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