who are less fortunate.” – Ok, I’ll give you this one. We merely disagree on how to best help those who are less fortunate. The liberal methodology is to take from those who have and give to the have-nots, whereas the conservative modus operandi is to give those who have not the tools so that they can turn themselves into haves. Liberal policies create poverty by focusing on equality and fairness, while  conservative policies focus on creating wealth which in turn lifts society as a whole.

“Liberals believe government should never act on the basis of sectarian faith.” – And yet liberals have no problem teaching their own brand of faith and enforcing it ever as strictly as any nun in a Catholic school. Everyone has a “faith” whether or not it is an organized religion. Liberals have merely replaced one God with another that doesn’t look like the first.

“Liberals believe courts have a special responsibility to protect individual liberties. It is principally liberal judges and justices who have preserved and continue to preserve freedom of expression, individual privacy, freedom of religion and due process of law.” I agree that judges have protected religious liberties–against liberals. There was an example of this just today in Connecticut wherein the Catholic Church retained the right to manage its church affairs free of government interference–at least for now.

“Liberals believe government must protect the safety and security of the people…” – Again, liberals just seem to have a strange way of doing this, by appearing to oppose every effort the military makes to defend our country. It is liberals who try to restrict the training programs of the military because of environmental concerns. It is liberals who spread rumors and lies about our military personnel, and who then act like nothing happened and issue no apologies when their claims are proven to be false.

“Liberals believe government must protect the safety and security of the people, without unnecessarily sacrificing constitutional values.” – And yet it was liberals in the 1920′s who spied on their neighbors and raided the homes of those who disagreed with the government. It was FDR who was ready to overturn the Constitution to suit his own ambitions. And I wouldn’t put it past liberals to trample the constitutional rights of citizens once again if they thought they could get away with it.

Perhaps we selectively see what we want to see. Perhaps one of us is wrong, or both of us are. But suffice it to say, I see things quite a bit differently than Mr. Stone.

We received an interesting letter in our mailbox today…no stamp, no name, no address. A full page typed letter from an angry person who somehow learned we are Mormon. They went on and on about how we were terrible for having such hate for gays. How the bible taught the golden rule and equal rights, and we shouldn’t judge. Sad.

Below is the full-text of that letter (although Word auto-corrected a few spelling errors and I blanked out the f-word, but here is a scan of the actual letter).

I am writing this letter to you regarding the sign I saw in your yard one day as I drove through your neighborhood during the campaign. I was furious that you would have such hate. I have since discovered that your family is Mormon. So you are VERY religious people. Do you not remember in the bible where it states, “ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL”? In your case YOUR bible and your GOD does not define that for you let me do it for you. That would mean if you are white, black, brown, yellow, purple, man, women, gay, straight, disabled, non-disabled etc. we are ALL EQUAL and be treated the same. Oh and let me just state before you throw this letter away and not finish reading it, I am a straight women married to a wonderful man, but I have no hatred towards anyone of any color, or gay people either. I just wanted to clarify that with you.

I am sure also since you are from the Mormon religion you went door to door in your neighborhood to get the other people that had the signs in their yards to put them up as well, since that is what Mormons do; go door to door. All you were doing was spreading your hate and lies, just like ALL the radio and T.V. ads and commercials because ANYONE with a brain knows darn well that kids are NOT taught about gay marriage in school they are NOT even taught about marriage between a man and a women. Maybe in high school if they take a special class, then marriage would be taught but it would NOT be until high school #1, #2 the kid would have to choose that class, and #3 his/her parent would have to sign a permission slip for the kid to take the class before being able to do so; so over all everything your religious right Mormon freak party in Utah funded was ALL a lie and FRAUD, and guess what it was caught. Lawsuits have been filed and of course I am not going to release the information as to what they filed about because that is NONE of your business, but I guarantee you this it will go all the way through the court system and I bet end up in the supreme court and what did happen in this election the supreme court will overturn and if it doesn’t in the upcoming years our new black president will help pass it because he does NOT have ANY hatred unlike yourself.

Another thing is how would Mormons like it if another organization gathered and arranged something to advertise hateful things against you guys and put up yard signs that basically states that Mormons are hated and you had to look at that every where you drove around throughout your state? I don’t care what you say I know that you would not like that and no one does, so why do it; because you are hateful people. God doesn’t like hateful people. On “D” day for you Mormons you will find out what happens to people that have hate against others against gods beliefs of “ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL”. It also states in the bible, not to do to others that you would NOT want done to yourself. Maybe you should think about this because what you have done evil ALWAYS someway somehow comes back and bites you.

One thing that you and your Mormon counter parts should take into consideration, whether they come out and tell you the truth or not is, is that you have family that is gay, you have friends that are gay, you have co-workers that are gay, you have neighbors that are gay, so on and so on. To make a long story short gay people are everywhere they always have been and they always will be, and it is absolutely none of your business about what they are doing and it is none of your business to butt into their lives just like it is none of their business what others are doing and none of their business to butt into others lives, so really what does it matter to you if gay couples have the same rights as everyone else like they should have, they are gods children too just like all of us, we should ALL have EQUAL rights???? It doesn’t affect you and your life so it shouldn’t matter therefore butt the ____ out.

