Scrupulosly Assessing Studds: I understand and agree, in part, with the October 17, 2005 The Boston Globe Op Ed opinion of Mary Breslaure regarding the late former Congressman Gerry Studs. There is no question he contributed much to his district and the State of Massachusetts. I support all gay rights legislative attempts.

Having said that, it still bothers me that a sitting Congressman had sex with a 17 year old page. The difference between former Congressman Foley and the late Congressman Studds was that Foley, in addition to committing unseemly acts with a page, belongs to a party that condemns the very essence of who Foley is thereby relegating the Foley act to the world's hypocritical archives.

The acts themselves, however, I believe, must be separated from the politics of the individual. In my opinion, actions of the late Congressman Studds and the former Congressman Foley give a black eye to a group of people who do not need it or deserve it. For everyone, a sexual liaison in the workplace -- most especially with an underage person --should be out of bounds period. Sexuality is not the issue but it becomes the issue because there are those who would like nothing more than to paint all homosexual people with the same brush.

Persons in positions of power because they are in the public arena whose decisions affect so many others, should scrupulously monitor the consequences of their actions. In my opinion, the late Congressman Gerry Studds, while a fine congressman on the issues, was forever tainted by an act he never should have committed. His censuring served only to reinforce the indictments about a group which was and is trying so hard to secure its rights but whose opposition for years has been trying equally as hard to crush those rights. Gerry Studds's actions had consequences for us all.