A Garbage Can Situation

Since the facts are there, newspapers, Herald Tribune, the LA Times and Dr. Laura Schelssinger, we can bring up the question that Ms McGillivray seems intent not to answer.

There are the critics that insist this thread is irrelevant to being a Council person, however it is not irrelevant. When the Presidential Candidates or any other candidate for political office begins to express religious views, family values views or take a stand on abortion what happens? This Country goes nuts. Look at the rumor about Obama being a Muslim. It should not matter what his religious beliefs are, but it does.

So in that light why would MaryAnn McGillivray crusade in the late nineties to deny same-sex couples with kids or foster kids the simple right to call themselves a family. WHY?

Background: In 1997, Then Councilmember MacGillvray prodded the Sierra Madre City Council to adopt a definition of “Family” that excluded same sex marriages, foster parents and couples that, for whatever reason, choose not to marry.

She is quoted by Dr. Laura Schlessinger in the book “Stupid Things Parents do to Mess up Their Kids”.

“The redefinition was considered important because, as Councilwoman MaryAnn MacGillivray said, ‘We didn’t want to expand the definition of family into a garbage can situation…the fact is this community takes a moral stand.’”

So what is MacGillivray suggesting? What is wrong with alternative families? The quote implies they are garbage. How are you going to tell that to a 15 year old foster child who is having self esteem issues anyway?

It seems clear is that MacGillivray has no qualms at all about labeling people according to her personal moral views, and persuading others to do so as well. We the voters ought to think really hard about whether or not this kind of divisiveness has any place in our City Hall. Not to mention that it has no place in politics.
Some additional interesting quotes:

LA Times - 1997

“Councilwoman MaryAnn MacGillivray, who pushed for the separate definition of family, said the City Council should take a moral stand and use its power as ’small town lawmakers’ to maintain the definition of family as separate from any other living arrangement”

What will she try to use that power for next? Censorship?

LA Times 1997

“MacGillivray, however, demanded that the term ‘family’ be limited to those related by blood, marriage, or adoption, and that those living together in other relationships be called ‘housekeeping units’. She said using the word ‘family’ to describe those not related by blood or law ‘degrades the meaning of the term’”.

People were harmed and affected, the families that are a group of people affiliated by consanguinity, affinity, and co-residence, were degraded, and the whole family debate fiasco was an embarrassment and is remembered as a black eye on our community.

Herald Tribune

“The Supreme Court in its infinite wisdom, gave us a definition of family that we in Sierra Madre do not think is correct. Sierra Madre is much more adept at figuring out what is best for our community. We are tired of big government jamming these things down the throats of the small community. We don’t have to swallow that”

What will she pick and choose next? I am in shock and awe that she thinks she can take on the US Supreme Court. Who is “we”?

What about the waste of the Sierra Madre City Councils and staffs time and taxpayers money having this debate and adopting the definition in 1997, what might she do next to waste the time and money of our City Council and staff if she is elected?

Thankfully on November 25, the Sierra Madre City Council voted unanimously to repeal MacGillivrays’ definition of family. The blended, gay and lesbian, adoptive, foster and unmarried families in Sierra Madre are now and always will be, families, not housekeeping units.

So it seems she will stay silent about this “family debate” black mark on her resume, perhaps she will also stay silent on the fact that she was not only on the Council but on the General Plan Steering Committee which adopted the General Plan that helped One Carter get approved, and that she would rather litigate the City into bankruptcy than work and deal with the realities of what is going on in the City. Perhaps the next tax increase will be to pay for the attorney fees to litigate and prevent any further developments from occurring in our City.