Recent Changes for "Mo Torres" - Davis Wiki

Mo Torres

BrianNeal — 2009-11-18 04:16:31

changing my comments

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 91:	Line 91:
- * http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/FastFacts-MSM-FINAL508COMP.pdf I was outraged by the [http://theaggie.org/article/2009/11/17/causeway-classic-blood-drive-returns-to-uc-davis article] in the Aggie, that anyone would suggest ending blood drives on campus, but after reading Mo's position, I don't think he's being unreasonable. The national blood drive policies also discriminate based on national origin, past diseases, and about a million other things. It's not like MSM are being singled out. There is no "right" to give blood, hence I don't think this is an issue that should be framed in terms of rights or harmful discrimination. The blood banks got burned hard in the 80's, with many people becoming infected. The current policy errors on the side of caution, and that's not going to change anytime soon. As for trying to split hairs about risky behavior, they don't let you give if you've been in Britain for more than 3 months because of mad cow disease, even if you're a vegetarian. -["Users/BrianNeal"]	+ * http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/FastFacts-MSM-FINAL508COMP.pdf I was outraged by the [http://theaggie.org/article/2009/11/17/causeway-classic-blood-drive-returns-to-uc-davis article] in the Aggie, that anyone would suggest ending blood drives on campus, but after reading Mo's position, I don't think he's being unreasonable. The national blood drive policies also discriminate based on national origin, past diseases, and about a million other things that would be illegal for employment. It's not like men-who-have-had-sex-with-men are being singled out. There is no "right" to give blood, hence I don't think this is an issue that should be framed in terms of rights or harmful discrimination. The blood banks got burned hard in the 80's for their resistance to change, and many people became infected as a result. The current policy errors on the side of caution, and that's not going to change anytime soon. As for trying to split hairs about risky behavior, they don't let you give if you've been in Britain for more than 3 months because of mad cow disease, even if you're a vegetarian. -["Users/BrianNeal"]

Mo Torres

BrianNeal — 2009-11-18 04:13:40

adding comment

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 91:	Line 91:
	+ * http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/FastFacts-MSM-FINAL508COMP.pdf I was outraged by the [http://theaggie.org/article/2009/11/17/causeway-classic-blood-drive-returns-to-uc-davis article] in the Aggie, that anyone would suggest ending blood drives on campus, but after reading Mo's position, I don't think he's being unreasonable. The national blood drive policies also discriminate based on national origin, past diseases, and about a million other things. It's not like MSM are being singled out. There is no "right" to give blood, hence I don't think this is an issue that should be framed in terms of rights or harmful discrimination. The blood banks got burned hard in the 80's, with many people becoming infected. The current policy errors on the side of caution, and that's not going to change anytime soon. As for trying to split hairs about risky behavior, they don't let you give if you've been in Britain for more than 3 months because of mad cow disease, even if you're a vegetarian. -["Users/BrianNeal"]

Mo Torres

jsogul — 2009-08-27 10:04:06

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 91:	Line 91:
- * I HIGHLY doubt you are sincere about this. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and tell you this: the rules don't discriminate against people who bareback, they discriminate against ALL men who have sex with men, even if they have only ever had safe sex. That's the problem here, in my opinion. --["Users/jsogul"]	+ * I HIGHLY doubt you are sincere about this, especially since you made a sockpuppet account to post this comment. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and tell you this: the rules don't discriminate against people who bareback, they discriminate against ALL men who have sex with men, even if they have only ever had safe sex. That's the problem here, in my opinion. --["Users/jsogul"]

Mo Torres

jsogul — 2009-08-27 10:03:38

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 91:	Line 91:
	+ * I HIGHLY doubt you are sincere about this. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and tell you this: the rules don't discriminate against people who bareback, they discriminate against ALL men who have sex with men, even if they have only ever had safe sex. That's the problem here, in my opinion. --["Users/jsogul"]

Mo Torres

JoePomidor — 2009-08-26 22:35:01

my #2 cents

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 90:	Line 90:
	+ * Care to point us towards some evidence? Because I'm calling bullshit. -["Users/JoePomidor"]

Mo Torres

OscarWao — 2009-08-26 22:12:55

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 89:	Line 89:
- ps. stop being so flamboyant. --["Users/OscarWao"]	+ --["Users/OscarWao"]

Mo Torres

OscarWao — 2009-08-26 22:05:50

Comment added.

