The Stranger Rescinds Its Endorsement of Erin Jones for State Super

Update: well, there is a firestorm of thought on this issue.  Jones has some very passionate supporters and yet there are people who are uncertain/not happy and they fall into two camps.

1) People worried about her stances on LGBTQ issues.
2) People who find her lack of clarity and updating of her positions unnerving.

She led a chapter of Young Life, a high school Christian group, in Spokane for a couple of years. That's fine but some chapters are homophobic but she says hers wasn't. I did check with the regional YL and their leaders all have to sign a "faith and conduct" contract for their own lives which is to embracing their teachings and reject "the gay lifestyle." They also said all kids are welcome and not questioned about their views and the leaders are not there to try to change anyone.

She also said - at her campaign Facebook page - "When I answered "NO" I was referring to both the sexual orientation being a choice question as well as if it (sexual orientation) was a sin question. The answer is NO to both. I do not believe people make a choice in regards to their sexual orientation or it is a sin for those that are apart of the LGBTQ community."

You'll note she does not directly say "being gay is not a sin"; what she said was that it is not a sin to be a part of the LBGTQ community. That's something akin to what the Catholic Church says - you can be gay but you can't act on it. You can be a part of that community but don't act on your feelings.

She also has not answered any questions about her role as state superintendent and guidance to schools on supporting transgendered students.

It's all a little confusing about what Jones does or does not believe.

Does The Stranger have some egg on their faces? Sure but they at least are willing to admit their mistake. They have rescinded endorsements before and it's not like it's the week before the election.

I have a hard time believing in someone like Jones who does not speak with clarity on her positions or shape-shifts as she gives them. She's a smart, decent person but I still don't think she's ready for this job.

end of update
This announcement came a little while ago from The Stranger endorsement board.  It follows a rather whirlwind day of back and forth. I waited on writing anything until this evening and now it's a bigger story with The Stranger pulling their endorsement.  (The Stranger had previously had an enthusiastic endorsement for Jones.)
The Stranger had another interview with her on August 25th. 

In addition, during an August 25 interview with The Stranger, Jones declined to answer directly when asked whether she thinks being gay is a sin. And in a late August endorsement interview with Equal Rights Washington (ERW), the largest group advocating for LGBTQ rights in this state, Jones reportedly talked about LGBTQ identity as a “lifestyle.”

As a result of that ERW interview, Equal Rights Washington said they are endorsing her rival, Rep Chris Reykdal.

As some of my readers may know, Jones had done an interview with a conservative public education blog over in Eastern Washington, the Southwest Washington Education blog, a few months back.  (Oddly, I can't seem to find the link to the blog.) Here's what The Stranger said about that:

Earlier this year, Erin Jones, a former assistant state superintendent and award-winning educator, responded to a conservative blog’s question about “teaching transgenderism” in elementary schools by saying “I do not think it is appropriate” and that such instruction could cause students to “feel additional pressure to ‘choose an orientation.’” Jones’s comments accepted the flawed premise of the right-wing blog’s talking points and language (“transgenderism” is a term used mainly by anti-trans activists, and likewise for the idea that a person is able to choose their sexual orientation). Her comments also run contrary to state curriculum guidelines and fly in the face of scientific research about how kids learn and process ideas about gender and sexuality.

Jones continued: “I am concerned about the prioritization of this curriculum over all else.”

For balance, here's what Reykdal said in answer to the question about “whether kindergartners should be taught transgenderism.”

Reykdal’s answer to the conservative blog was terse and corrective. “The standards do not promote cross-dressing and other fabrications of the extreme right,” Reykdal wrote. “They teach gender identity and self awareness. These are good things not to be vilified.” 

Jones told The Stranger that she thought her comments to SW WA Education blog a "mistake."

She said she’s since spoken to many LGBTQ advocates who educated her on some of the issues—like homophobic and transphobic bullying—faced by LGBTQ youth in schools. 

At the same time, Jones told The Stranger that she didn’t “know exactly” whether kids “choose an orientation.” 

“I think they’re born that way,” Jones said. “I’m not a scientist. I don’t know exactly. I think for most children it’s not a choice.”

Now those are some interesting statements for someone who took in two teens who were rejected by their parents for the teens' sexuality orientation.  (More on this in a minute.)

But when The Stranger followed up by e-mail to ask (again) whether Jones believes kids can choose their sexual orientation, she hedged her answer in personal anecdote. “I am not a scientist, but I think if kids could ‘choose’ their sexuality, the kids I know would not have ‘chosen’ to be gay.”

When The Stranger asked Reykdal if he thinks kids’ sexual orientation is a choice, he replied simply that it’s not.

Here's what Jones had to say about today's article in The Stranger (no word yet on what she thinks of their pulling of their endorsement.)

