Gay/black tension

Re “The gay/black divide,” Opinion, Nov. 8

I am very glad that you published Jasmyne A. Cannick’s Op-Ed article. She says much that is true, much that the mostly -- though certainly not exclusively -- white organizers of the unsuccessful campaign to defeat Proposition 8 need to hear and ponder.

But her central argument dangerously confuses two things. Yes, future organizers, to be successful, must make a better case to black voters, beginning by asking themselves the sorts of questions Cannick asks (“Is marriage really more important than poverty?” and so on).

But their failure to do so does not mean that they do not yet have the rights that voters have rejected. Just as African Americans had a right to a better America long before Nov. 4, 2008, so too do my rights, as a gay American, exist with or without anyone’s permission, including Cannick’s.

Shane Butler

Santa Monica

--

Cannick’s poorly reasoned screed is a transparent distraction from the real issue.

Despite years of oppression, 70% of the black community voted intolerance and discrimination into the California Constitution against another minority group. The rationale is nothing short of bigotry dressed up in the very same religious language that perpetuated the laws against interracial marriage, segregation and separate drinking fountains. Shame on them.

Todd Calvin

Los Angeles

--

I am in agreement with much of Cannick’s analysis of gay/black tensions, but I differ with her conclusion.

She suggests that because African Americans continue to suffer disproportionately, it is understandable to permit attacks on -- or begrudge the civil rights gains of -- other marginalized groups. However, by pitting one group against another, she threatens to erode gains made by both groups.

From the standpoint of this African American, straight male, we witnessed a giant leap forward with the election of Barack Obama. But attacks on the civil rights of gays and lesbians remain unjust and should not be tolerated by African Americans. As the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. once stated, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

Robert K. Ross

Los Angeles

The writer is president and CEO of the California Endowment.

--

This article reminded me of the strategic alliances forged between black abolitionists, such as Frederick Douglass, and white suffragists. These alliances were instrumental in advocating for rights in a society in which African Americans and women were systematically disenfranchised and silenced.

Today, our cause enjoys support primarily from one demographic: the white middle class. The failure to establish ties with other groups is a serious deficiency: We have already lost and will continue to lose ballot initiatives on same-sex marriage and adoption; there is limited support for gay hate-crime legislation; programs that benefit gay youth are undervalued and underfunded; and public perception of HIV/AIDS has changed little, if at all, over the last two decades.

We cannot address these serious problems unless we can appeal to communities that lie beyond our base. I urge us to rethink our strategy and to start being more inclusive. Maybe we have a lesson to learn from the abolitionists and suffragists.

Ivan Espinoza-Madrigal

New York

--

Would those living in poverty, those serving time and those living on the wrong side of the digital divide not benefit from the comfort of a spouse in facing some of these issues? Do the black lesbians and gays living in California not deserve the right to marry as much as their white gay counterparts or their black straight ones? Must legitimate grievances about inequalities translate into a rejection of the right to marry? Whatever happened to “for richer for poorer, in good times and bad, in sickness and in health”?

Teresa DeCrescenzo

Los Angeles