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 86:	Line 86:
	+ ------ + ''2009-08-26 23:05:50'' [[nbsp]] Men who have sex with other men are usually at an increase risk of having HIV/AIDS, and the prevalence and incidence rates continues to rise.. Perhaps you should consider telling the gays to stop barebacking and pnp'ing. + + ps. stop being so flamboyant. --["Users/OscarWao"]

Mo Torres

ThUn — 2009-08-05 14:13:29

Comment added.

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 80:	Line 80:
	+ ------ + ''2009-08-05 15:13:29'' [[nbsp]] Greetings Mo, just thought I'd stop by and say hi. + + I really hope the case with blood drives on UC Davis campus makes progress. You know I totally support the removal of campus funding to blood-drives as long as they continue to disallow me, as an LGBT person, to donate blood. + + =] --["Users/ThUn"]

Mo Torres

MattBlair — 2009-02-17 23:50:07

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
- '''Mo Torres''' is a candidate for the ["ASUCD Senate"] with ["LEAD" L.E.A.D.] running in ["Fall 2008 ASUCD election"].	+ '''Mo Torres''' is an ["ASUCD Senate" ASUCD Senator]. He ran, and won, with the ["LEAD"] slate in the ["Fall 2008 ASUCD election"]. +

Mo Torres

BrentLaabs — 2008-11-18 14:49:22

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 55:	Line 55:
- ''2008-11-11 15:37:26'' [[nbsp]] I'm not sure what you want to do about the Blood Drive. It's an ASUCD activity, and doing nothing would result in it continuing to happen. You want to have some sort of education campaign about gay rights, but the current focus for that demographic is still on Prop 8, and it might be a better fit. About the advocacy campaign, it raises the most questions from me: are you seriously considering restarting some sort of national advocacy effort in ASUCD (i.e. the National Lobby unit)? If so, have you considered working with the [wiki:ucdgsa Graduate Student Association], which is closely allied with the National Association of Graduate-Professional Students? --["Users/BrentLaabs"] - * With all due respect, I am not sure what position you hold to say that a focus on Prop 8 is more appropriate than a focus on blood drives. The LGBT community is not homogenous. Marriage is an important issue to many that identify as LGBT/queer, but by no means is it important to all. To a great number of students, the issue of Prop 8 is one that is wholly symbolic. Most undergraduate students are not married, and presumably, most will not be married by graduation. Prop 8 and the issue of gay marriage are important, but blood drives affect students DIRECTLY, not symbolically. Blood drives bring active discrimination to the UC Davis campus in a way that banning gay marriage does not. ASUCD already passed a resolution in opposition to Proposition 8. I am not entirely sure what else you want ASUCD to do about that. ASUCD has greater control over blood drives on this campus, and as a Senator I will work towards ensuring that the LGBT voice is NOT left out of this discussion as has historically been the case. - A national advocacy campaign will be a great idea one day, but for now, it is probably an even better idea to work on the local level. As far as collaboration goes, I would love to work with any student or organization that is interested in fighting for LGBT issues.-- ["Users/MoTorres"] - * I don't see what you can do at a local level, other than coalition building, that will have any effect whatsoever on this blood donation policy. You want to repeal a federal policy: the MSM deferral for gay men. The MSM deferral was only approve the last time around by a FDA Advisory Board vote of 8-7, so directed agency lobbying could see results. While this policy is only a recommendation, the American Red Cross lobbied very strongly to keep the MSM deferral, so that nationwide organization is another target. But a grassroots campaign without a nationwide goal is worthless here. --["Users/BrentLaabs" Brent Laabs], Legislative Chair, National Association of Graduate and Professional Students - * A similar argument can be made regarding Prop 8 -- what exactly can be done on our college campus? Resolutions from ASUCD and rallies on the quad are great, but they don't impact the actual policy. The difference between activism focusing on Prop 8 and activism focusing on blood drives is one of