Box Turtle Bulletin

Ft. Worth Mayor Apologizes For Rainbow Lounge Raid; LGBT Police Liaison Announced

About two dozen LGBT citizens and allies spoke before the Ft. Worth city council last night about the June 28 raid on the Rainbow Lounge by Ft. Worth police and agents from the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission. They were there to ask city council members to apologize for what happen and ensure that such a raid will never happen again:

One woman said she had traveled some 1,500 miles from San Francisco to lend her support. A few speakers said they were not gay, but that they wanted the council to know that it was not just the gay community concerned about the actions of Fort Worth and TABC officers that night.

One woman described in detail what she saw during the inspection.

“That was the first time I was ever afraid of the police,” said Sarah Bryant, who had been at the bar with her boyfriend that night. “After that, I was overwhelmed with disappointment and I guess a little bit disturbed. … We just need your help to move on.”

The violent raid on the Rainbow Lounge took place on the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Rebellion. Chad Gibson was severely injured with a head trauma which resulted in him being sent to intensive care with bleeding in his brain. His full recovery may take as long as two years. FWPD and TABC are both conducting separate internal investigations into the raid, and the acting U.S. Attorney James Jack will independently review those investigations when they are completed. Meanwhile FWPD has suspended all cooperative activities with the TABC pending the outcome of these investigations,

One woman in the audience asked Ft. Worth Mayor Mike Moncrief why he hasn\’t apologized for Gibson having to be hospitalized, “If you want an apology from your mayor, I am sorry for what happened in Ft. Worth. I am sorry,” Moncrief replied. According to the Associated Press, the crowd stood and applaused. The Star-Telegram merely said the apology drew “some applause.”

More than 250 people packed city council chambers for the meeting, with another 150 people gathered outside watching it on television monitors.

The meeting got off to a bad start when seven Dallas-based protesters from Queer LiberAction tried to disrupt the meeting. Those protesters were angry because the Rainbow Lounge discussion was placed last on the open discussion portion of the city council agenda — a normal spot when a particular topic is known to be of high interest and will likely generate a lot of discussion. Putting it last ensures that the other topics are discussed and gotten out of the way before the big one begins. But I guess there are always some people who are more interested in theater than action, demanding that their oppressed voices be heard when the topic is already right there on the agenda. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed:

While the outbursts from protesters brought a smattering of support, most at the meeting seemed bothered by the interruptions and broke out in applause when marshals escorted the men out and thanked Moncrief for working with the gay community.

DeeJay Johannessen approached the microphone and said he understood putting such speakers at the end of the meeting is a common practice.

“We are willing to wait. We\’re going to be here. We look forward to talking to you. We looking forward to resolving this issue with you,” he said, prompting some to give him a standing ovation.

Real progress was made at the meeting. In addition to the Mayor’s apology, Ft. Worth Police Chief Jeffrey Halstead announced the appointment of Officer Sara Straten as liaison to the city’s LGBT community. Officer Straten is a 17-year veteran of the police force. Meanwhile, the internal investigations continue, with the FWPD considering theirs a high-priority investigation, and have so far interviewed 33 eyewitnesses since the start of the investigation. They expect to complete the investigation in 30 days.

“Better Late Than Never”…

…is a cliché that’s rarely spoken of with any real sense of satisfaction. More often, it’s said in exasperation over the fact that the late is just barely better at all than the never. And there are times when you don’t even want to acknowledge that much, like when former President Bill Clinton says this:

Asked if he would commit his support for same-sex marriage, Clinton responded, “I’m basically in support.”

This spring, same-sex marriage was legalized in Iowa, Vermont, Connecticut, Maine and New Hampshire. In his most recent remarks on the subject, Clinton said, “I think all these states that do it should do it.” The former president, however, added that he does not believe that same-sex marriage is “a federal question.”

