Dear Editor:

It is most unfortunate that the mass of people judge Christianity by what the “Televangelists” say.

I am Christian, and also Gay, and I am truly sorry that people were hurt by this statement. I invite those that are and those that are not Christian to read “What’s so Amazing About Grace?” by phillip yancy.

In that book is the essence of what real Christianity is. Put the Televangilist on the shelf with entertainment, but please don’t judge God or Christians by the stupid remarks made by someone on TV.

Ron Mason

Dear Editor:

In the “Dear John” item about me printed in the Conversations column (GLT, 9/30/04), the columnist uses statistical information gleaned from the Union-Tribune about the astounding growth of communities of color in just the last three years, to justify the need to “plan ahead” for the future of our community. Services doled out based on race, according to Dr. Jacobs and Attorney Valdez, are now the accepted norm at the Center and “preparing our community for the changing face of our city” is now being mandated. So much for believing affirmitive action has been outlawed under Prop 209. I suppose next we’ll be seeing whole sections of this newspaper written in some foreign language? Will Mama’s Kitchen now be made to serve foreign foods cooked by a board of chefs?

It may not have occured to these “wise and intellectual” geniuses who run the Center that the statistics they are so fond of quoting just maybe can be taken with the proverbial grain of salt. I am speaking of how eloquently Time magazine recently wrote about uncontrolled immigration, Who Left the Door Open? It gives us an unpretty portrait of what the real future of our country will be. Right now LA’s workforce is 53% illiterate. Is the Center preparing? Will dubious growth soon mandate bilingual volunteers? For forty years we’ve had a racially profiled immigration system that is designed to reject fair play. A system that no doubt was crafted by minds similar to the Center’s.

John Primavera

Dear Editor:

Great article. It was Susan Jester, not Susan Chester, (misspelled) as the writer said in the article who did SD Walks for Life. Check with Nicole. He should agree (at least about the spelling of Susan’s name)

Charles S. Kaminski

Dear Editor:

It’s incredibly sad to see Nicole Ramirez pimp so heavily for Tricia Hunter in light of Hunter’s anti-Latino mass mailing attacking Lori Saldaña for “supporting” illegal immigrants.

What a telling commentary on Hunter that this so-called moderate Republican has taken a hateful page from Pete Wilson’s political handbook and targeted illegal aliens in a racist appeal to voters.

No self-respecting gay individual – indeed, no thinking individual – should give his or her backing to a politician so willing to promote a despicable hate mailer that is hurtful against a minority group.

D. Jon Komatsu

Dear Editor:

Your latest issue, “Gays get political,” spotlighted the extreme disconnect of persons who identify themselves foremost as Republicans rather than as gays and lesbians.

Twice now, in 1992 and 2004, the Log Cabin Republicans have withheld their support for the Republican candidate—because of his fundamentally opposing most all of our rights, but refused to support his main opponent—although actually supporting most all of our rights, just because he’s a member of another party. So rather than act on the universal truth of our rights to equal opportunity and legal status by voting for the candidate who most supports them, they abstain from any vote that keeps us from permanent second-class status if it violates the fiction of party purity. That’s not principled, it’s perverse.

Especially since that party has been hijacked by the Christian Right and there isn’t any other group identity whom they are openly denying equal protection before the law and demonizing as the greatest moral threat to our country: It doesn’t matter how much money you give or letters you write or votes you don’t cast or whose daughter is a lesbian or if you call yourself a Green or a Democrat or a Log Cabin whatever, they’ll always just see a faggot. Your best intentions by definition can never pierce their theological boilerplate. And when across the board—on fiscal responsibility, smaller government, nation-building, and the primacy of the individual—the Bush Administration has betrayed the core beliefs of the Republican Party, what exactly is left to identify with?

Where is there any evidence of the Log Cabin’s “moderating influence” or “role as educators?” Who of the “15 openly gay people” Bush appointed has protested the elimination of sexual orientation from the list of protected categories for federal employees or the removal of guidelines from the CDC that assert the reliability of condoms as protection from HIV or the refusal of funds to any AIDS-education group that doesn’t teach abstinence-only? Why is it with this label, after all the struggles of coming out, that the desperation for acceptance prevails over the pain of denial?

The consequences of valuing party affiliation or ideological purity over personal identity are too real for any of us to entertain fantasies of false solidarity.

Mat Wahlstrom