awareness. People understand what gay marriage is, and understand that Prop 8 is discriminatory. There is little awareness, however, of the discriminatory policies regarding blood drives. You cannot underestimate the power that education has in the LGBT movement. There are more pressing issues facing those in the LGBT community on this campus than marriage, and for many, that issue is the banning of gay men from blood donation, which is largely symbolic of the stigma against LGBT people that is still very real in all aspects of society. A goal of lobbying the federal government/national organizations is a great one, and one that will hopefully come in the future. At the moment, that goal is improbable. If most students don't even understand the issue, how are we supposed to mobilize against it? An educational campaign on this campus will have a lasting impact--at first only on the local level--but I hope that you can see the possibility for a larger impact as a result. -- ["Users/MoTorres"] - * I'm really trying to see things from your perspective. I think you may suppose that I'm against your issue, but I'm not. I do understand the idea of an educational campaign, as I myself was heavily involved in starting one: ["Students for an Orwellian Society"]. Besides the artistic elements of that, there was still a goal: getting people's feelings about their government from revolted to revolting. We were less concerned about specific policies, we just wanted to build a general sense for change. The educational campaign and media campaign were direct consequences of this goal. So I'm trying to see what your goal for the blood drives issue is. Obviously, doing nothing would allow blood drives to continue on campus, so that's meaningless. Gay men are legally allowed to provide donated blood, but the FDA issues a "guidance" against its use. It would have been good to provide precise definitions in your campaign to get elected (a great time to inform people on campus), but that's over with. Still it looks like this FDA rule is your primary focus. Unless there is subtext here. The first subtext, which I consider a likely one, is that you put that on your statement to say, "I'm the LGBTQI candidate, vote for me!" That's fine, it is an election after all. The other one is that you want to increase the status of LGBT issues in the community, which I consider doubtful, as you don't think that you should take action on Proposition 8. Still, it's also a worthy goal. Now, how do we go about accomplishing these goals? For the most part, I still see a much narrower goal that I had in OrwellSoc: repeal a specific government policy, and use it to symbolically inspire the gay community to further action and to gain community recognition. In order to repeal that policy, you must have a lobbying effort. Things do not happen in DC without some form of lobbying effort. While there appears to be some organization supporting this [http://www.gayblooddonation.org/ in Australia], there isn't an umbrella group working on this in the US. You could build a coalition to form one. Next, all good organizations have strong grassroots support. So looking at other grassroots organizations, ["CalPIRG"] being the obvious example, they actually educate people while getting them to sign postcards advocating action on federal and state legislation/regulation. And then they try to get you involved. An education and an advocacy campaign are not mutually exclusive, they are complimentary. You can use the campaign as a way to start talking with ["Blood Source"], since you're promoting the idea of blood donation. Perhaps you can even partner with them, since the Red Cross is likely still in opposition. You'll also need to talk to the scientists, to convince people that this blood is safe (and no, they won't catch "the gay" from it). Since you're from LEAD, I was expecting the level of leadership I'm accustomed to from that party. Leadership requires the vision to see the entire campaign, not just the few things that you feel you can do personally. You care enough to start an educational campaign, so why not care enough to see your campaign succeed? Proposition 8 exemplifies what happens when you have a strong grassroots base, but no leadership. I'm trying to help you out, to see that you succeed in your campaign. Good luck! --["Users/BrentLaabs"] - ------