Now he says he’s “basically in support.” He’s out of office, his political career is over, and what he says and thinks carries all the weight of the latest Elizabeth Hasselbeck outburst on The View. This president, who now believes that same-sex marriage is not “a federal question” is the very president who made it a federal question when he signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law — and then he used that to brag about how “pro-family” he was in campaign commercials on Christian radio.

But now he’s “basically in support” and does not believe that it should be “a federal question.” The president who hasn’t held power in almost nine years is now better on the issue than the one who does. Thanks. Better late than never, I suppose.

Artist Protests Own Exhibit

When John Paul Blanchette learned that Barnes and Noble in Framingham, MA, would display his artwork he was no doubt elated. It would, after all, be his first solo exhibition.

Then he heard that one of his paintings was “too offensive” and would not be shown.

“It’s so ridiculous that when I met with (the manager) it took a minute before I was like, ‘Oh, she’s actually serious,”‘ Blanchette said. “There are romance book covers in there that are more offensive.”

You see, the picture in question was of two blue women in their underwear. And they weren’t going to be having no lesbians at the Barnes and Noble.

So Blanchette and a few friends protested his own exhibition.

We’ve not heard Barnes and Noble’s side (I’m waiting for a response), but it doesn’t sound like they are denying it.

Margaret Moore, community relations manager at the store, would not say why she declined to display the 11th painting; however, she did say “it is up to the store’s discretion to decide what we show.”

Yup, and it’s up to my discretion where I buy books.

Rainbow Lounge Raid Inspires Police Improvements

The raid on the Rainbow Lounge in Ft. Worth, Texas, has yeilded some positives. Inspired by the community outrage, Police Chief Halstead has gone from defending the action as having “restraint” to a finding solutions and preventing further abuse.

From PoliTex:

• Internal affairs investigators have conducted interviews with 33 attendees at the Rainbow Lounge and expected to complete the investigation in approximately 30 days.
• The Fort Worth police consider the investigation a priority, taking some internal affairs investigators off other cases to focus on the Rainbow Lounge incident, he said.
• Halstead expects to update the police department\’s policy regarding bar raids, after taking input from the community.
• Soon after the incident, Halstead said he decided he needed a police officer to serve as a liaison to the city\’s gay/lesbian/bisexual community, just as the department has people serving in a similar position for other minority communities. Officer Sara Straten, a neighborhood officer in north Fort Worth and 17-year veteran of the department, volunteered for the position.

Meanwhile our community must stay vigilant and follow up to be certain that those who abused their power are held accountable.

Sen. Reid Supports Overturning DADT

NY Times

“We\’re having trouble getting people into the military,” [Senate Manority Leader Harry] Reid told reporters when questioned about whether he could support an 18-month moratorium on enforcing a prohibition on gays in the armed forces. “And I think that we shouldn\’t turn down anybody that\’s willing to fight for our country, certainly based on sexual orientation.”

Mr. Reid said he would go the proposal, being considered by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York, one better and support a permanent repeal of the ban.

CA Gay Groups Advise Waiting, Waiting

Those gay organizations that led the disastrously ineffective campaign against Proposition 8 are sharing their wisdom again. According to the LA Times,

“Going back to the ballot . . . in 2010 would be rushed and risky,” read a joint statement issued Monday by three gay-rights groups and signed by more than two dozen other groups and individuals. “We should proceed with a costly, demanding, and high-stakes electoral campaign of this sort only when we are confident we can win.”

Personally, I suspect some organizations have ulterior motives behind their opposition to moving forward.

Take, for example, the LA Gay and Lesbian Center. This organization is primarily a health organization – with a few other worthwhile programs. I have long pointed out that this organization is far removed from gay men and women in the community and no longer provides any services to gay men and women other than those narrowly defined by their state-funded programs (they dropped the word “Community” from their name years ago).

Yet Lorri Jean, the LA Gay and Lesbian Center\’s Executive Director, was one of the small number of individuals calling the shots during the campaign. Lorri was so concerned about Prop 8 and took her job so seriously that she decided to take a month long vacation in Alaska. In July 2008. Three months before election day.

