Dear Editor:

A recent letter to the editor concerns me. Ross Taylor makes allegations about Stepping Stone that just are not true.

I graduated from Stepping Stone in 2001 and have continued to live my life free of drugs and alcohol. Since my graduation, I’ve served as a volunteer and now staff at Stepping Stone. I have seen numerous changes in this period of time, predominantly changes made to better serve clients.

Stepping Stone emphasizes the Twelve Steps of recovery along with encouraging individuals to take responsibility for their actions. This can include working in environments that would not necessarily be considered conducive to recovery. Stepping Stone wants clients to be successful in recovery and also to experience life from a broader perspective. Stepping Stone absolutely does not condone fraternization or sexual conduct among the client population and all clients must sign a no-sexual-conduct agreement upon admission. This is extended to all staff members and volunteers as well.

Upon leaving Stepping Stone I wanted to give back to the agency and the community that helped save my life, and I pursued certification as an AOD counselor. I have been employed by this agency for four years and have seen a lot of miracles as well as a lot of tragedies. Sometimes people relapse as a result of returning to old behaviors or turning attention away from their program. This is not an uncommon occurrence with any treatment program, as statistics will bear out, and is typically more the result of unfortunate choices than an inherent weakness in a given program. It is unrealistic in any instance to place the responsibility solely and directly on lack of qualified staff, and I can personally attest that it is unrealistic in this instance as well. The people employed by this agency are well-trained individuals with a strong desire to help all people seeking recovery regardless of what the disease of addiction has taken from them.

Stepping Stone has changed countless lives and continues to provide services and resources to a highly underserved population. If we were never to implement change that would indicate that we weren’t growing or evolving in dynamic response to the needs of our clients.

It is natural for people to have feelings regarding things that evoke passion. Saving lives is something that evokes passion in employees and friends of this agency and I respect Mr. Taylor’s right to his opinion. However, I would ask that he recognize that there are almost always two sides to every story.

I will be 38 this June and I am amazed every year I grow older that I’ve actually gotten this far. At one time I doubted my ability to live beyond 30. There is no doubt in my mind that without Stepping Stone and the excellence of its program I would have perished in my disease.

Cecily Swanson

Dear Editor:

The sisters are going to scare the shit out of them and reinforce their hate, but who gives a shit. Anyone standing there would reinforce their hate and the protest, to me, isn’t really about changing THEIR minds. It’s about the queer community refusing to be erased or made invisible. It’s about making sure we are heard as well and the public knows we aren’t going anywhere. It’s not about changing the minds of these kids or really giving a shit what they think. I’m so sick of the queer community trying to silence and erase members of their own community....it’s disgusting. And they do it all the time to suck up to the straight or right-wing community. “Will you love us if we hide the ones you REALLY don’t like and only show you the ones who look like you?” It’s awful. So rock on Sisters! Get your asses out there whenever, wherever you want!

Mel Shaw

Dear Editor:

I strongly disagree with your editorial’s underlying assumption that District 3 voters should back ONLY candidates from the LGBT community and ANY candidate from the community. What is important to me at least is whether the policies a candidate espouses are compatible with my own. I thought blindly voting as a block went out with Tammany – at least it should have. A straight candidate who supports the interests of our community should be more acceptable than an LGBT candidate who does not. That brings me to Robert Gleason, whom you describe as “being courted.” He is gay, and sits on the Center Board, good, but he also represents the wealthy Evans family – who occupy an upper tier of San Diego’s landed aristocracy. Gleason’s interests and the Evans’ interests do not align with those of many in District 3 (or other San Diego Districts for that matter), while the more progressive Whitburn’s and Gloria’s do. I do not live in District 3. I would like to be able to vote for an LGBT candidate in my own District, and all things being equal I would do so. But all things are never equal. A voter should consider what a candidate stands for first, not whom she or he lies down with.

Charlie Pratt

Dear Editor:

The Sisters do not choose “pseudonyms”. As with traditional religious orders, we choose a name when we take our vows. Do refer to a Catholic nun, whose name is Sr. Michael, as using a pseudonym? Do you also insist that she tell you her name prior to taking her vows as your paper does not print pseudonyms? After almost 30 years of being in existence and having houses all over the planet with more Nuns added all the time, you would think that members of the GLBT community, that we came out of and are still a large part of, would realize we are not just a bunch of gay men playing dress-up.

Unlike our Catholic Sisters, whose numbers are dwindling so much that they can barely keep some houses going (forget about priests), we are growing by leaps and bounds. The San Francisco Mother House is larger than it ever has been. There are close to 100 active nuns in our house alone, gay men, lesbians, straight women and yes even some straight men.

Yes we are flamboyant, yes many of us do wear whiteface, but not all of us do. I can name many Sisters in my own house who no longer wear whiteface.

All of our Sisters in Australia and the UK do not wear “face”, so claiming we are hiding behind our “signature whiteface” is wrong. I am not now, nor never have been anonymous being a Sister. Yes are names are provocative, to be honest, many of us had our names pick us, not the other way around. Just ask Sr. Vicious Power Hungry Bitch, one of our founding members, whose chosen name was something much different, but that was the name that chose her.

Keith Folger

Sr. Pigmentia Stigmata (Sr. Piggy)

Dear Editor:

I am very confused by the letter from Tom Orozco in issue 1008 of 4/19/07. It starts with a position I, and many others agree with, to let the candidates for the District 3 race “duke it out a few rounds”. Then he goes into a long detailed reason of why he is supporting Stephen Whitburn. Isn’t this tantamount to talking out of both sides of your mouth? So far it appears we have a lot of good candidates interested in running. Lets hear more from all of them before some of our “leaders” start to push for their favorites.

Roger M. Negro