The Stonewall Citizens Patrol organized a candlelight vigil and protest against reggae artist Buju Banton’s House of Blues-sponsored performance at 4th & B on the evening of Oct. 4. The Jamaican native’s lyrics advocate for burning, shooting and pouring acid on the heads of gay people.

In response to the event, Ron Deimling, general manager of House of Blues, wrote to the Gay & Lesbian Times, stating that he believes “neither I, nor House of Blues, have the right to censor or decide what a person or artist verbalizes or states to the public, even if those lyrics may be hurtful to others.”

“I am not willing to be put in to a position to be judge and jury as to what the public considers ‘entertainment’ as that concept clearly varies with different groups of people,” he added.

Well, the law says something different.

Under California law, all businesses have a duty to protect the public – including gay folks – from a hostile environment that would make a reasonable gay person feel harassed. By creating or tolerating such a condition, the result is discrimination.

And that’s what happened here. Based upon the context and the circumstances, it was foreseeable that a gay person attending Banton’s concert would feel threatened, intimidated and uncomfortable hearing an entertainer who advocates harm to gay persons.

To be blunt, Banton is comparable to a Klansman in the ’50s strumming his guitar while advocating for the lynching of African-Americans. Imagine the irony if the House of Blues called that entertainment and booked him. Gee, how would African-Americans feel? Gays don’t need to see a “no fags allowed” sign to know when a venue is off limits to them that night.

The House of Blues claims it doesn’t have the choice to censor. That’s wrong. It has a duty to censor. Just like the duty of every employer to censor employee language that is calculated to harass others, the House of Blues has the duty of preventing its employees and contractors from doing the same.

I’m grateful for the Stonewall Citizens Patrol for organizing a protest. I hope they make other anti-gay businesses feel the pinch. It’s about time.

Years ago, I learned a valuable lesson from legendary gay rights attorney Tom Homann. When local mall security harassed a lesbian couple for holding hands, rather than banter with the mall attorneys Tom did something far more effective: He had a group of lesbians show up outside the mall with signs protesting the mall’s treatment of lesbians. Even straight women joined in, and others refused to enter stores.

Ironically, within a few minutes, Tom got a call from the mall’s lawyers begging him for help.

The Stonewall Citizens Patrol should organize protests about discriminatory practices against gays and lesbians.

In a few weeks, we go to the polls to vote on another measure (Proposition 85, parental notice prior to a minor obtaining an abortion) put on the ballot by San Diego Reader publisher Jim Holman, a raving homophobe. Holman has contributed millions of dollars to measures designed to repeal laws (and oust judges) supportive of gay rights and a woman’s right to choose.

The Reader did not accept an ad two years ago for the San Diego LGBT Pride festival, and that refusal violated state and local civil rights statutes.

Holman publishes another paper called the San Diego News Notes, which is designed for fundamentalist Catholics. Two years ago, the News Notes published an article urging readers to boycott a car dealer that was a major GLBT advertiser because the dealer advertised in the Gay & Lesbian Times. You may have noticed that the major advertiser in question no longer has the coveted back page.

It doesn’t even matter if there is a connection. Just the act of advocating for a boycott of a business for doing something it has a legal right to do is extortion.

An act of hate waged against the San Diego GLBT community’s only newspaper is an injury against us all.

The Stonewall Citizens Patrol should consider targeting the Reader. Every time people pick up the Reader, they need to be aware they subsidize his radical anti-sex agenda.