Mo Torres

CurlyGirl26 — 2008-11-18 14:36:14

Comment added.

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 82:	Line 82:
	+ ------ + ''2008-11-18 14:36:14'' [[nbsp]] I volunteered at Clinica Tepati for 3 and something years back in the day! That practically makes us family. + + Good luck! --["Users/CurlyGirl26"]

Mo Torres

JamesSchwab — 2008-11-18 14:06:12

Comment added.

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 80:	Line 80:
	+ ------ + ''2008-11-18 14:06:12'' [[nbsp]] Mo - its not worth responding to this ridiculousness. Just keep your page updated and have people email you. --["Users/JamesSchwab"]

Mo Torres

BrentLaabs — 2008-11-18 11:48:00

campaign planning

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 60:	Line 60:
	+ * I'm really trying to see things from your perspective. I think you may suppose that I'm against your issue, but I'm not. I do understand the idea of an educational campaign, as I myself was heavily involved in starting one: ["Students for an Orwellian Society"]. Besides the artistic elements of that, there was still a goal: getting people's feelings about their government from revolted to revolting. We were less concerned about specific policies, we just wanted to build a general sense for change. The educational campaign and media campaign were direct consequences of this goal. So I'm trying to see what your goal for the blood drives issue is. Obviously, doing nothing would allow blood drives to continue on campus, so that's meaningless. Gay men are legally allowed to provide donated blood, but the FDA issues a "guidance" against its use. It would have been good to provide precise definitions in your campaign to get elected (a great time to inform people on campus), but that's over with. Still it looks like this FDA rule is your primary focus. Unless there is subtext here. The first subtext, which I consider a likely one, is that you put that on your statement to say, "I'm the LGBTQI candidate, vote for me!" That's fine, it is an election after all. The other one is that you want to increase the status of LGBT issues in the community, which I consider doubtful, as you don't think that you should take action on Proposition 8. Still, it's also a worthy goal. Now, how do we go about accomplishing these goals? For the most part, I still see a much narrower goal that I had in OrwellSoc: repeal a specific government policy, and use it to symbolically inspire the gay community to further action and to gain community recognition. In order to repeal that policy, you must have a lobbying effort. Things do not happen in DC without some form of lobbying effort. While there appears to be some organization supporting this [http://www.gayblooddonation.org/ in Australia], there isn't an umbrella group working on this in the US. You could build a coalition to form one. Next, all good organizations have strong grassroots support. So looking at other grassroots organizations, ["CalPIRG"] being the obvious example, they actually educate people while getting them to sign postcards advocating action on federal and state legislation/regulation. And then they try to get you involved. An education and an advocacy campaign are not mutually exclusive, they are complimentary. You can use the campaign as a way to start talking with ["Blood Source"], since you're promoting the idea of blood donation. Perhaps you can even partner with them, since the Red Cross is likely still in opposition. You'll also need to talk to the scientists, to convince people that this blood is safe (and no, they won't catch "the gay" from it). Since you're from LEAD, I was expecting the level of leadership I'm accustomed to from that party. Leadership requires the vision to see the entire campaign, not just the few things that you feel you can do personally. You care enough to start an educational campaign, so why not care enough to see your campaign succeed? Proposition 8 exemplifies what happens when you have a strong grassroots base, but no leadership. I'm trying to help you out, to see that you succeed in your campaign. Good luck! --["Users/BrentLaabs"]

Mo Torres

GregWebb — 2008-11-18 00:06:48

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 76:	Line 76:
	+ * I appreciate the offer and for someone who claims to not be reachable on the wiki, you respond very quickly. I'll probably take you up on the offer later in your term when things are less hectic (finals). - Greg Webb

Mo Torres

MoTorres — 2008-11-17 22:16:54

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 59:	Line 59:
- * A similar argument can be made regarding Prop 8 -- what exactly can be done on our college campus? Resolutions from ASUCD and rallies on the quad are great, but they don't impact the actual policy. The difference between activism focusing on Prop 8 and activism focusing on blood drives is one of awareness. People understand what gay marriage is, and understand that Prop 8 is discriminatory. There is little awareness, however, of the discriminatory policies regarding blood drives. You cannot underestimate the power that education has in the LGBT movement. There are more pressing issues facing those in the LGBT community on this campus than marriage, and for many, that issue is the banning of gay men from blood donation, which is largely symbolic of the stigma against LGBT people that is still very real in all aspects of society. A goal of lobbying the federal government/national organizations is a great one, and one that will hopefully come in the future. At the moment, that goal is improbable. If most students don't even understand the issue, how are we supposed to mobilize against it? An educational campaign on this campus will have a lasting impact. An education campaign will at first only have an impact on the local level--but I hope that you can see the possibility for a larger impact as a result of that. -- ["Users/MoTorres"]	+ * A similar argument can be made regarding Prop 8 -- what exactly can be done on our college campus? Resolutions from ASUCD and rallies on the quad are great, but they don't impact the actual policy. The difference between activism focusing on Prop 8 and activism focusing on blood drives is one of awareness. People understand what gay marriage is, and understand that Prop 8 is discriminatory. There is little awareness, however, of the discriminatory policies regarding blood drives. You cannot underestimate the power that education has in the LGBT movement. There are more pressing issues facing those in the LGBT community on this campus than marriage, and for many, that issue is the banning of gay men from blood donation, which is largely symbolic of the stigma against LGBT people that is still very real in all aspects of society. A goal of lobbying the federal government/national organizations is a great one, and one that will hopefully come in the future. At the moment, that goal is improbable. If most students don't even understand the issue, how are we supposed to mobilize against it? An educational campaign on this campus will have a lasting impact--at first only on the local level--but I hope that you can see the possibility for a larger impact as a result. -- ["Users/MoTorres"]
Line 68:	Line 68:
- * Other candidates would not have provided as strong an LGBT voice as I will provide in ASUCD. Activism against blood drives, as James has pointed out (below) is a natural offspring of the greater LGBT rights movement. LGBT activism on the UC Davis campus is increasing in recent weeks, and a push to ban blood drives is very possible. If ASUCD does not take a leadership role in advocating against the ban on gay men, I will tell you now that such a push would come with my full support. If my senate goals are successful, however, that will not be the case. We will be able to take an active stance against homophobia, while at the same time, supporting blood drives. Hopefully that clears things up for you. -- ["Users/MoTorres"]	+ * Other candidates would not have provided as strong an LGBT voice as I will provide in ASUCD. Activism against blood drives, as James has pointed out (below) is a natural offspring of the greater LGBT rights movement. LGBT activism on the UC Davis campus is increasing in recent weeks, and a push to ban blood drives is likely. If ASUCD does not take a leadership role in advocating against the ban on gay men, I will tell you now that such a push would come with my full support. If my senate goals are successful, however, that will not be the case. We will be able to take an active stance against homophobia, while at the same time, supporting blood drives. Hopefully that clears things up for you. -- ["Users/MoTorres"]

