Dear Editor:

In response to your “Guest Commentary” on May 24, 2007 by Gil Eastham, president, Stepping Stone board of directors and Beverly Fisher, chief officer, Client Services & Quality Assurance –

Whether or not Stepping Stone condones sexual acts between and among clients is moot. There are apparently no consequences for such activities. In any legitimate treatment program in the country, sex between clients would jeopardize their continued participation in treatment.

The Commentary is a condescending attempt to justify the prostitution of the organization for money or more base motivations. This defense flies in the face of evidence and legitimate approaches to treatment. Many other examples could be given, but the larger issue facing Stepping Stone is that it has no clear mission or treatment policy.

In recent years Stepping Stone’s program has drifted away from the social model steeped in 12 step traditions. In its place, the agency has begun to adopt a clinical model. Research has consistently shown that a clinical approach is not effective with substance abuse. If Stepping Stone is to base its programs on a clinical approach, it should be staffed entirely by clinicians.

The Commentary indicates that Stepping Stone’s program is no longer based on the 12-steps. It seems to use homelessness as a primary focus rather than sobriety. Further, the Commentary’s groundless and self-serving remarks strongly imply that anyone who disagrees with its position or reasoning must be old, out of date, and out of touch. The Commentary speaks of change. This is the most distressful message of the Commentary. The Bible also speaks of change and of a “holy instant.” I became sober through a miracle – in an instant I changed my whole life. While I did not know it at the time, by clinging to the 12-steps for guidance, I now recognize that holy instant. It is that spiritual contact, no ‘progressive steps’ or condoning of ‘slips’ which provide a context for sobriety.

Volunteers are critical to the past record of success at Stepping Stone. Not only do they provide services which tight budgets can not allow, they are also critics with nothing to lose. They provide valuable feedback, insight and wisdom to the staff and board of this publicly funded organization. When such criticism becomes a threat, despotism reigns.

I have been associated with Stepping Stone for 23 years as an employee, volunteer and supporter, I now move on. I’ve had the opportunity to share my recovery with hundreds of residents. I leave a legacy of consistency, accountability and adventure. My life has been enriched by success and enduring friendships, all of which blossomed during my association with Stepping Stone. I am grateful for the opportunities.

Alice Miller Henry

Dear Editor:

In response to your editorial in the June 21st issue of the GLT; I am concerned that even with your positive words about Coucilwoman, Toni Atkins, your piece also places an unfavorable opinion about her to your readers. I don’t want to say that Ms. Atkins and I place issues in the the same priority, but I can say I understand that with other important issues to have resolved, gay marriage is a priority that is lower on my list. It was unnecessary for your editorial to state, “But we wonder why we had to prompt her to take the initiative.”

As a member of the gay community, I am not a strict activist for gay marriage. I don’t want to be misunderstood, but I do believe that marriage should be open to all social communities in our society. There is more acceptance of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders in our society today, but gay marriage is not a platform I feel is the most important issue to have resolved. Ms. Atkins represents a community, yet mostly gay, but a mixed constituency.

As a member of her constituency, she has represented me well and I hope that she will continue her excellent work in the State Assembly.

Romel White

Dear Editor:

Before you get all excited about the Padres partnering with the GLBTEUIOP.... community (and I know they are), they refuse to admit that. How does it make you and your friends feel to know that the Padres are ashamed, scared, whatever, to admit that they are partnering with you?

Talk about wanting it both ways. They are more than happy to take your money and tell you to your face that they are with you, but when I or anybody else who sees this as an affront to decency confronts them about it, they just say it’s another “group sale.” How does that make you feel? Really wanted? Doubt it.

Mike Farmer

Dear Editor:

Thank you for some rare objective journalism on HIV. As a longtime dissident I have grown accustomed to being marginalized and am disgusted by the press and the huge AID$ Industry. Big Pharma/Big Gov has been a huge success in this one.

The complicity of the gay community in the virus theory is due to victimhood, not necessarily the 1980’s panic kind, but the unwillingness to admit to and own up to the widespread drug use beyond unhealthy eating and sedentary life-styles of the country. How dare Peter Duesberg say nitrates can kill and ruin my little-brown-bottle-disco night-out on alcohol and profilactic antibiotics! Anyone around in the 70’s knows the score and most, to properly use a word, are “denialists”.

I read Duesberg’s “Inventing the AIDS Virus” in 1995 and got a divorce from HIV. Instead of wasting a few more billion on a vaccine and other such nonsense we can educate ourselves about our health, our only true possession, and wind up on raw foods.

Since you’re headed in the right direction I suggest you do an expose of the baldface assertion that HIV tests detect HIV exclusively and accurately.

I sincerely hope this letter pisses off the right people!

Jerry McPherson

To read more letters to the editor, visit www.gaylesbiantimes.com.