An open letter:

Today I have been left saddened and in disbelief after reading the Stranger earlier this morning. I am saddened because I have a longstanding, strong support for LGBTQ rights. I recognize and regret using overly equivocal wording on issues related to the LGBTQ community that has let friends and supporters down. I am apologetic that I used language that could be too easily interpreted as equivocal.

I have been asked over the course of this campaign if I think being LGBTQ is a choice and if I think it is a sin. Let me be crystal clear on this issue: NO. I do not believe sexual orientation is a choice. I do not believe you have a choice in the matter, just as one has no choice as to what color they will be or what blood type they will have. I also do not believe we should refrain from teaching the most accurate, compassionate and open-hearted curriculum in our schools to help support every child. It is true that my perspectives and language on LGBTQ issues have changed, as I have intentionally sat in spaces to learn and gain better understandings that will help me best serve our students, and our communities. In my answers to the SW Washington Blog, and some of my responses to the Stranger I made mistakes, however, I have shown true commitment to grow in my understandings of these issues.

My personal and professional life experiences and actions with the LGBTQ community are a mirror into who I am and have always been as a person. As a teacher, I worked to ensure that all my students felt safe and knew they were accepted and loved for who they were regardless of their sexual orientation. As a mother, I have two biological children, an adopted daughter who is biologically my niece, and two adopted children who were disowned by their families after “coming out”. These young people are not biologically mine, yet have adopted me as their surrogate mother who accepts and loves them for who they are. The thought of rejecting a child for being their authentic self makes my heart sick.

I am running for OSPI precisely because of my combined personal and professional experiences. These experiences have led me to serve for over 20 in classrooms and schools with some of the highest need, highest poverty, and most ethnically, culturally, and sexually diverse communities in our state. I am proud of my work and support for the rights of all people—and all children—regardless of race, sexual orientation, gender identity or economic status. I too recognize that I have work to do as a person and professional to align my language with my values. But I know my values, and they are strong, and fully manifest in my work, life, and commitment to the kids of our state.
~Erin

So what's my take?  Two things - confusion and readiness to be a candidate.

Confusion
What do I always say, readers? Words - have - meaning.

Jones states that she has two "adopted" children that she took in after their parents rejected them for their sexuality.  But she told The Stranger she took them in but they are not adopted.  When you are running as a candidate, what you say has to be what the truth is.

The issue is not the goodness of what she and her husband did for these teens; it's that she doesn't seem to get that saying she "adopted" them means a legal process and a different relationship.  I wrote to her today to ask for an interview for clarification and she said that they are "surrogate children."

Surrogate means substitute.  Do I think she means these teens are substitutes for her own children?  I don't.  I think what she meant is that she is their surrogate mom (but I can't be certain.)

She has to be clear and specific in her statements to the public and the press or there will be continue to be misunderstandings.

Also, if she has had such close dealings with LGBT teens, how could she be so unclear on her stands?

She also said this about her participation in leadership for a Christian high school youth group, Young Life, from 2006-2008. 

But Young Life remains a big presence in many public school districts. Jones stressed to The Stranger that different Young Life chapters had different perspectives on LGBTQ youth, and that she didn’t agree with them all. But she declined to clearly answer the specific, direct question The Stranger had posed, which was whether—like some Young Life members—Jones believes being gay is a sin.

“I am not Young Life in the way that other people are Young Life, just as I am not black in the way that other people are black,” Jones told The Stranger.

I find that latter statement confusing especially when she's being asked a direct question.

This confusion about words and their meaning also causes me to wonder - once again - about her stance on charter schools.  I don't want to see her elected and then find out that she meant something else than what she ran on and just didn't "align" her language properly.

Readiness

She said this:

I recognize and regret using overly equivocal wording on issues related to the LGBTQ community that has let friends and supporters down. I am apologetic that I used language that could be too easily interpreted as equivocal.

I have been asked over the course of this campaign if I think being LGBTQ is a choice and if I think it is a sin. Let me be crystal clear on this issue: NO. I do not believe sexual orientation is a choice. I do not believe you have a choice in the matter, just as one has no choice as to what color they will be or what blood type they will have.

But The Stranger says she refused to answer the question on whether being gay is a sin.  Why did she refuse? Was it that she didn't know at the time the question was asked what her answer was?  Was it personal belief?  That last one might be okay except for her leadership in Young Life.  That shows she was willing to take her beliefs out into the community. 

Both Confusion and Readiness:

And, in her statement today, she said:

I too recognize that I have work to do as a person and professional to align my language with my values.

Okay, we ALL have work to do on ourselves and, hopefully, we all never stop learning and evolving.  The problem for me is a candidate that is doing it as they are running for office.

As well, "align my language with my values?"

Those two points signal to me someone who is not just not ready to run for office, no less win.