Archive | November, 2009

Puerto Rico Murder and Texas Assault to be Prosecuted as Hate Crimes

November 30, 2009

Two weeks ago, I told you about a rash of hate crimes against LGBT people. Now comes the welcome news that two of those crimes will be prosecuted with hate crime “enhancements”.

On November 14th, the decapitated, dismembered body of Jorge Steven López Mercado (henceforth Steven López) was found in Cayey, Puerto Rico. Steven’s murderer was arrested and confessed, at which time he began floating a Gay/Trans Panic defense. (more on the Trans component in a future post)

Puerto Rico activist Pedro Julio Serrano quickly called on the Puerto Rican government to prosecute the murder as a hate crime, a literally unprecedented move in the US commonwealth.

After meeting with local ACLU representatives, the Puerto Rican government last Wednesday announced that hate crime charges would indeed be included in the prosecution of Juan Antonio Martínez Matos. Boy in Bushwick reports:

Puerto Rican authorities have agreed to investigate Jorge Steven López Mercado’s murder as a hate crime after they met with local representatives of the American Civil Liberties Union.

“The ACLU has tried to get the government to accept its responsibility to investigate cases . . . that are hate crimes, particularly that of young Jorge Steven López Mercado,” [William Ramírez, executive director of the PR chapter of the ACLU] said in a statement. “We should not be satisfied with the possibility the federal government will do what our government is not interested in doing; which is to protect every citizen.”

Activists on Puerto Rico and around the country have repeatedly called upon local authorities to charge Matos under Puerto Rico’s hate crimes law, which includes sexual orientation. They have also blasted investigator Ángel Rodríguez Colón’s assertion López somehow contributed to his own death. The Federal Bureau of Investigation in San Juan has not ruled out the possibility of additional federal charges in the case.

Meanwhile, Rod McCullom of Rod 2.0 has news on hate crime charges in the case of Jayron Martin, a 16-year-old Houston student who was severely beaten after being refused help by two assistant principals and a school bus driver.

Sources in Houston and at the Human Rights Campaign in Washington tell Rod 2.0 the suspect will be charged as an adult with assault and a hate crimes sentencing enhancement. Texas hate crimes law explicitly includes “sexual preference”.

Rod also reports that the bus driver will likely be fired for allowing Jayron to exit the bus with the group of thugs that had threatened to assault him. No word on the two administrators who also ignored his pleas for help.


  • Share/Bookmark

Hospital Sends Out The House Fags

November 25, 2009

I wanted to post something light and positive today. I really did. After all the bad news of the last few weeks I thought it would be nice to leave something fun before the Thanksgiving break.

Sadly, that will not be possible.

Recall that two months ago I published a story about Lisa Pond, a lesbian who was left to die alone because Jackson Memorial Hospital refused to acknowledge her partner Janice Langbehn or their children even after required legal documents had been produced.

Recall also that her partner’s suit against the hospital was dismissed after the court found that a Florida hospital has a right to do that to anyone, regardless of whether a hospital actually does do that to anyone other than a lesbian.

In yesterday’s guest post on Steve Rothaus’ Gay South Florida (a blog of the Miami Herald), John Dorschner posted a defense of the hospital by several lesbian and gay employees.

It’s an oddly-timed and transparent public relations move not unlike the Southern tradition of the master sending House Negroes to calm down other slaves after they’d heard a bit of truth.

I’m not going to republish the article here. Here’s the Cliff Notes version: “Oh no, Massa don’t hate queers! Janice must have been distraught and, um, misunderstood when people treated her like shit for eight hours until Lisa’s sister arrived and got information immediately without proving that she was related. She just misunderstood, see!”

In an open letter this morning, Janice Langbehn responded, again through Steve Rothaus’ blog. Click through to read her full comments, but here’s a taste:

I was given a link for the Miami Herald article done by John Dorschner (11/24) that I believe just set our family back 2.5 years. In the article a lesbian charge nurse at Jackson Memorial (apparently on duty the night Lisa was there) says she personally knows the SW and he is fine with her and her partner. The article goes on and basically accuses me of being irate in the waiting room and all but calls me a liar for what our family endured. I am beyond shocked to say the least that this would come just 5 days after an apology from other employees of the hospital. I wish I had been irate because maybe then I wouldn’t feel like a failure for not being with Lisa instead of doing as I was told – to repeatedly to take a seat and just “wait”.

