Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Equal treatment under the law is for everyone, no matter what

By ERNEST HOOPER
Published June 17, 2005

When I read about the Hillsborough County Commission's decision to ban county government from acknowledging gay pride, my first thought was to wonder how I would feel if the ban was against black pride.

What would be the level of my anger if the board had lashed out against an expression of black individuality? What would be the depths of my despair if they had voted against equal treatment for me and my people?

Would I be mad enough to protest, or sad enough to move?

A number of blacks, particularly religious leaders, refuse to draw any parallels between civil rights and gay rights. They say the black struggle is about gaining inalienable rights as Americans, but the protests of gays are about an endorsement of a lifestyle they find sinful and reprehensible.

Commissioner Thomas Scott, who is a minister, said Thursday that when you consider 16-million Africans died during the middle passage journey to the Americas, that blacks were castrated, lynched and killed for centuries, it's a slap in the face for gays to make comparisons.

Scott and I agreed to disagree. I see similarities and not just because I believe being homosexual isn't a choice for the majority of people who call themselves gay. I think it's similar because this is a demand to be treated fairly, a demand blacks have sought for many decades and continue to do so today.

As a society, we have failed to learn from past lessons if we force gays to go through the same battles blacks - or women for that matter - had to endure. Suffering through discrimination is not the exclusive domain of African-Americans, and for blacks to turn against gays after winning major civil rights battles is the height of hypocrisy.

But ministers and the deeply religious have the prerogative to be morally opposed to homosexuality.

The same, however, cannot be said about our county commissioners, who have been elected to represent all the citizens of the county. Sure, there may be a constituency that doesn't want their tax dollars going toward the support of gay pride. But there also is a group of folks who want this county and its leaders to fight any form of discrimination, any sense of injustice.

Scott argues this wasn't about denying gays fair treatment. He said they can still have gay pride month, still have gay pride parades. He just doesn't want county government promoting an alternative lifestyle or a certain sexual orientation, just as he wouldn't want county government promoting Christianity over Islam.

Scott said he wants everyone to be treated equally under the law, including gays. He actually tells a fairly poignant story about how he spent a year caring for his gay brother, who died of AIDS.

"It was one of the most painful experiences of my life," Scott said.

Scott has spoken about his brother in the past, but he didn't share that story during Wednesday's commission meeting. Nor did he bother to denounce unequal treatment.

That's one of the most disturbing aspects about the board's vote, which stemmed from a display at the West Gate Public Library promoting Gay Pride and Lesbian Pride Month. None of the commissioners who voted yes - Scott, Ronda Storms, Jim Norman, Brian Blair and Mark Sharpe - bothered to frame their vote in any kind of context. During the commission meeting, the most public of forums, they offered little explanation or reason for the vote.

So, it's left for us to interpret what motivated them. Is it a vote for bigotry, a stand against tolerance? Did they slap gay people in the face?

Any public discussion of gay rights or gay pride can't be left up to interpretation. If unstable people translate the vote into an all-out rejection of gays, there is no telling how they may react.

The ban was wrong, and to cast the vote without meaningful discussion was reckless and irresponsible.

Our political leaders need to promote tolerance and respect at every turn.

While they may not embrace gay pride, they should embrace community pride. At the very least, they shouldn't use their political power to decide which groups get to feel like they're a part of the community. And which don't.

That's all I'm saying.

Ernest Hooper can be reached at 813 226-3406 or Hooper@sptimes.com

[Last modified June 17, 2005, 00:34:18]