But the Center has an opinion is back with an opinion about the next election date, and it takes little to see their motivation for delay.

Jim Key, spokesman for the L.A. Gay and Lesbian Center, also worried that a 2010 political campaign might tap the same donors that service organizations rely on to fund HIV care, services for homeless youths and other programs at a time when, because of the economy, those programs are needed the most.

In other words, your fight for equality cuts into donations for our programs. And so you should wait.

Another group counseling waiting is Equality California, another prime player in the 2008 losing game.

“We initially said we believe 2010 was the right time to go back to the ballot,” said Marc Solomon, marriage director for Equality California, one of the state’s biggest gay-rights groups. But he added: “We’ve also made it very clear we will only move forward if we have a clear road map to victory. . . . The last thing we want to do is go back to the ballot and lose.”

He said his group has sought advice from political consultants and polling experts and would present it publicly later this month.

This is the same group that kept quiet about their “inside polls” that showed the campaign behind and instead let gay folks – who might have walked precincts and held house parties and talked to their church – believe that we were ahead and their efforts weren’t needed.

We don’t have to wait for next month to know what they will say. EQCA will give us a slicing and dicing of the demographics of voters who vote in gubernatorial elections and tell us that there is a tiny advantage to avoiding the older voters now in order to chance it with higher black turnout in 2012. And in 2012 we’ll hear that 2014 is really, really even better.

I think that all of these organizations miss the big picture. Because they are all motivated by fear.

They fear a decrease in donations. They fear a repeat of the loss of position they felt after Prop 8. They fear losing by a bigger margin. They fear that they may upset the establishment or the connections or the money guys or the Party or any of a number of others who can give them goodies, enhance their image and influence, and prop up their resumes.

I fear too, but my fears are different.

I fear that we are fighting a battle of retreats. I fear that we capitulate, give up territory, and let our enemies define the frontier.

We are accepting the declarations of our enemies that the battle is over. We are conceding defeat.

In every instance in which a state has passed a discriminatory amendment to deny gay couples equality under the law we have stood back, said, “oh well”, and waited for the next battle. What we should have done is collected the signature to reverse that vote, put it back on the ballot, and fought in every state in the nation.

I\’m not saying that we should have committed huge sums or that we should have exhausted our resources, but we should have made the citizens of those states face this question for the rest of their long-lasting lives until they tired of their own bigotry and – faced with scorn from their children – reversed their position and removed discrimination from their constitution.

Had we been battling in other states, I believe that the tide would have already turned. And Proposition 8 would never have happened. They would never have dared attack us in California. And faced with the prospect of voting until equality wins, Californians would have voted for an end to the war.

We should go back to the ballot in 2010. And should we fail, go in 2012. And if that doesn\’t work, we\’re back in 2014.

We need not put $40 million on the line. We need only push Gay, Inc. out of the way and run a grass roots campaign that ignores the “political consultants and polling experts” and speaks to our neighbors and our churches and our communities. We build coalitions that include churches and civil rights fighters and ethic interest groups and Democratic, Republican, and Libertarian activists and Susan who picked up a flyer at her yoga session and Gilbert who saw a table in front of a bar on Saturday night.

Screw the pointless tepid advertising. Away with the carefully crafted (and stupid and offensive) scripts for volunteers to follow when calling specifically filtered phone lists. Be gone with centralized “messaging” and selected media access. Done with the elimination of anything that will remind the voter that we are actually talking about real living breathing gay people. And enough with the pussy-footing around about who is funding the anti-gay efforts and their motivations.

Our cause is right. Our cause is just. Our cause is moral.

And the battle is in our own states, cities, and communities. We aren\’t going away. Our need for equality isn\’t diminishing. So why have we let our “leaders” convince us that the battle is over in Oregon or Arizona or Colorado or Wisconsin? The question is not whether we should be putting this back on the ballot in California in 2010, but why we aren\’t putting it back on the ballot in every state in which discrimination has been enacted.

