Dear Editor:

Please pardon my being so slow to the draw. During all the back and forth about crystal, and in your earlier issue focusing on that subject in the GLBT community, I was left with a feeling that something was missing in the dialogue and interviews.

When I came to San Diego, I was really ignorant about drug use in the community. When I came to realize what an issue this was, I was also made aware that chronic fatigue due to AIDS/HIV was a major influence in the use of crystal. Many gay men with AIDS simply found it too difficult to get out of bed without the use of this drug.

I feel that this type of use was an avenue by which crystal was introduced to men who would otherwise not have used crystal, much less become addicted to it. And when they found they were going to live longer than initially expected, the addiction had already set in. Previous articles and comments seemed to indicate that gay men’s use of crystal was solely for sexual stimulation. This may be true in many cases, but we should not forget that many men were simply looking for a way of getting on with daily life.

Frank P. Arce

See www.gaylesbiantimes.com/?id=8589

Dear Editor:

I’m writing in response to the article submitted by Nicole Murray-Ramirez, “City Council’s stand against Wal-Mart is a bad vote.”

Clearly, Nicole doesn’t understand the word “community,” and should stick to the sloppy gossip reporting she is known for.

In her article, Nicole states, “This outright ban on superstores is not in the best interests of our city and we consumers.” Has Ms. Murray-Ramirez been living under a rock, or does she even live in San Diego? What good can come from big-box superstores, which threaten the individuality, we, as a “City of Villages,” have worked so hard to create? Obviously, Ms. Murray-Ramirez doesn’t care about the small businessman, who serve our communities, both gay and straight!

When these ugly, big-box superstores come to town, they destroy our environment, our culture, and do nothing but tear into a unique and vibrant market, known as small business. What happens to the small, quaint shops that line our streets, or the Trader Joe’s, Henry’s or Whole Foods that we all enjoy? What about the clothing boutiques and gift shops that wind through University Heights, Hillcrest, North Park and Mission Valley?

Ms. Murray-Ramirez goes on to say, “We consumers should have choices.”

By allowing Wal-Mart into our cities, however, they crush the competition, leaving nothing but Wal-Mart to turn to. Where are the choices then, Nicole?

Without our support and patronage, these businesses would not be a part of our culture. It is up to us as a community, to stand behind our small business owners, and give them everything they need to succeed, even if that means keeping Wal-Mart out!

The bottom line is that, when Wal-Mart comes to town, small business fails, leaving people wondering what we could have done to stop it. When that happens, we all lose.

Keep Wal-Mart out, and keep the communities we all know and enjoy in business.

Russ Smith

See www.gaylesbiantimes.com/?id=8674

Dear Editor:

I was very disappointed in your editorial of November 30, 2006 (“Pelosi steps in it twice—and counting”).

Any argument you were trying to make aside, YOU stepped in in twice. First, Pelosi is not a “senator from California”—she is a member of the U.S. House. This minor mistake could be forgiven, however, except for the fact that Pelosi did NOT nominate Rep. Alcee Hastings to chair the House Intelligence Committee as you stated. He was the subject of much speculation, but ultimately Pelosi chose another member to serve as Chair.

This very sloppy journalism takes away from the valid points you tried to make about Speaker-designate Pelosi’s early moves. It is also a bit embarrassing to see a LGBT news source get things so wrong!

Come on now—don’t step in it again!

Paul Fahey

See www.gaylesbiantimes.com/?id=8594

Dear Editor:

I can see I have touched a nerve regarding my letter concerning Nicole’s misguided advice that our community stop striving for marriage equality and in typical Nicole style she attacks the messenger when there in no worthy response available. I wrote a letter last week regarding Nicole’s stating in her column that we should give up on striving for marriage because it was politically costly to her political friends. She implied that more democrats would be elected if the gay community just dropped the fight for marriage rights. I stated and I reiterate that this is a appalling and misguided opinion and that Nicole should be ashamed, but the words are there in black and white.

I did not misquote Nicole and I do not hate Nicole, I do not even know Nicole, but I hate anyone saying that we should give up on fighting for equal rights. My unnamed friends who supposedly told Nicole this are nonexistent. My friends would not talk to Nicole. As to me writing continuos letters, in the 10 years that I have lived in San Diego I have written 3 or 4 regarding Nicole’s rants. I wish the editor would educate Nicole that we live in America where we all have the right to voice an opinion and that she cannot silence mine just because she has a weekly column to slander me and others. As to positions to which Nicole has been elected, I do not recall any mention of Nicole’s name on any ballots in the 10 years that I have lived in San Diego, so I would like to know who is electing her. I understand that she has been appointed to positions, has served our community, but she is often wrong and as many people have written me in the last two weeks, she is an embarrassment as a leader. It is typical that when someone like Nicole says something wrong or makes a mistake she just cant admit it.

Marriage equality now is not negotiable. Full equality is not negotiable.

As for my being in the closet in the past, that is one of Nicole’s only true statements regarding me, I was in the closet as many people in our community were and with Nicole’s style of leadership and advocacy of giving up equal rights, many gay men and lesbian women will remain in the closet.

Regarding Nicole’s challenge, I will not even dignify that with a response except to say that I pledge to donate 1000 to Mamma’s Kitchen and 1000 to the Human Rights Campaign so Nicole can match either of these gifts as she sees fit. . Again I must close saying I DO NOT HATE NICOLE, I HATE HER PRINTED OPINION THAT WE SHOULD NOT STRIVE FOR OR DESERVE FULL MARRIAGE RIGHTS. I challenge Nicole to stop slandering me and my dissenting voice as we are both proud members of the gay and lesbian community ,we can work together for the good of our community.

Dennis E Mayer

See www.gaylesbiantimes.com/?id=8620