I am letting you all know of this article posting and that I was NOT contacted to provide any information for this article. I don’t know the reporter who did this article for the Miami Herald. As you might guess I am at a loss and feel so personally attacked and that the apology I received last week in Miami was just lip service.

I am asking that you do not let give up the fight for equal treatment for our families, especially in crisis situations. I have Lisa’s medical records, I know when they stopped critical care. And as for the nurses to say my memory may be “hazy” is such a disservice to Lisa and our family. I have never wavered what happened that night – only JMH has they try to find new ways to spin the truth to make them look better since the LGBT community is afraid to seek care at their facilities.

Please keep Janice and her children in your prayers and thoughts this Thanksgiving. I’m not sure how you’ll tie that in to giving thanks, but they deserve your unending support.

P.S.: Janice, you are far from a failure. Quite the contrary, you are an inspiration!

Note: The comments section on my original blog post about Lisa and Janice got way out of hand until I finally shut them down. Before you comment here, please read the comment rules for this blog and know that comments that break those rules will be deleted.

7CHHBF4A4TVH


  • Share/Bookmark

Welcome to our church. You're not gay, are you?

November 23, 2009

I consider myself fortunate on my church home. Our minister is a true man of God and my fellow members are warm and caring. We’re active in local, national, and international mission work. We enjoy a true sense of family that I’ve found to be rare.

Not all people are so fortunate. Most mainline churches aren’t terribly up front about their stance on gays, so you can’t always tell what you’re getting until months have passed.

Such is the case for “Mike”, whose letter I ran across last night. Written in early 2007 about an incident in early 2006, the letter illustrates the danger at hand when we gays search for church homes.

I’ve decided to protect the identity of the writer, the pastor, and the congregation in this post. For reference, I’ll just say that this United Methodist congregation is located in the Church’s South Central Jurisdiction.

Dear Jeff:

During the last 9 months, I have debated whether to write these words strictly for catharsis or to write them and actually send them to you. When I began this morning, I figured that I would choose the former. But as the day progressed, two events galvanized my decision to proceed with the latter. The first was during lunch at [restaurant]. My partner had mentioned his father in passing but then began to cry: the man died of cancer almost a year ago. The second was my hearing you on a local radio station, advertising █████ █████████ Church’s assortment of Easter services. I wish listeners had access to the list of tacit conditions and exclusions.

Surely you recall having e-mailed me in mid-July 2006 and asking whether I could meet with you. None of the times you suggested fit with my schedule that week, so you then said that you were going out of town but that you would be back in touch with me during the last week of July. I waited.

Guessing what you wanted to talk about was no mystery. I am not oblivious to where I live and the kinds of people that surround me. But before you write me off as just another deviant suffering from inner brokenness, I will explain the gross assumptions that you have either made for yourself or accepted on the secondhand testimony of others.

My partner, whose name I imagine you never bothered to learn, is an unusually tender-hearted, sensitive, and deeply caring man. Hallmark commercials, cute babies, and small acts of kindness will bring him to tears. Mere days after his father died last year in [other state], we were sitting in church here. █████████ ██████ was preaching, and she made a comment about God wanting people to have strong family connections—with our brothers, our sisters, our fathers, and our mothers. When she said “our fathers,” he started crying. Seeing this was painful because I hate to see anyone hurting. I put my arm around him to reassure him that he wasn’t alone. He was shaking a little from the crying, and I did my best to comfort him.

It would appear that others sitting in church saw one man with his arm around another man and on that sole basis concluded that two gay men were scheming and plotting to flaunt their aberrant lifestyle for all to see. Of course, had he been a woman, no one would’ve thought anything of it. But men, real men, don’t show their emotional weaknesses, I suppose. In the weeks that followed, other statements from the pulpit would resonate with his loss, and he would cry or lose his composure; I would hold his hand, although each time he recovered a little faster. But the damage was done: entire groups of people evidently assumed that I am a homosexual, concluded that I had brought a filthy outsider into the church, and mobilized to treat him and me with, at best, cool civility, lest God think they condoned my evil choice. Jesus would be proud. When I stopped coming to services, presumably there was no longer a need for you to contact me, as you had promised.