Episcopal Church Chooses Gay Christians Over Foreign Appeasement

At their national convention in 2003, delegates of the Episcopal Church took a vote that was not much watched by those outside of the body of Anglicans. Yet this decision has perhaps had more global fallout than any specific religious action in centuries.

When the Episcopal Church ordained Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire, it infuriated conservative American Episcopalians as well as those around the world affiliated with the Anglican Communion, the globe\’s third largest Christian fellowship.

In America, several priests and laypeople left the church in protest along with a handful of churches and even four dioceses. Other religious leaders were quick to throw in their opinion with some, like evangelical mega-church pastor Rick Warren, leaping to praise the dissidents.

A number of Archbishops in Africa and Asia condemned the American church and declared that they would not break bread with anyone who would accept gay Christians on an equal standing. The global body stood on the brink of schism.

In 2006 the Episcopal Church took a breather. They chose to stand back and hold off on ordaining any further bishops or in taking any steps to recognize or celebrate same-sex unions in hope that this cooling off time could allow them to find common ground with anti-gay elements of the Communion and achieve peace.

But peace was not an option. Conservative Anglicans are not interested in unity in Christ or the guidance of each body\’s conscience or in allowing all to listen to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. They want strict adherence to their demands or harsh punishment as a consequence. Either reject gay Christians, or to Hell with you.

This week the Episcopal Church is meeting again, as it does every three years. And it appears to have made its decision. By a vote of 99-45, resolution D025 broke the moratorium on partnered gay ordinations. (NY Times)

The resolution passed on Monday was written in a way that would allow dioceses to consider gay candidates to the episcopacy, but does not mandate that all dioceses do so.

This is of particular note because while the resolution had passed the House of Deputies handily (77-31 in the lay order and 74-35 in the clerical order), it had not been anticipated that the House of Bishops would be so resolute.

This is a step that should not be underestimated. It is quite likely that this action will lead to a separation of the Episcopal Church from the Anglican Communion. Indeed, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the head of the church, hinted at such last week when he addressed the American delegation.

Dr. Williams addressed the General Convention in Anaheim as it opened last week, saying, “Along with many in the communion, I hope and pray that there won\’t be decisions in the coming days that will push us further apart. If we — if I — had felt that we could do perfectly well without you, there wouldn\’t be a problem.”

Should a separation (or expulsion) occur, it may soon be followed by other national bodies deemed too “liberal” by those who measure their faith by who it excludes. Eventually the parent church, the Church of England, may find itself in the position of fighting for its own inclusion in the body to which it lends its name.

Also in play is a resolution to “collect and develop theological resources and liturgies of blessing for same-gender holy unions” for consideration in 2012. This resolution, C056, has moved out of the Prayer Book Committee by a huge margin (6-0 among bishops, 26-1 in deputies) and is now before the House of Bishops.

The significant majority of Bishop support for ordination – considering its expected consequence – may give promise of a positive outcome for C056. Having embraced full inclusion of gay Christians, the church may feel less need to hesitate over blessing of their vows and commitments.

Today the Episcopal Church made a momentous decision. They took a step towards inclusion that will likely result in their exclusion. They decided that you are more important than the good favor of those who reject you. They decided that you are more valued than centuries of tradition, communion, and organization.

Given a choice between welcoming you into their fold or appeasing those who find you abhorrent, they chose you.

For excellent blogging of the convention and its decisions, see Episcopal Cafe

– – –
A special congratulations to my friend Dan who leaves this week to become an Assistant Rector at an Episcopal Church in Illinois. May God keep you, guide you, bless you and shower you with His blessings.

