24 comments

• 

  Brian

  1 year ago

  I don't think it is that the Mayor is daring to enforce the law so much as he is suggesting that gay men need automated locks to prevent them from having public sex (there is of course, no data to back up this assertion--or even the assertion that public sex in portable toilets is occurring). And that the Mayor "erroneously [stated] that gay men represent the demographic with the highest incidence of new HIV infections."
  
  The problem it seems isn't so much with enforcing law but with the mayor making erroneous and inflammatory statements. He of course is not advocating violence against gay people but after perpetrating such outlandish myths, misinformations, and smears, we can hardly be surprised when individuals take action on their own.
  
  Especially when there are pastors such as Ken Hutcherson stating "If I was in a drugstore and some [gay or effeminate] guy opened the door for me, I'd rip his arm off and beat him with the wet end."
  reply
• 

  Randy

  1 year ago

  The point of the post is that what the Mayor did or did not do has nothing to do with these violent crimes.
  
  Where did Hutch say that? That doesn't sound like the man I have met at all.
  
  Regardless, the point is these activists are being irresponsible and opportunistic in blaming others for crimes they had nothing to do with.
  reply
• 

  Joe Brummer

  1 year ago

  Randy, If I am understanding your words correctly, are you feeling angry that these activist are presenting their anger for these crimes in ways that don't meet your need for honest and value? Please correct me if I have not understood you. I do find it important to empathize with each other even if I disagree with your beliefs. I would like to acknowledge your feelings.
  
  Next, I would love to share with you what I am feeling as I read your post.
  
  I feel frustrated, and a little angry. Why you ask? I have a need for understanding on this issue and it seems that is so unreachable. I have been writing a blog about this issue for years and it seems impossible for people to ever make the connection between the messages we put out about GLBT folks and the violence. Mayor Naugle and some of the advocates in his group have painted such dark images of gays and lesbians. I struggle with the pictures they paint because they create enemy images of gays and lesbians. When a group has been painted as the a threat that needs to be addressed, some will ultimate take that threat and react to it.
  
  The big issue is that gays and lesbians have long been discussed as a "threat to marriage", "A threat to public health", and the ever popular "war on Marriage". Such language is a call to arms as calling energy to a threat is asking people to defend against it. The simple version is that one cannot run around the village telling everyone we are witches, scaring everyone with how we will corrupt the village, destroy the village, build the argument for putting up a stake and then act so innocent and surprised when someone shows up with a match.
  
  Yes, Mayor Naugle has played a part in the culture of violence against gays and lesbians. Is he responsible for this one act...of course not. Is he responsible for helping to fuel the culture that feeds this violence. Yes, he is. Anyone who has taken part in the enemy imaging of GLBT folks with messages like the "war on marriage" or the "threat to children" shouldn't be surprised when someone shows up to the village with a match and some gas.
  reply
• 

  Randy

  1 year ago

  Joe,
  
  Is Mel White guilty for the bomb threat made against our office or the reasons I have had to notify the police twice for people threatening my safety? I mean he does say that I commit "spiritual violence" and people in his sphere of influence have called people like me murderers and responsible for others death.
  
  Could he actually be charged with hate speech and considered a criminal for indirectly inciting others to violence against myself and others of the same belief?
  
  Is the HRC personally responsible for contributing to the climate of hate with their dogma that no one can change and that ex-gays are harmful? Did that polarized, bigoted and "absolutist" argument lead a gay man to brutally kill Mary Stachowicz in Chicago? All she said, after being invited by him to give her opinion was that she though he should stop sleeping with men. He punched, kicked and stabbed her and then when he got tired ... he put a plastic bag over her head and suffocated her to death.
  
  If the police found the HRC hit piece on ex-gays in his bookshelf, should Joe Solonese and Wayne Besen go to jail?
  
  No, Mel, Wayne and HRC are not guilty of violent crimes and their hateful words that declare me null and void, a myth even, are freedom of speech. It is ridiculous to hold conservative leaders equal to violent criminals as well.
  
  The gay activist community is just as guilty as some on the right of calling names and using "war" language. Yet, I would never be so bold to equate their rants with criminals and violent crime.
  
  Mayor Naugle and the people at Florida4marriage are not hateful people...at all.
  
