Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!genrad!wjh12!foxvax1!brunix!sdo
From: sdo@brunix.UUCP (Scott Oaks)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.motss
Subject: Re: Scandalously honorable Studds supported.
Message-ID: <10776@brunix.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 27-Nov-84 12:29:03 EST
Article-I.D.: brunix.10776
Posted: Tue Nov 27 12:29:03 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 30-Nov-84 08:44:18 EST
References: ahuta.114
Lines: 20
Xref: sdcsvax net.politics:5614 net.motss:1320

[]
This all misses the point--I think I recall that the page was indeed over the
age of consent, but this did not tend to be an issue with most groups.

What was an issue with many groups was that Studds had admitted being gay--
and many groups took him to task for this, arguing that he deserved a harsher
penalty than did the straight congressmen who also were eventually censured.

And, what was the issue in the campaign was not the age of the page but
again was Studds' homosexuality per se.  The new right in Massachusetts
mistakenly believed that the citizens of Massachusetts could learn to
harbour the same unjustified criticisms of homosexuality which they bore
and could thus defeat Studds (despite the fact that Studds popularity amon
his constituents is among the highest in the Congress).

The new right was of course proved incorrect, and Studds became the first
openly gay member of Congress to be re-elected.  And in the current frame
of American politics, it was a refreshing victory indeed.

Scott Oaks