Dear Editor:

I read your comments this morning and found them favorable to my thought. However, since The Center has made the decision to fly their flags they error in not waving all the flags that represent the other groups in our community, ie. The Bears and The Leather Order.

We make the mistake often by not being inclusive, it is discriminatory you know.

Thanks for pointing it out.

Goldman Jacobs

Dear Editor:

A recent letter to the editor called it a “disgrace” that me and dozens of my gay and Democrat Assembly campaign supporters were allowed to march in the Gay Pride Parade. The writer mistakenly assumed that because I am a registered Republican I would if elected “vote whatever way the party leaders instruct me.”

A decade ago I served in the State Legislature. My voting record was independent and bi-partisan. If elected this November, I will continue to vote for what I think is right, not what ideological Republican or Democrat leaders demand. My opponent, Lori Saldana represents the kind of divisive and shrill partisan politics that got our state into the crisis we are in now. She is unable and unwilling to work across party lines, or with the Governor.

I am proud of my voting record on diversity gay civil rights is public, and I encourage any interested voter to review it. This record, and my non-partisan ‘get things done’ approach has earned me the endorsement of dozens of active Democrats, GLBT Vote 2004, and Planned Parenthood.

Tricia Hunter

Dear Editor:

As a gay man with over 30 years experience as an LGBTI rights advocate, I am embarrassed by and ashamed of the opposition from some in our community to the addition of transgender people to the Employment Non Discrimination Act (ENDA). It is just plain selfish to say that we should work to end discrimination against lesbians, gays, and bisexuals now, but transgender people will have to wait. The opposition to adding transgender people to ENDA suggest an attitude of; “I want what’s good for me and I don’t care about other people’s needs.”

I see no particular reason why lesbians, gays, and bisexuals should go first. They don’t merit protection more than transgender people. In fact, one could reasonably argue that transgender people should get protections first. Society is much more accepting of lesbians and gays than they used to be. Transgender people experience more discrimination and persecution.

Can we be sure that lesbians, gays, and bisexuals will work as hard for transgender rights in the future if an ENDA, without transgender people, is passed. My experience tells me that’s not likely.

Some say adding transgender people to ENDA will make it harder to pass. Frankly, we have spent 30 years trying to gain passage of legislation that protects only lesbians gays and bisexuals. The first attempt was made by Representative Bella Abzug, D-New York in 1975. She attempted to add sexual orientation to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. After 30 years of trying, we have to admit the exclusion of transgender people is a failed strategy. Rather than fighting to exclude an important segment of the LGBTI community from ENDA we should be focusing on finding the real reasons for the failure of our current strategy. We should concentrate on determining what changes are needed to gain passage of ENDA. Clearly we need a better plan.

One problem with the current strategy is that it divides our community. As a civil rights advocate, I know, the more people working in support of a bill the more likely it is to pass. Adding transgender people to ENDA is likely to increase the number of individuals and organizations working in support of the bill.

For 30 years we have been telling transgender people be patient we’ll get to you later. It will probably take another 10 to 20 years, at least, to get Congress to pass ENDA. Is it reasonable to ask transgender people to wait 40-50 years BEFORE WE EVEN START to work on protecting their rights? Clearly the answer is no. We should begin now to work hard for the rights of all the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community.

Boyce Hinman

Dear Editor:

I am writing you about a situation that has happened with the San Diego based Gay Men’s Spiritual Retreat (GMSR). First let me preface my statements with the fact that I have been an active participant of the GMSR for many years now. I was even given a special award for service to the GMSR at one of the recent retreats and was chosen to be the Chair for the 2005 retreat.

I continue to be disappointed and confused at the fact that the current President of the GMSR has chosen to perform in a bareback porn video (an industry that the California Attorney General is asking to change). His image is available on both the website for the GMSR and for the bareback porn company. I have taken several actions to try to resolve the irresponsible behavior of a current leader of a 501 © 3 organization. First I spoke with Mike individually. I resigned as the Chair for the 2005 retreat in hopes that it would enlighten him to the severity of his choices as a leader. I went back and asked him formally, one on one to resign as President of the Board and thereby distance himself from the organization. As of today, September 6, 2004, he has chosen not to.

My next step was to make a statement to the Board of Director’s asking them to remove Mike from his position. I was given 5 minutes at the beginning of their meeting on Thursday, August 24, 2004. All of the Board except one member were present. Their names are Mike Zimmerman, Carl Ducket, Robert Wood, Alan Riggins, Joe Rego, Johnna Helm, Trenton Shine, John Flores, Peter Fletcher, Chad Beasely, and Dave Smith. The absent member was Bo Bortner. After addressing the Board, I was told...Someone will call you if there are any changes. I have had no call as of September 6, 2004.

I outlined for the Board the “precarious position” Mike’s behavior has left several other organizations in. A local recovery home for instance receives some funding for HIV teaching and prevention. Knowing that Mike’s behavior may effect the funding and services that this recovery home might be able to offer to the community.....the current Board of Directors did nothing. They have basically condoned Mike’s behavior by not removing him from his position.

I want to make a distinction here that this is not about what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their home. This is however about appropriate behavior for leaders and mentors in our community. It became an issue for the community at large when Mike did a video that is available to the public. It became a public issue when after being asked privately and then at the Board of Director’s level the issue was taken seriously. In my opinion this is one more case where a Board of Director’s has become a “Good Ol Boys Club.” Not taking responsibility one more time and hoping the problem will just go away.

Our community deserves and must demand responsible leadership. Our community deserves respectful leadership. We must hold responsible people accountable and choose accountable people that are responsible!

Patrick Cullen