You’d think, since God is said to be love and has promised in scripture never to leave or forsake me, that his church would be the one place in the world I should be able to go without fear of being judged or treated with disdain. I ask myself how Jesus would have responded had he seen someone anguished over the loss of a family member. Would he have stopped to think, Hey, I’m a man, and so is this person suffering here. Maybe, since my showing him compassion could be misconstrued as overtly homosexual behavior, I’d better play it cool.

I’m not denying that I’m gay and that I brought my partner to church with me once he moved here from █████ (where we met when I was working there in 2004). But people saw me touching another man and, without stopping to think, assumed the worst. They didn’t try to find out anything else; once their minds were made up, the unconditional love, kindness, and compassion of Jesus Christ evaporated. I assumed that people complained to you—or maybe you drew these conclusions yourself. Either way, hating for the sake of pharisaical righteousness is easier than thinking for oneself, than following Christ’s model. People who once greeted me warmly every week would look at me with barely concealed disgust—or, in some cases, wouldn’t meet my eyes. I’ve run into members of the church and clergy in public, and where once they would seek me out, now I have become invisible. They will look everywhere in a room except for the spot where I am, their eyes glossing over me as if retroactively I never existed.

One exception to this unfortunate trend, however, reminds me that there are Methodists here who, per the Book of Discipline, are committed to “social witness against the coercion and marginalization of homosexuals.” And he might well also believe the passage stating that homosexual behavior is incompatible with Christian teaching. Regardless of his beliefs, [another pastor at the church] has many times found me in public, looked me in the eye, shaken my hand warmly, and asked with seemingly genuine curiosity how I am doing. Many of the friends I made in that congregation continue to treat me with that same decency and kindness—as I imagine Jesus would.

As for those who presumed to know my heart and mind, drawing broad-sweeping and vast conclusions based on fractional minutiae, I’m not sure they would know the love and grace of God if it bit them. A friend told me how it works: the most generous donors to your church also happen to be the most conservative. We must always keep them happy, even at the expense of emulating Christ.

One other thing: my partner knows nothing about any of this: not people’s putative reactions, not your e-mail, not this response. Please don’t contact us, lest he learn of these issues. I will not risk poisoning him to the idea of church. He might see your church as not only tolerating but also embracing people who are kind only to those of identical mind. The real test of Christianity is how you treat people who are different. The real sermons of Christianity are the lessons people learn from observing you, not from listening to your words.

When did Christianity become nothing more than decrying abortion and homosexuality? When the church newsletter stopped coming in the mail, I got the message. I took the money that I had set aside for your church and gave it instead to the American Red Cross and the ████ Food Bank—two organizations that practice religion that is pure and undefiled, as the scriptures define it. I’m fairly certain that both groups, and the people they benefit, are grateful for my help, no matter what sex I’m attracted to.

Your church got the best of both worlds, though: you kept cashing my checks even after defaulting on the Christ-like behavior. Jesus saved his harshest words for ostensibly religious people who were certain of their doctrinal accuracy but whose hearts were necrotic. Maybe you should change the church’s motto: “Sharing the heart of Christ … but only as long as we’re in our comfort zone.” My sharing the heart of Christ will manifest itself through caring for my partner during his time of emotional turmoil. Maybe that’s how he will perceive Christianity: individual kindness rather than the warped version that I encountered.

[signed]

Thanks to Mike for letting me publish his letter on the blog. I’ve been in a similar circumstance (though not (directly) because I’m gay), and revisiting the experience is not my favorite pastime.

In an email this morning, Mike mentioned that Jeff made one attempt at email contact (against Mike’s expressed wishes), then months later when he saw them at a restaurant. He also said that the pastor he had praised in this letter has now been maneuvered out of direct contact with the congregation.

Is it any wonder so many LGBT people have divorced themselves from religion? Do you begin to see why so many of us have a sense of urgency about the changes the Church must face?


  • Share/Bookmark

The Religious Right's "Manhattan Declaration"

November 20, 2009

A group of well-known anti-gay activists released their “Manhattan Declaration”, a treatise on their stance against civil rights causes, with a special focus on The Homosexuals. I’m not going to dirty my blog with the whole 4,732 word screed. For that you can go to Jeremy Hooper at Good-As-You, who got his hands on a copy before it was released.