India’s Top Televangelist Also Claims Gay Cure

Some things are the same the whole world over. And it seems that religious cures for homosexuality bring in the bucks no matter what television network you use to spout your dogma. (Dispatch Online)

India’s top television yoga expert has challenged a landmark court ruling legalising gay sex, claiming it is a “disease” that can be cured by yoga.

Swami Baba Ramdev filed the petition on the grounds that the Delhi High Court “erred” in decriminalising “unnatural sex acts” and that homosexuality was an illness which could be treated, according to the Indian Express newspaper.

“It can be treated like any other congenital defect. Such tendencies can be treated by yoga, pranayama (breathing exercises) and other meditation techniques,” he said.

I suspect that the Swami hasn’t been to a yoga class in Hollywood (or Seattle).

Focus on the Family Exists to Fight Marriage Equality

If you’re old enough, you might remember the good ol’ days, the days when Dr. Dobson provided advice to parents on how to raise their kids. When spiritual advice was provided to help newlyweds deal with stress and build a happy marriage. When Focus on the Family focused on, well, the families of their listeners.

Those days are over.

Now FotF has a different purpose – focus on your family and how to harm it.

Sonja Swiatkiewicz, Focus\’ director of issues response, spoke with Everyday Christian:

She said gay marriage issue is now one of the largest for Focus.

“I would not consider gay marriage as something we are just keeping an eye on,” Swiatkiewicz said. “Protecting the institution of marriage as between a man and a woman is one of our primary goals. We receive about 250,000 communications a month from folks who have very deep hurts on this issue and request resources. We know the impact it has on the breakdown of the relationship between men, women and children.

“We work to protect or restore marriages as closely as we do on the sanctity of life beginning at conception and protecting religious liberties.”

Yes, Focus on the Family has become an issues advocacy organization, and not for issues that directly impact any of their listeners or contributors. Their mission is no longer to advise Christians; instead they demand that non-Christians or others who disagree with them do what Focus commands. They’ve de-emphasized providing care to Christian families and now are dedicated to imposing their polical will on others.

You might say they’ve lost their focus.

DADT to be Put on Hold by Senate?

Jason Bellini is reporting: (Daily Beast)

New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is considering bringing the battle over “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to the Senate this week, by introducing an amendment that would put an 18-month moratorium on the discharge of gays serving in the military

While I favor a full reversal of all institutionalized discrimination against gay citizens and taxpayers, such a process may not be a bad idea. It would allow the administration to demonstrate that removing anti-gay policies did not result in chaos or in loss of troop morale.

New York Marriage Vote in September?

NY1 is reporting

Governor David Paterson will push the State Senate to vote on same-sex marriage during a special session in early September.

But, as we’ve seen, we shouldn’t make any assumptions.

The Great Salt Lake City Kiss-In

 For a few hours on Sunday morning, the area near Salt Lake City’s LDS Temple became the gayest spot in the Beehive State. That’s when more than a hundred people, mostly gay but some straight supporters as well, gathered at the LDS Church’s Salt Lake Temple near Main Street Square to participate in a light-hearted protest against the LDS’s detention of a gay couple after one of them kissed the other on the cheek.The couple, Derek Jones and Matthew Aune, were detained Thursday on Main Street Square by LDS security guards.

LDS officials were not amused by Sunday’s show of support for the couple:

Several LDS Church security guards dressed in suits kept a watchful eye, and turned some protesters back when they tried to cross the church-owned plaza or walk onto the property to share a kiss.

Guards called police when protesters staged a walk onto the plaza, and officers stood to block the entrance.

“They were asked repeatedly not to come onto the property, and they chose to do so anyway,” said LDS church spokeswoman Kim Farah. Though a few people spoke in protest, there were no direct confrontations, and guards did not stop the protesters gathered past the property line.

The city sold Main Street Square in 2003 to the LDS church and it is now Mormon property, even though it is readily accessible as a public space.