If this letter is sincere or represents the sincere feelings of anyone I think it’s sad that there are such misunderstandings out there, and I think it’s sad that anyone would perpetuate such misunderstandings about proponents of Prop 8. This letter does not accurately describe my feelings, those of my parents, or those of anyone I know when it comes to our regard for gay people. If anyone thinks this is how gay people are regarded, I would encourage them to find someone who voted in favor of Prop 8 and ask them why they voted for it, and then just listen, without judging, and truly seek to understand their point of view. I think you would find that it wasn’t hate at all that motivated people to vote for Prop 8.

I’ve already written on the hypocritical stance of many in the gay marriage movement, but it bears repeating since this letter is such an excellent example. The author of this letter accuses my father of hate, lying, judging, and butting into other people’s lives. This is all completely false, and yet that is exactly what this person is doing. She is full of hate and anger “I was furious…”, she spreads lies “ANYONE with a brain knows darn well that kids are NOT taught about gay marriage in school…” (it’s already been done in Massachusetts), she insults (just read the whole letter), she judges “…you are hateful people.”, she threatens “On ‘D’ day for you Mormons you will find out what happens to people that have hate against others…”, and she butts into my parents’ lives as my parents have never done (my parents never found out where gay people lived and then gave them anonymous, harassing letters).

I can only speak for myself and my own experience, but I don’t know anyone who hates gay people, and I live in Utah and am surrounded by Mormons. I’ve never heard anyone here ever say anything hateful about gay people–ever. I’ve never hated gay people and I don’t hate them now. I don’t even mildly dislike them. I do think the homosexual act is a sin, but I don’t hate people who do it. I also think heterosexual sex outside of marriage is a sin, but I don’t hate people who do that either. I think it’s wrong, I think it leads to unhappiness, and I think societies acceptance of sex outside of marriage has led to a lot of pain and suffering in this world in the form of broken and disfunctional homes with innocent children bearing the brunt of the consequences. I think government redefining marriage to include gay marriage would be another brick removed from the wall that protects families, and that all of society will suffer as a result. That’s why I was in favor of Prop 8. There’s nothing hateful about it, it’s just a logical, rational, pragmatic decision based on what I believe about how society depends on healthy, traditional families to provide the greatest chance for happiness for the greatest number of people.

This is not a religious matter for me. Even if I were an atheist I would still have the same perspective based on the evidence I’ve seen. I don’t think we should legalize gay marriage any more than I think we should legalize stealing. Just as legalizing stealing would obviously lead to unhappiness and suffering, so to I believe the legalization of gay marriage will lead to increased unhappiness and suffering. I don’t hate thieves, but I don’t believe even thieves would be happy in the long run if theft were legalized. Likewise I don’t think gay people will truly be happy if gay marriage becomes legal.

If gay people feel that everyone hates them then I’m sorry for that. I’m sure there are some hateful people out there. I’m not one of them and I don’t know any that are. I suspect there are very few of these truly hateful people around and that opponents of Prop 8 have tried to make everyone who is for Prop 8 look hateful in order to get votes and promote their agenda. But such a path only divides and does nothing to bring about tolerance and unity.

Blacks are born with dark skin. They’re not Black because they decided it’s cool to be Black, or because they feel drawn to being Black. They’re Black because their skin is dark. They were discriminated against not because of the content of their minds or the quality of their character, but because of the color of their skin. Born with that skin, they are not capable of changing it (with the exception of Michael Jackson). In fighting for equal rights, they were fighting to receive the rights already expressly guaranteed to all citizens in the Constitution.

People are not born gay anymore than people are born fat. People get fat because they choose to eat more calories than they burn, and people are gay because they choose that lifestyle. Some people, like me, are disposed to eat Ben & Jerry’s all day while others eat reasonable portions of healthful foods. In my case, it takes an overwhelming amount of self-control to eat right and exercise, while I have friends for whom it takes virtually no effort to stay in shape. Some people appear to be drawn to others of the same sex while others don’t feel any such temptation. Perhaps these feelings can be motivated by genetics. But nobody forces me to eat ice cream, and nobody is forced to be gay.

If those who wish to redefine what the word “marriage” means want to attract Blacks and Latinos, they shouldn’t compare their movement to the Civil Rights movement. They may be shooting themselves in the foot by making a comparison that is logically challenging, and which can come across as offensive.

What interests me in all this is the blatant hypocrisy of those in the gay marriage movement. They talk of tolerance, but they are intolerant of any view but their own. They call for an end to hate as they spread it. They talk of love when they are full of anger. They talk about equal rights when they actually want preferential treatment. They decry harassment yet they harass. They profess to care for those who are victimized, but supporters of Prop 8 have become victims of their attacks. They want people to understand them, but they don’t seek to understand the perspective of others. They support the democratic process when it leads to the ends they want, but try to circumvent it when it doesn’t. If the same behavior were directed towards them they would be outraged. And yet I don’t think they see it. They appear to be completely blind to the double-standard.

I suspect if Prop 8 had failed they would only be happy for a moment. I’m not sure equality is what they really want. I think they’re looking for true acceptance, but no law can legislate that.

Only when a gay friend demanded that I agree with his or her point of view or cease to be friends has the friendship ended. What is odd is that in every case they called me intolerant. They misunderstood the meaning of “tolerance.”

Tolerance implies disagreement — it means that even though we don’t agree with or approve of each others beliefs or actions, we can still live together amicably. When we agree, we aren’t being tolerant, we’re being uniform.