  To silence dissent by stigmatizing to eventually criminalize speech (and freedoms of religion and conscience) is a dangerous and irresponsible route.
  reply
• 

  Joe Brummer

  1 year ago

  Randy, I just want to point out a few things for the record here.
  
  I never suggested advocates on either side should be held equal to violent criminals. I suggest that each has to take responsibility for their part in creating this climate of violence against gays and lesbians.
  
  I don't think advocates on either side should be charged, I think they should change the message choices. It is possible to disagree with homosexuality without painting homosexuals as the enemy or a threat to society. I would feel safer it they did.
  
  I hear that you might have a lot of anger in what you think that I said, but what I have put down on words doesn't appear to match what you have taken as a message.
  
  I would make the request that you re-read my first comment and write back what you think I said. Maybe I can figure out why you didn't get the message I really have.
  reply
• 

  Randy

  1 year ago

  Glad you said "might" because I don't have a lot of anger or any anger about your comment and I understood what you are saying and my answer still stands.
  
  You did not balance the field in your comment by holding both sides accountable. Indeed, you do equate Naugle to contributing to a "culture of violence." Your comment in light of my original post seems to only reinforce the original articles criticism of Naugle and Florida4Marriage as causing murder and physical assault.
  reply
• 

  Brian

  1 year ago

  I don't think it is that the Mayor is daring to enforce the law so much as he is suggesting that gay men need automated locks to prevent them from having public sex (there is of course, no data to back up this assertion--or even the assertion that public sex in portable toilets is occurring). And that the Mayor "erroneously [stated] that gay men represent the demographic with the highest incidence of new HIV infections."
  The problem it seems isn't so much with enforcing law but with the mayor making erroneous and inflammatory statements. He of course is not advocating violence against gay people but after perpetrating such outlandish myths, misinformations, and smears, we can hardly be surprised when individuals take action on their own.
  Especially when there are pastors such as Ken Hutcherson stating "If I was in a drugstore and some [gay or effeminate] guy opened the door for me, I'd rip his arm off and beat him with the wet end."
  reply
• 

  Randy

  1 year ago

  The point of the post is that what the Mayor did or did not do has nothing to do with these violent crimes.
  Where did Hutch say that? That doesn't sound like the man I have met at all.
  Regardless, the point is these activists are being irresponsible and opportunistic in blaming others for crimes they had nothing to do with.
  reply
• 

  Joe Brummer

  1 year ago

  Randy, If I am understanding your words correctly, are you feeling angry that these activist are presenting their anger for these crimes in ways that don't meet your need for honest and value? Please correct me if I have not understood you. I do find it important to empathize with each other even if I disagree with your beliefs. I would like to acknowledge your feelings.
  Next, I would love to share with you what I am feeling as I read your post.
  I feel frustrated, and a little angry. Why you ask? I have a need for understanding on this issue and it seems that is so unreachable. I have been writing a blog about this issue for years and it seems impossible for people to ever make the connection between the messages we put out about GLBT folks and the violence. Mayor Naugle and some of the advocates in his group have painted such dark images of gays and lesbians. I struggle with the pictures they paint because they create enemy images of gays and lesbians. When a group has been painted as the a threat that needs to be addressed, some will ultimate take that threat and react to it.
  The big issue is that gays and lesbians have long been discussed as a "threat to marriage", "A threat to public health", and the ever popular "war on Marriage". Such language is a call to arms as calling energy to a threat is asking people to defend against it. The simple version is that one cannot run around the village telling everyone we are witches, scaring everyone with how we will corrupt the village, destroy the village, build the argument for putting up a stake and then act so innocent and surprised when someone shows up with a match.
  Yes, Mayor Naugle has played a part in the culture of violence against gays and lesbians. Is he responsible for this one act...of course not. Is he responsible for helping to fuel the culture that feeds this violence. Yes, he is. Anyone who has taken part in the enemy imaging of GLBT folks with messages like the "war on marriage" or the "threat to children" shouldn't be surprised when someone shows up to the village with a match and some gas.
  reply
• 

