Dear Editor:

Since there has been no response from this Board in regards to removing the known registered sex offenders from their roles as supervisor and official, I’ve sent out letters to the community, and to your sponsors. You may be receiving more calls soon.

This is not a Liberal vs. Conservative issue. This has nothing to do with any kind of prejudice personally or collectively with this Board. This issue also has nothing to do with any kind of ‘Pride’ in the gay community.

As a member of the gay community who was only made aware of this problem recently, I was even more shocked that this Board would not do the right thing by removing these two individuals from their roles in these events by now. It does not make sense to promote a healthy atmosphere for families and children in this community then let known sex offenders be allowed to participate in these events. There are always children present at these events! I cannot imagine any responsible gay or straight parent being okay with this idea. If you’re doing this for some political reason, or to prove something to someone, please stop it and consider the risks.

If I had not known about this until recently, I can only assume that most of the gay community may not be aware of this problem. I am not someone who has subjugated himself to a religious faith nor do I consider myself a ‘radical’ anything. I do not read the conservative publications-which is why I had not known about this problem before last week. This is exactly how the far-right gains their ground against the gay rights movement. This kind of news doesn’t seem to make it into the mainstream gay media. These are the skeletons’ in our closets that will eventually do us in if we do not change our ways.

Tolerance should selective, not simply accepted for everything that passes through this community. We have allot to lose if we cannot gain some credibility with average Americans. This is so NOT the way to get this accomplished.

Please reconsider your stance on this issue. A very ‘public’ acknowledgement will be needed if you decide to correct this error in judgment. Consider what it will mean to this community and what it will show to those that oppose us. Common sense will make this more of a win-win situation for this event over the current road you’re taking.

Bill Lullo

Dear Editor:

Your editorial endorsing Donna Frye for mayor recognizes that Donna is honest, hardworking, well- informed and smart. She has a vision for San Diego.

San Diego needs change and what disappoints me most is that Toni Atkins, who I like and agree with on most social issues and certainly on issues important to the community has so much difficulty making decisions, takes big money from Cheetahs and from Corky McMillan and other developers, and can’t even take the risk of endorsing Donna Frye for mayor.

I am planning to run for the District 2 council seat and should I win, I hope Toni could show more leadership and help me make San Diego a better place for everyone.

Ian Trowbridge

Dear Editor:

Councilwoman Toni Atkins: I am not sure what your vote was on the decision to pull San Diego City’s support from Gay Pride this year. I am hoping that you did NOT vote in favor of this measure. Since you are my council member,I feel I must address this to you regardless of your vote. I hope that you will express my opinion to the members who voted in favor of such a fascitst decision!

Let me first say that I am not gay. And I am a Christian (obviously not the kind of Christian that protests the rights of humans who don’t share their lifestyles). I do support the gay community and have attended pride in the past to offer that support. I was a volunteer for Holistic Aids Response Program, providing massage to people suffering from HIV and aids.

I have a few questions for the Council: When did the “Christian” agenda become the ONLY agenda that matters in this city (for that matter in this country)? Are they the ONLY tax-payers? When did it become Okay to snub San Diego’s nose at a large (and I might add incredibly productive) group of people that also pay taxes in this city? Have you considered the income that Pride brings to the city this weekend and every year? You should think about that if nothing else, since San Diego always seems to make that an issue when we throw tax dollars at the sports teams.

Most importantly, I want to say that Gay Pride is not just about celebrating a lifestyle, it is about overcoming the bigotry and prejudice that have been bestowed upon the Gay community for far too long. Why does the council support the upholding of this bigotry?! For that matter I would like to address the ”Christians”. Didn’t Christ himself say that we should love our fellow man? He didn’t say “of course, unless they are gay.”

Tracie Livermore

Dear Editor:

I was deeply saddened to read Brent Montejo’s letter to the editor chastising Steven B. Johnson for his leadership in attempting to raise awareness and create change with regard to the issue of crystal meth and sex in the gay community.

Mr. Johnson’s letters in the UT and GLT are not alarmist, they are accurate. All one needs to do is read the article entitled “HIV and Meth: More bad news” in the July 19th issue of The Advocate to know there is a direct correlation between crystal meth use and new HIV infections. In the article it is reported that in LA County, 30% of newly infected gay men indicate that crystal meth played a role in their infection. We are witnessing a similar correlation in San Diego County and as Mr. Johnson accurately points out, County leadership has failed to adequately address the need for funding and has sat on its hands while the problem has worsened.

As a gay man in his 40s, I have witnessed first hand the both the devastation of the AIDS epidemic and the emergence of this new crisis, one that threatens to bring about similar destruction. When gay men were sick and dying from AIDS our community acted in support and solidarity to take unprecedented action . It was through this extraordinary act that we were able to shift the attitudes of the broader community and secure the support, financial and political, that was necessary to adequately address the problem. Any other tactic would have resulted in further harm to our community.

