Gazette Telegraph, Colorado Springs March 30, 1993, pg B5 By Greg Walta About two weeks ago, I announced that Come Together Colorado would not try to pass a statewide clarification of Amendment 2 this year. This decision was driven by the fact that key business and civic leaders in Denver, Boulder and the mountain communities now believe that Amendment 2 will be struck down by the Colorado Supreme Court, leaving local sexual orientation ordinances in force in those communities. If that happens, those cities will simply resume enforcement of their local ordinances, leaving the Amendment 2 crisis behind them. Things will not be as easy for Colorado Springs. As the home of Colorado for Family Values and the birthplace of Amendment 2, the image of our city has been radically transformed in the last year. We will soon have to decide whether Colorado for Family Values will continue to define our city for the rest of the nation. In the article that follows, I speak for no one but myself. It is my effort to candidly share some of the things I learned during the last three months. I apologize if some of the things are hurtful, but I believe they need to be said. *Colorado for Family Values*. Shortly after I began working on the clarification amendment, I met with Will Perkins on two occasions. I explained to him that my draft was meant to give both sides what they told the voters they wanted: no discrimination, no special rights. I asked for his help and I asked for his ideas. Perkins said he'd get back to me. He never did. His position became clear only when CFV began a series of misleading and emotional attacks which were designed to appeal to the worst in people, not to lead to reasoned discussion. Soon CFV was travelling the state showing videos of a San Francisco Gay Parade that is such a crude appeal to hatred that even CFV co-founder Tony Marco objected. Based on my experience in recent months, I believe that Colorado for Family Values is not interested in common ground but is interested only in total victory over the homosexuals, whatever the cost to Colorado Springs. We now know that its campaign slogan of "no special privileges or special rights for homosexuals" was not an honest description of the intent behind Amendment 2. The amendment's true intent was spelled out in a letter from Pat Robertson's Naitonal Legal Foundation to Colorado for Family Values in June of 1991, where the lawyer who drafted Amendment 2 said: "I believe that No Special Privilegs is a good motto for the amendment's public campaign, but I fear the possible legal ramifications if it is included int eh amendment itself. The language of the amendment should prohibit homosexuals from claiming any rihts regarding employment, education, housing or stauts." In other words, CFV told the voters they were only denying homosexuals "special rithts," but wrote the amendment to deny homosexuals any rithts. Itw as a prescriptionf ofr a nightmare and a nightmare is what we got. *Lambda Legal Defense Fund*. But Colorado for Family Values is not the only problem we face. Lambda Legal Defense Fund, a gay rights organization headquartered in New York City is just as extreme on the other side. I believe that Colorado gays were being honest in the campaign when they said that they only wanted protection from discrimination, not "special rights" like affirmative action, quota preferences, contract set-asides or use of statistical evidence. However, in the past two months, Lambda Legal Defense has launched a strong effort to convince gays that they should not only seek protection from discrimination, but should also seek the special rights they disclaimed during the Amendment 2 campaign. Colorado for Family Values has already broken its trust with the voters. If the Colorado gay community does the same, we are in for a long and ugly decade. *The future of Colorado Springs*. If Amendment 2 is struck down, Colorado Srpings will be left to find a peaceful solution at the local level. In order to reclaim our "live and let live" reputation, we will have to chart a course between the two extremes. Colorado for Family Values has defined this city for the rest of the world during the past year, and I believe we are suffering significant downside consequences as a result. Among those consequences are the following: *Economic consequences. Some of our largest employers have made it clear that they are uncomfortable with Amendment 2. This hurts our chances for expansion of existing plants or for attracting new ones. Similarly, hotels which have attracted world-class conventions for generations are struggling to keep conventions that were booked before November and are having trouble even making the short list for future conventions. *Religious consequences. A year ago we were striving to become the evangelical capital of America and a beacon of Christian love for the world. Many now see us as a beacon of intoleranc, not love. At the very least, Amendment 2 has confused and devalued the message most Chrtisians hoped to send. *Political consequences. We are in the unfortunate position of being a Republican town facing the threat of military base closures in 1995 under a Democratic administration. With a new president committed to civil rights for gays, our image of in- tolerance could have dire consequences. I realize that we hve the rght to voge as we wish in Colorado Srpints and it is nobody else's business. But we must also realize that, just as we have the right to vote as we please, others have an equal right to disagree with us and to make thier own decisions aobutg which community they choose to avoid. I am not talking abou the boycott. I am talking aboutt the isolation that naturally follws when a community's reputation is damaged. *The choice*. We can choose to allow CFV to continu to define us or we can take charge of our destiny by fashioning a moderate local solution to the divisive issue of homosexuality. If we seize this opportunity, we can heal our community and move forward to bigger and better issues, but this will take open acts of courage by many people, especially leaders in our gay and Christian communities. Gay leaders will have to show courage because progress cannot happen unless the local gay organization, Ground Zero, publicly rejects the positions taken by Lambda Legal Defense and chooses a moderate course of its own. They must realize that the law can and should provide protetion from discrimination, but it cannot and should not mandate approval or override good faith religious beliefs. Christian leaders will have to show courage because healing cannot happen until they turn away from Colorado for Family Values and toward tolerance of those with different religious and moral beliefs. Chrsitians can oppose discrimination in jobs, housing and public accommodations, while still opposing homosexuality on moral grounds. Indeed, to display tolerance for those with whom we disagree is in the best tradition of the Bible--and in the best tradition of this country. The day of reckoning will happen in late summer or early fall, when the Colorado Supreme Court rules on Amendment 2. Let us all hope and pray that this city and its leaders will make wise choices when the time comes. The stakes could not be higher. Walta is a local attorney.