  Randy

  1 year ago

  Joe,
  Is Mel White guilty for the bomb threat made against our office or the reasons I have had to notify the police twice for people threatening my safety? I mean he does say that I commit "spiritual violence" and people in his sphere of influence have called people like me murderers and responsible for others death.
  Could he actually be charged with hate speech and considered a criminal for indirectly inciting others to violence against myself and others of the same belief?
  Is the HRC personally responsible for contributing to the climate of hate with their dogma that no one can change and that ex-gays are harmful? Did that polarized, bigoted and "absolutist" argument lead a gay man to brutally kill Mary Stachowicz in Chicago? All she said, after being invited by him to give her opinion was that she though he should stop sleeping with men. He punched, kicked and stabbed her and then when he got tired ... he put a plastic bag over her head and suffocated her to death.
  If the police found the HRC hit piece on ex-gays in his bookshelf, should Joe Solonese and Wayne Besen go to jail?
  No, Mel, Wayne and HRC are not guilty of violent crimes and their hateful words that declare me null and void, a myth even, are freedom of speech. It is ridiculous to hold conservative leaders equal to violent criminals as well.
  The gay activist community is just as guilty as some on the right of calling names and using "war" language. Yet, I would never be so bold to equate their rants with criminals and violent crime.
  Mayor Naugle and the people at Florida4marriage are not hateful people...at all.
  To silence dissent by stigmatizing to eventually criminalize speech (and freedoms of religion and conscience) is a dangerous and irresponsible route.
  reply
• 

  Joe Brummer

  1 year ago

  I might request that you could try to empathize with those of us who feel the way I do about Naugle. I wonder if these conversations would go to a better place when we both understand completely where each other is coming from.
  
  I would love for us to understand each other on this and many other issues. I feel frustrated that could ever happen. I try to see both sides of issues, I try to understand where people are coming from and where their energy lies.
  
  I would still request the same thing, take me original comment and rewrite it. Tell me what you have heard me say and lets see if what you understand of my words and how close it the intention of my words.
  reply
• 

  Joe Brummer

  1 year ago

  Randy, I just want to point out a few things for the record here.
  I never suggested advocates on either side should be held equal to violent criminals. I suggest that each has to take responsibility for their part in creating this climate of violence against gays and lesbians.
  I don't think advocates on either side should be charged, I think they should change the message choices. It is possible to disagree with homosexuality without painting homosexuals as the enemy or a threat to society. I would feel safer it they did.
  I hear that you might have a lot of anger in what you think that I said, but what I have put down on words doesn't appear to match what you have taken as a message.
  I would make the request that you re-read my first comment and write back what you think I said. Maybe I can figure out why you didn't get the message I really have.
  reply
• 

  Randy

  1 year ago

  Glad you said "might" because I don't have a lot of anger or any anger about your comment and I understood what you are saying and my answer still stands.
  You did not balance the field in your comment by holding both sides accountable. Indeed, you do equate Naugle to contributing to a "culture of violence." Your comment in light of my original post seems to only reinforce the original articles criticism of Naugle and Florida4Marriage as causing murder and physical assault.
  reply
• 

  Randy

  1 year ago

  Joe ... really. I have read what you had to say and responded. I am sorry you didn't get the type of empathy that you apparently wanted. I find equating Naugle and Florida4Marriage to criminals or justifying criminal behavior because of someone publicly opposing a gay worldview, is in and of itself wholly irresponsible and slanderous. It abuses the freedoms I already outlined in this comment thread.
  
  I can empathize with you until the cows come home but that won't change my views of the above mentioned post. I understand you and where you are coming from. I once believed and approached activism in the same way you do almost 18+ years ago. Even so, I don't agree with you or empathize with politically opportunistic blameshifting.
  
  Men were attacked, justice is needed and Florid4marriage and Naugle had nothing to do with the crimes. They are not lending to an atmosphere of violent crime just as militant gay activism does not.
  reply
• 

  Brady

  1 year ago

  Randy, here's the article with the quote from Hutch that Brian is referring to http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/352368_fait....
  