Mr. Johnson’s actions do not denigrate the reputation of gay people. What is denigrating to gay people is to regard ones own reputation over the health and wellbeing of our entire community. What denigrates gay people is when our own would rather play nice and not ruffle the feathers of the “straight community” over concerns for how we might look while we suffer and die.

What Mr. Montejo fails to realize is that we are one beautiful, powerful LGBT community and when one of our sisters or brothers suffers, we all suffer. When we distance ourselves from one another, especially those who struggle, we act to perpetuate the same kind of ignorance and lack of compassion that allowed that AIDS epidemic to grow unattended for far too long. Our concern is not with whether we look good in the eyes of a particular segment of society. Our concern is to be good to one another by doing whatever is necessary to secure the support needed to keep our community well.

Keith A. Anastasi

Dear Editor:

When I’ve asked you to look in the mirror, I did not mean to check your (blond) hair. “We’ve been too complacent…As a community continuously criticized from the outside, we often are reluctant to space judgment upon ourselves.” (Issue 897) “…most will agree the spike in HIV is a result of multiple variables…” (Issue 913) You continue to print the words, yet you continue to support a complacent attitude right here in San Diego by continuing to ignore “variables” I have long believed the responsibility of gay media and gay leaders.

“…the community [has] united in action making the campaign against crystal meth and other party drugs THE priority.” (Issue 919) Drugs in and of themselves do not spread HIV, (I’m proof of that,) irresponsible sexual behavior does. Not taking a strong stance against arrant property and business owners and managers within our own community ignores part of the equation.

The week after the GLT reported the problems at Club 2200, Mr. Ramirez-Murray advocated the club stating “it is clan, safe and open for business,” continuing to assert there was a new “owner” and new management.

In issue 897, Anthony Baldwin reported, “According to the investigator’s report dated Dec. 2, an undercover detective had entered 2200 Club posing as a customer and observed…” The next week Mr. Ramirez-Murray wrote “The popular 2200 Club continues to operate and contrary…One officer did go in to make an inspection and that was when it was formally the Mustang Spa.”

Back in January, issue 891, the GLT documented the horrendous conditions and the deplorable behaviors allowed to take place at the former Mustang Spa. Bob Smith, who has been “alerted” by Mr. Ramirez-Murray, was reported as saying, “F Street Corporation owns the property and the pluming work cost the property close to $19,000. When I took over the place, all the pluming was not in function and that all had to be replaced.” The pluming has been inadequate for at least a year, and the fact that Mrs. Alma Rosa Vassic had finally become a responsible property/business owner in the gay community does not impress me.

It was also reported that BOB SMITH, the alleged new owner of the club, had hired JOHN SMITH as the general manager. Because I choose to believe my own eyes, and other senses, I can say with confidence that there has not been a management change at the property in years. It is my opinion that my community leaders should have caused real change at this bathhouse long ago, and the SUPPORT of those responsible for creating and providing an environment sero-conversion friendly, I find repugnant.

Mr. O’Brien, you continue to call for more funding. You continue to call for local and state politicians, for gay leaders and service providers to “device campaigns.” You keep asking for a “collaboration to effectively tackle the issues surrounding crystal meth and the increase in AIDS.”

“We’ve heard plenty of talk, but when are we ACCUALLY going to do something…?” (Issue 901)

I ask YOU. What does “do something” mean… What does it look like? The answer is seen in that mirror.

Kevin McCarthy

Dear Editor:

Log Cabin Republican Matthew Veritas Tsien of Fort Lauderdale writes (7/21) that the gay community, utilizing the “usual slanderous liberal ideology”, has accused George Bush of lying to go to war in Iraq. Tsien reports that these accusations have been proven false.

In response I would like to make the following points:

1. First of all, I am proud to consider myself a liberal. The dictionary defines liberal as: “Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others.”

2. Has Mr. Tsien been living in a cave for the past few months? Has he not heard of the Downing Street memo? The Memo transcribed during Tony Blair’s meeting in July 2002—eight months PRIOR to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 paints a picture of Bush intent on invasion and looking for ways to justify it.

3. Tsien also writes: “If government officials are corrupt, or dishonest, then the loser must have been worse, or the Democrats would have been in the majority.” This statement (along with others in Tsien’s letter) makes no sense whatsoever.

4. The 7/21 letter is Tsien’s latest in a series printed in the Gay & Lesbian Times. Perhaps Mr. Tsien should write letters to a paper closer to home rather than bore San Diego readers with his nonsensical drivel.

Mason McCleary