Mo Torres

MoTorres — 2008-11-17 22:14:42

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 59:	Line 59:
	+ * A similar argument can be made regarding Prop 8 -- what exactly can be done on our college campus? Resolutions from ASUCD and rallies on the quad are great, but they don't impact the actual policy. The difference between activism focusing on Prop 8 and activism focusing on blood drives is one of awareness. People understand what gay marriage is, and understand that Prop 8 is discriminatory. There is little awareness, however, of the discriminatory policies regarding blood drives. You cannot underestimate the power that education has in the LGBT movement. There are more pressing issues facing those in the LGBT community on this campus than marriage, and for many, that issue is the banning of gay men from blood donation, which is largely symbolic of the stigma against LGBT people that is still very real in all aspects of society. A goal of lobbying the federal government/national organizations is a great one, and one that will hopefully come in the future. At the moment, that goal is improbable. If most students don't even understand the issue, how are we supposed to mobilize against it? An educational campaign on this campus will have a lasting impact. An education campaign will at first only have an impact on the local level--but I hope that you can see the possibility for a larger impact as a result of that. -- ["Users/MoTorres"]
Line 67:	Line 68:
	+ * Other candidates would not have provided as strong an LGBT voice as I will provide in ASUCD. Activism against blood drives, as James has pointed out (below) is a natural offspring of the greater LGBT rights movement. LGBT activism on the UC Davis campus is increasing in recent weeks, and a push to ban blood drives is very possible. If ASUCD does not take a leadership role in advocating against the ban on gay men, I will tell you now that such a push would come with my full support. If my senate goals are successful, however, that will not be the case. We will be able to take an active stance against homophobia, while at the same time, supporting blood drives. Hopefully that clears things up for you. -- ["Users/MoTorres"]
Line 73:	Line 75:
	+ * Just wait and see, Greg. A lot will be done. I am aware of your skepticism, and if you would like to discuss this issue personally with me, I invite you to meet with me at any time. I will be in the Cross Cultural Center every day this week. If you would prefer not to meet with me in person, you can e-mail me at motorres at ucdavis. The wiki is not a particularly good way to reach me. I visited this page by chance last night, and am happy to reply to people on a public forum, but e-mail is a much better way by which to contact me. -- ["Users/MoTorres"]

Mo Torres

JamesSchwab — 2008-11-17 21:18:35

Comment added.

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 73:	Line 73:
	+ ------ + ''2008-11-17 21:18:35'' [[nbsp]] [http://media.www.thespartandaily.com/media/storage/paper852/news/2008/03/12/News/Two-San.Jose.Jcs.Suspend.Blood.Drives-3264907.shtml Maybe this will give you an idea] --["Users/JamesSchwab"]

Mo Torres

GregWebb — 2008-11-17 20:35:13

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 72:	Line 72:
	+ * I agree with Brent, I read the comments last night and was really glad that Mo answered the questions, I know a lot of the other candidates haven't but to their defense they may not know how to use the wiki. I think it comes off as slightly rude but the whole blood drive thing was kinda iffy to begin with because honestly, what can Mo really do other than ban blood drives? It's a great way to appeal to students however. - ["GregWebb"]

Mo Torres

JabberWokky — 2008-11-17 18:47:24

Revert to version 11 (Anybody want to propose a lifting of the ban given the recent civility?).