Yelping Over Discrimination In El Paso

Chico’s Tacos is a venerated institution in El Paso, Texas. It was founded in 1953 and is now the kind of place that locals take out of town visitors to visit, and former El Paso residents make a special point of stopping in whenever they’re in town. But that hasn’t prevented Chico’s Tacos’ Yelp ratings from plunging to 1½ stars over their discriminatory practices. They’ve been pummelled with 118 one-star ratings so far since July 10. That’s out of 153 reviews, most which had previously been very positive. It’ll take a very long time to recover from that. Not sure that this will have much of an impact with locals; they either love it or hate it. But it’s bound to deter some out-of-towners from stopping in.

El Paso Police Chief Disavows Prior Statements, Pledges To Enforce Anti-Discrimination Ordinance

El Paso Police Chief Greg Allen has issued a statement “to correct and clarify prior statements” concerning the eviction of five men from an El Paso restaurant after two of them kissed. The new statement calls prior statements an “incorrect recitation of the law” and recognizes the police department’s responsibility to enforce the city’s anti-discrimination ordinance. That 2003 ordinance bans discrimination in public accommodations based on sexual orientation.

This statement is in response to public outcry over actions by police officers who were called to Chico’s Tacos restaurant after a security guard threatened to remove five male customers because two of them kissed. The guard told the group to leave, saying that “faggot stuff” wasn’t allowed. The men called police over their pending removal, but instead of enforcing the city’s anti-discrimination law, a responding officer threatened the cite the kissing couple for violating a nonexistent law against “homosexual conduct” — one that presumably would go so far as to ban something as radically “faggotty” as a kiss. Later, an EPPD spokesperson compounded the problem over the non-existent law by saying that the five men at Chico’s Tacos could have been charged with criminal trespass instead.

Chief Allen’s statement now recognizes the police department’s responsibility to ensure “the opportunity of each person to obtain goods and services in all process of public accommodation without fear of discrimination.” The new statement “recognizes the negative impact that discrimination can have on a community”and requires that all police personnel “be courteous and respectful in their official dealings with the public.” Chief Allen requires EPPD personnel to “maintain a level of competence” in enforcing the city’s anti-discrimination ordinance, and warns that failure to do so “will result in appropriate discipline.”

Click here to read the El Paso Police Department Statement

El Paso Restaurant Guards Release Statement Calling Kissing “Lewd Behavior”

Two of about 100 people protesting outside the Chico's Tacos restaurant in El Paso, Texas. (Ruben R. Ramirez/El Paso Times)

It looks like a kiss is still a very radical act. The security firm hired by Chico’s Tacos has responded to the uproar over the five men who were kicked out of the El Paso, Texas restaurant after two of them kissed. It turns out that kissing is now lewd behavior:

The security company’s general manager, Robert Gamboa, released a statement Friday that said the guard encountered eight men, not five. The statement said the men were disruptive and caused a disturbance when the guard approached them.

“While at their seats, two members of the group did proceed to engage in kissing and other lewd conduct,” the statement said. “It wasn’t until another member of the group started to dance around in the aisle like a ballerina, that our officer approached them and asked them to settle down or they would be asked to leave.”

Carlos Diaz de Leon, one of the five men kicked out is described at being appalled at the statement. He insisted that there were only five men in the group and that no one was dancing. “That security company is ridiculous,” he said. He led a protest by about a hundred people in front of the restaurant Friday.

El Paso has an anti-discrimination ordinance which prohibits, among other things, restaurants from refusing to serve anyone based on sexual orientation. But that didn’t stop private security guards hired by the restaurant from ordering the men to leave after two of them kissed, saying that “faggot stuff” wasn’t allowed. Both parties called police, but instead of enforcing El Paso’s anti-discrimination law, officers threatened to cite the men with violating a statute prohibiting “homosexual conduct,” saying that kissing was forbidden in public. An EPPD spokesman later compounded the problem by saying that the couple could have been charged with criminal trespass.

The ACLU is calling for an official inquiry into the reported anti-gay discrimination, as well as the response by the El Paso Police Department.