Signers (so far) include:

  • Chuck Colson, convicted felon and long-time foe of civil rights, who helped write the document
  • Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl, who last week threatened to shutter all Catholic charities in Washington, DC if a gay-marriage law is passed by city council
  • Jim Daly, Focus on the Family’s new president, who misrepresented the science of anthropology earlier this year in order to make a false point about Homosexual “Marriage”
  • James Dobson, Focus on the Family founder and long time opponent of civil rights, not to mention truth and integrity
  • Tony Perkins, Family Research Council president, who earlier this year said that the United States should stand with George W. Bush’s “Axis of Evil”
  • Bishop Harry R. Jackson, Jr., colleague of Leroy Swailes in the fight against a potential gay marriage law in Washington, DC
  • Catholic Bishop Richard J. Malone, whose diocese in Maine raised over half a million dollars to remove civil rights by passing the plate during worship services three times
  • Alan Sears, Alliance Defense Fund president, who for some reason failed to rush to the defense of Louisiana’s Keith Bardwell when he refused to marry an interracial couple, even though doing so was clearly mandated by a statement earlier this year
  • Mark Tooley, President of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, which bribed (or attempted to bribe) United Methodist General Conference 2008 delegates from Africa and South America to vote against gay-positive measures
  • Gary Bauer, president of American Values and standard go-to bigot for FOX News
  • Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage and Liar-in-Chief for the anti-equality movement
  • Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Church, who says that Democrats are Nazis
  • and many more

Seriously. It’s like a Who’s Who of Religious Right leaders. It’s nice to have them all in one place, I guess.

I do want to pull out one significant line from the final paragraph of this long, rambling tome:

… nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family.

Attention signers of this nonsense and their followers:

NO ONE HAS SUGGESTED THAT CHURCHES SHOULD HAVE TO BLESS GAY MARRIAGES!

NO ONE HAS SUGGESTED THAT CHURCHES SHOULD HAVE TO LOVE OR APPROVE OF GAYS!

STOP SPREADING LIES!

STOP SPREADING FEAR!

You’re Christians. Start acting like it, for God’s sake.


  • Share/Bookmark

Too Late to Save Careers of Choi and Fehrenbach?

November 19, 2009

The US Senate held confirmation hearings today for Dr. Clifford Stanley, nominatee for the position of Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. This is important to Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) watchers because that officer usually deals with DADT cases. We’d hoped to get a glimpse at the Obama Administration’s handling of the theoretical repeal of the discriminatory law.

From my count, we got two indications from today’s hearing.

Sen. John McCain’s opening remarks include the statement that “this policy has worked successfully in my view.” (via Kerry Eleveld’s twitter stream) I would hardly call Sen. McCain moderate, especially considering his unabashedly anti-gay statements during last year’s failed campaign for the presidency, but it’s still disheartening to hear such nonsense go unchallenged.

More troublesome, though, is Dr. Stanley’s response to a question from Sen. Roland Burris of Illinois about what happens to current DADT investigations if DADT is repealed. Stanley’s answer was, “if there are pending cases, they would fall under the existing statute. That’s about all I can say about that at this time.” (again from Kerry Eleveld’s coverage)

We had hoped, or at least I had hoped, that DADT’s repeal would end the destruction of honorable servicemembers’ lives. That doesn’t seem to be the case, at least not according to the testimony of this candidate.

Lt. Choi and Lt. Col. Fehrenbach

Lt. Choi and Lt. Col. Fehrenbach

Based on this testimony I have to wonder: Is it too late? Should current DADT victims give up their personal fights for justice to save their veterans benefits? It might be too late to save their careers, but can they save their futures?

Lt. Dan Choi came home from an extended tour of duty in Iraq with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). If he gets a less-than-honorable discharge (which is guaranteed if he fights his firing), he will lose his veteran health benefits and, at least to my understanding, his PTSD would be used as a preexisting condition to deny coverage from health insurance companies.

Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach is now about a year away from his 20-year retirement date. Remember, if he continues to fight for justice, he will lose retirement funds of $46,000 per year for the rest of his life, all of the lifetime veteran health benefits he has earned, and $80,000 in separation pay.

All this because the cases came a year before congress had the courage to act.

Is this how America treats its veterans? Is it really?


  • Share/Bookmark