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 59:	Line 59:
- * Let me respectfully disagree with Mo on this issue. First of all, ASUCD has no power to remove blood source off the campus and even if they did it would be political suicide, and even if it was political suicide the decision would be reversed as soon as the next Senate came to power. Second of all, this will not in anyway change Blood drive policies. They're not going to change an international policy due to you. And finally it is a good policy because its not medically safe. There are diseases out there and the medical community needs to take steps to prevent diseases causes by un-safe sex, needle use, and bad meat. The discomfort of being discriminated "for your behavior" does not outweigh the lives of sick people and especially newborn infants that need disease free blood. Killer Squirrel

Mo Torres

killersquirrel — 2008-11-17 18:39:03

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 59:	Line 59:
- * Let me respectfully disagree with Mo on this issue. First of all, ASUCD has no power to remove blood source off the campus and even if they did it would be political suicide, and even if it was political suicide the decision would be reversed as soon as the next Senate came to power. Second of all, this will not in anyway change Blood drive policies. They're not going to change an international policy due to you. - And finally it is a good policy because its not medically safe. There are diseases out there and the medical community needs to take steps to prevent diseases causes by un-safe sex, needle use, and bad meat. The discomfort of being discriminated "for your behavior" does not outweigh the lives of sick people and especially newborn infants that need disease free blood. Killer Squirrel	+ * Let me respectfully disagree with Mo on this issue. First of all, ASUCD has no power to remove blood source off the campus and even if they did it would be political suicide, and even if it was political suicide the decision would be reversed as soon as the next Senate came to power. Second of all, this will not in anyway change Blood drive policies. They're not going to change an international policy due to you. And finally it is a good policy because its not medically safe. There are diseases out there and the medical community needs to take steps to prevent diseases causes by un-safe sex, needle use, and bad meat. The discomfort of being discriminated "for your behavior" does not outweigh the lives of sick people and especially newborn infants that need disease free blood. Killer Squirrel

Mo Torres

killersquirrel — 2008-11-17 18:35:49

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 59:	Line 59:
	+ * Let me respectfully disagree with Mo on this issue. First of all, ASUCD has no power to remove blood source off the campus and even if they did it would be political suicide, and even if it was political suicide the decision would be reversed as soon as the next Senate came to power. Second of all, this will not in anyway change Blood drive policies. They're not going to change an international policy due to you. + And finally it is a good policy because its not medically safe. There are diseases out there and the medical community needs to take steps to prevent diseases causes by un-safe sex, needle use, and bad meat. The discomfort of being discriminated "for your behavior" does not outweigh the lives of sick people and especially newborn infants that need disease free blood. Killer Squirrel

Mo Torres

BrentLaabs — 2008-11-17 17:44:21

yep

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 71:	Line 71:
	+ * Yep, I learned this at the NAGPS Annual Conference. We had a motivational speaker come and talk to us about increasing our happiness through the MYFABMOFA plan: Make Yourself Feel Awesome By Making Others Feel Awful. Note that this motivational speaker was a comedian. But yeah, one of the tactics to use here is to start a sentence with something that sounds positive, only to let them drop even more. This enhances the fun. Examples: "I appreciate your work", "Please don't take this the wrong way," or "With all due respect." --["Users/BrentLaabs"]

Mo Torres

JamesSchwab — 2008-11-17 17:14:09

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 70:	Line 70:
	+ * Come on now. really?? -JS

Mo Torres

BrentLaabs — 2008-11-17 16:31:59

hi schwab

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 58:	Line 58:
- * You're right. Gay marriage isn't the most important issue in the gay community right now, and the issue most likely to get some sort of policy movement. And it's not like the second couple married in Yolo County was two UCD students. Nor that students might want to get married after graduation. So never mind, forget I said anything. -BL
Line 70:	Line 69:
	+ * Any sentence that begins with "With all due respect" is not a respectful sentence. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]

Mo Torres

JamesSchwab — 2008-11-17 16:03:03

Comment added.