  I have some thoughts that lie somewhere in between what your and Jim's ideas seem to be, but I'm having trouble making them clear in my mind. Perhaps I'll respond later if I can find a way to express what I'm thinking.
  reply
• 

  Joe Brummer

  1 year ago

  The point I was making is that I don't see them as criminals. I also never said they were. You say you don't agree, but I don't think you understand what I have said, so how do you know if you agree or disagree. You don't seem to have taken what I have said for what I meant.
  reply
• 

  Joe Brummer

  1 year ago

  I am curious, what evidence would you need to see to be convinced that these type of messages painting gays as a threat contribute to violence. I would be happy to search out the evidence you need to believe this if you would be so kind as to tell me what you would need to see to believe.
  reply
• 

  Joe Brummer

  1 year ago

  I might request that you could try to empathize with those of us who feel the way I do about Naugle. I wonder if these conversations would go to a better place when we both understand completely where each other is coming from.
  I would love for us to understand each other on this and many other issues. I feel frustrated that could ever happen. I try to see both sides of issues, I try to understand where people are coming from and where their energy lies.
  I would still request the same thing, take me original comment and rewrite it. Tell me what you have heard me say and lets see if what you understand of my words and how close it the intention of my words.
  reply
• 

  Randy

  1 year ago

  Joe ... really. I have read what you had to say and responded. I am sorry you didn't get the type of empathy that you apparently wanted. I find equating Naugle and Florida4Marriage to criminals or justifying criminal behavior because of someone publicly opposing a gay worldview, is in and of itself wholly irresponsible and slanderous. It abuses the freedoms I already outlined in this comment thread.
  I can empathize with you until the cows come home but that won't change my views of the above mentioned post. I understand you and where you are coming from. I once believed and approached activism in the same way you do almost 18+ years ago. Even so, I don't agree with you or empathize with politically opportunistic blameshifting.
  Men were attacked, justice is needed and Florid4marriage and Naugle had nothing to do with the crimes. They are not lending to an atmosphere of violent crime just as militant gay activism does not.
  reply
• 

  Brady

  1 year ago

  Randy, here's the article with the quote from Hutch that Brian is referring to http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/352368_fait....
  I have some thoughts that lie somewhere in between what your and Jim's ideas seem to be, but I'm having trouble making them clear in my mind. Perhaps I'll respond later if I can find a way to express what I'm thinking.
  reply
• 

  Joe Brummer

  1 year ago

  The point I was making is that I don't see them as criminals. I also never said they were. You say you don't agree, but I don't think you understand what I have said, so how do you know if you agree or disagree. You don't seem to have taken what I have said for what I meant.
  reply
• 

  Joe Brummer

  1 year ago

  I am curious, what evidence would you need to see to be convinced that these type of messages painting gays as a threat contribute to violence. I would be happy to search out the evidence you need to believe this if you would be so kind as to tell me what you would need to see to believe.
  reply
• 

  Randy

  1 year ago

  I am crushed. I don't know what to say except... I can't believe he said that. I have never known him to be like that. In fact, the way he has treated me has always been as a peer. He has never been hostile to me and I am not the "butchest" person on the planet. In fact he has been very honoring, gracious and kind.
  
  While I know him I don't have direct access to him. What access I can go through to try and reach him I will. It's Biblical that I go to him, and a few more steps beyond that,first before writing about it here.
  
  A lesson I have/am learning the hard way.
  
  In the context of this thread though, Naugle and Florida4marriage have never said anything, that I am aware of, along the same lines as this horrible "joke." I also think the reporter takes it way to far. Unfortunately the alleged joke gives plenty of ammo for the reporter to take it too far but ... there it is.
  
  If you don't see me writing about the Hutch situation further (here on the blog) it's either because I am trying to communicate with Hutch or that I didn't get in touch with him in order to get anything resolved other than my stated objection about this alleged joke.
  reply
• 

  Randy

  1 year ago

  I am crushed. I don't know what to say except... I can't believe he said that. I have never known him to be like that. In fact, the way he has treated me has always been as a peer. He has never been hostile to me and I am not the "butchest" person on the planet. In fact he has been very honoring, gracious and kind.
  While I know him I don't have direct access to him. What access I can go through to try and reach him I will. It's Biblical that I go to him, and a few more steps beyond that,first before writing about it here.
  A lesson I have/am learning the hard way.
  In the context of this thread though, Naugle and Florida4marriage have never said anything, that I am aware of, along the same lines as this horrible "joke." I also think the reporter takes it way to far. Unfortunately the alleged joke gives plenty of ammo for the reporter to take it too far but ... there it is.
  If you don't see me writing about the Hutch situation further (here on the blog) it's either because I am trying to communicate with Hutch or that I didn't get in touch with him in order to get anything resolved other than my stated objection about this alleged joke.
  reply