Oregon Public Broadcasting

1st congressional district 2012 election 2012 session agriculture art arts author beer births books budget business central oregon college congress crime culture death penalty eastern oregon economy education employment energy environment eugene fishing food gangs gay rights health health care high school history homeless housing jobs kids law legislature literature living media mental health military movies music native americans obama occupy portland occupy wall street onthejob oregon our town outdoors parenting police politics portland portland business journal portland mayor pregnancy prison public health race rebroadcast recess recession religion republicans rural schools science shooting sports supreme court talking business technology teen theater trailblazers unemployment union university of oregon washington water weekend women youth

I do not know whether it is good or bad that Sam Adams had consensual sex with an 18-year-old, but at age 18, the young man's consent is meaningful. He could vote. He could join the armed forces of the United States, possibly be hurt or killed on foreign soil. He could have legally married any woman of any age had he been a heterosexual man; it happens all the time. If my politician does not have sex with an underaged person or an un-consenting person -- and Sam Adams did not -- then I don't want to hear about my politician's sex life. As a citizen of Portland, I want Mayor Adams giving close attention to the many problems of Portland and rallying support for great ideas that will lead our city into the future with prosperity for all. Knowing what I now know about his sex life, I would still vote all over again for Sam Adams. But I will never vote for Pearl District developer Robert Ball. Mr. Ball's resume is stashed in my "when Hell freezes over" file, along with the resumes of Multnomah County's own "mean grrrrrls": Maria Rojo de Steffey, Serena Cruz, and Lisa Naito -- and for the same reason: they do not seem to know how to make a positive difference in my community, so they cannot be effective public servants. They confuse notoriety and celebrity with reknown; they participate in government only to amuse themselves and advance their names. They do not have the best interests of the citizens at heart, but only seek to "win" or "dominate the field" without any purpose for doing so. Will the next politician who is asked about his or her sex life PLEASE have the guts to say to the questioner: "My legitimate, consensual sex life is none of your business." ??? PLEASE!!!!

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context