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 68:	Line 68:
	+ ------ + ''2008-11-17 16:03:03'' [[nbsp]] It's pretty sad when Mo comes on here to address your concerns and he answers them respectfully, yet does not receive the same respect in return. --["Users/JamesSchwab"]

Mo Torres

BrentLaabs — 2008-11-17 15:41:20

two replies to Mo, both in opposition

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 58:	Line 58:
	+ * You're right. Gay marriage isn't the most important issue in the gay community right now, and the issue most likely to get some sort of policy movement. And it's not like the second couple married in Yolo County was two UCD students. Nor that students might want to get married after graduation. So never mind, forget I said anything. -BL + * I don't see what you can do at a local level, other than coalition building, that will have any effect whatsoever on this blood donation policy. You want to repeal a federal policy: the MSM deferral for gay men. The MSM deferral was only approve the last time around by a FDA Advisory Board vote of 8-7, so directed agency lobbying could see results. While this policy is only a recommendation, the American Red Cross lobbied very strongly to keep the MSM deferral, so that nationwide organization is another target. But a grassroots campaign without a nationwide goal is worthless here. --["Users/BrentLaabs" Brent Laabs], Legislative Chair, National Association of Graduate and Professional Students

Mo Torres

JoseBleckman — 2008-11-17 15:19:35

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 65:	Line 65:
	+ * "Work towards allowing blood drives to continue at UC Davis" is the only thing I was referring to. I would not want voters to think that the only way to keep blood drives going would be by electing a particular senator. A lot of students enjoy taking part in blood drives, and I did not want them fearful that if they voted for other candidates blood drives would be taken away. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]

Mo Torres

MoTorres — 2008-11-17 01:51:50

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 56:	Line 56:
	+ * With all due respect, I am not sure what position you hold to say that a focus on Prop 8 is more appropriate than a focus on blood drives. The LGBT community is not homogenous. Marriage is an important issue to many that identify as LGBT/queer, but by no means is it important to all. To a great number of students, the issue of Prop 8 is one that is wholly symbolic. Most undergraduate students are not married, and presumably, most will not be married by graduation. Prop 8 and the issue of gay marriage are important, but blood drives affect students DIRECTLY, not symbolically. Blood drives bring active discrimination to the UC Davis campus in a way that banning gay marriage does not. ASUCD already passed a resolution in opposition to Proposition 8. I am not entirely sure what else you want ASUCD to do about that. ASUCD has greater control over blood drives on this campus, and as a Senator I will work towards ensuring that the LGBT voice is NOT left out of this discussion as has historically been the case. + A national advocacy campaign will be a great idea one day, but for now, it is probably an even better idea to work on the local level. As far as collaboration goes, I would love to work with any student or organization that is interested in fighting for LGBT issues.-- ["Users/MoTorres"]
Line 58:	Line 60:
	+ * I apologize for not making myself clear in my original statement. As much as I appreciate the sarcasm in your comment, I'm going to have to make a clarification here. I have never made the claim that anyone at UC Davis is actively fighting to ban blood drives. I will be the first to say, however, that the way blood drives are conducted in this country is discriminatory and homophobic. With that in mind, I completely understand why there would be a push to ban blood drives on a college campus. As part of a larger push for LGBT rights on the UC Davis campus, maybe somebody SHOULD work against blood drives. As of yet, this issue has gone unaddressed. + + My stance on this issue is a logical one. I understand the need for blood donation in this country. At the same time, if we wish to hold true to our Principles of Community, we must ensure that our university is open, safe, and inclusive to all students, regardless of sexual orientation. By allowing blood donation to occur at UC Davis while gay men are explicitly discriminated against in the process, we are perpetuating homophobia on our campus. + + My platform balances the need for blood donation and the responsibility of providing for a marginalized community on our campus. Very few senators have run on an explicitly pro-LGBT platform in the past. I am, quite frankly, surprised that you would choose to make light of this issue, when to many students at UC Davis, this issue is incredibly personal, and incredibly important. -- ["Users/MoTorres"]

Mo Torres

JoseBleckman — 2008-11-11 23:47:04

Comment added.

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 56:	Line 56:
	+ ------ + ''2008-11-11 23:47:04'' [[nbsp]] Mo is going to win, and thus blood drives will be allowed to continue. I'm glad Mo is fighting against those who want to take blood drives away. (Not that anyone is trying to do that, but I guess its good to be vigilant...) --["Users/JoseBleckman"]

Mo Torres

BrentLaabs — 2008-11-11 15:37:26

Comment added.

