I agree with Ken Schneyer's main point, which I take to be that a general
statement acceptable to a large majority may in fact not carry a sufficient
message against particular forms of discrimination, specifically against
discrimination based on sexual orientation. One result would be that we would
have to begin debate anew every time an issue of discriination came up - i.e.,
every time we considered booking, or did book, in a state that then passed a
discriminatory statute. The Statement is designed to provide a clear compass so
that we are not left at the last minute with an unsatisfactory
contract/location. Of course we need to debate this all year, but for now, I
would stay with the Statement as amended in Dallas.
 
On another point - Dan, that was a wonderful letter about the conference. It
was a fine meeting. I, too, thought about how mellow it all seemed compared to
a year ago. However, it seems all the firworks exploded as soon as we got home.
Let's lighten up! and remember, everything we teach is political!
Lucy Katz
on