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 54:	Line 54:
	+ ------ + ''2008-11-11 15:37:26'' [[nbsp]] I'm not sure what you want to do about the Blood Drive. It's an ASUCD activity, and doing nothing would result in it continuing to happen. You want to have some sort of education campaign about gay rights, but the current focus for that demographic is still on Prop 8, and it might be a better fit. About the advocacy campaign, it raises the most questions from me: are you seriously considering restarting some sort of national advocacy effort in ASUCD (i.e. the National Lobby unit)? If so, have you considered working with the [wiki:ucdgsa Graduate Student Association], which is closely allied with the National Association of Graduate-Professional Students? --["Users/BrentLaabs"]

Mo Torres

BrentLaabs — 2008-11-11 15:32:59

+comments bar

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
- Mo Torres is a candidate for the ["ASUCD Senate"] with ["LEAD" L.E.A.D.] running in ["Fall 2008 ASUCD election"].	+ '''Mo Torres''' is a candidate for the ["ASUCD Senate"] with ["LEAD" L.E.A.D.] running in ["Fall 2008 ASUCD election"].
Line 25:	Line 25:
- -
Line 53:	Line 51:
- Work towards allowing blood drives to continue at UC Davis, but with the condition that they must be accompanied with an educational / advocacy campaign to alert students of the problems with the FDA regulation.	+ Work towards allowing blood drives to continue at UC Davis, but with the condition that they must be accompanied with an educational / advocacy campaign to alert students of the problems with the FDA regulation. + + [[Comments]]

Mo Torres

EliYani — 2008-10-27 17:30:14

Differences for Mo Torres

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+ Mo Torres is a candidate for the ["ASUCD Senate"] with ["LEAD" L.E.A.D.] running in ["Fall 2008 ASUCD election"]. + [[Image(VoteMoTorres.jpg, thumbnail, "Vote Mo #1 for ASUCD Senate!")]] + + + == Candidate Statement and Activities == + + What's up everyone! My name is Mo Torres, and I am running for ASUCD Senate! I am a third year History and Chican@ Studies major from Sacramento, California. + + In case you've never voted in an ASUCD election before (and that's most of the student body) here's a little bit of info--there are twelve seats in the ASUCD Senate, and six of them are up for election this quarter! Because ASUCD elections use choice voting, where you RANK the candidates instead of just picking one, just remember to vote MO TORRES #1 and the rest of the LEAD slate #2-6! + + UCD Involvement / Experience: + + * Transfer Orientation Leader, Summer 2008 + * Freshman Orientation Leader, Summer 2008 + * Mixed/Multi-Ethnic Community Intern at the Cross Cultural Center + * Undergraduate Volunteer, Clínica Tepati + * Planning Committee, Middle East/South Asian Leadership Retreat + * Planning Committee, Mixed Heritage Week 2008 + * Undergrad Assistant, AIDS & Society + * Member, La Familia + * Member, Mixed Student Union + * Student Assistant, The History Project + * Attendee, Middle East/South Asian Leadership Retreat, 2008 + * Education Abroad Program participant: Bahia, Brasil Fall 2007 + + + + == Platform Issues == + + * TRANSFER STUDENT HOUSING + + Advocate for housing to be made available to new transfer students near campus. Work on reserving section of planned West Village community for transfer students. + + + * ETHNIC & CULTURAL STUDIES + + Continue the fight to bring a Chican@ Studies PhD to Davis + Push for allowing African American & African Studies, Asian American Studies, and Native American Studies majors to graduate with departmental honors + Expand the Middle East/South Asian Studies program, and push for more languages at UC Davis + + + * USE OF RACE IN UC STATISTICS + + UCD does not accurately represent the student body in terms of race + Southeast Asian students are under-represented, yet they go unnoticed because of UC's use of the umbrella category "Asian" + Mixed race students are not given a choice in how to identify - the UC does it for them + Work with students throughout the UC system to fight for systemwide change + + + * ASUCD BLOOD DRIVE + + Men who have sex with men are not allowed to donate blood under FDA regulations. Many college campuses throughout California are banning blood drives. + Work towards allowing blood drives to continue at UC Davis, but with the condition that they must be accompanied with an educational / advocacy campaign to alert students of the problems with the FDA regulation.

Mo Torres

EliYani — 2008-10-27 17:29:42

Upload of image VoteMoTorres.jpg.