Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Strangercrombie in Action | Screw curry, scarf yogurt »

Wednesday, January 18, 2006

An Open Letter to the Woman Behind the Man

Posted by on January 18 at 8:30 AM

I have a friend, Stuart, who has a penchant for emailing religious fundamentalists whenever they upset him. Which is often. And, as it turns out, they sometimes write him back. You should have seen the exchange he had last year with the person who answers James Dobson’s email.

Anyway, with Redmond’s very own Rev. Ken Hutcherson now agitating for a boycott of Microsoft, Boeing, and other companies over their support of Washington’s gay civil rights bill, Stuart is back pounding away at his keyboard. Problem is, it’s not easy to find Hutcherson’s direct email address. Instead, one has to go through his personal assistant, Anne Comer….

acomer.jpg

…who describes herself this way:

I love to sing in Choir and the Praise Teams, study God’s word and listen to the birds outside early in the mornings… God has blessed me with a wonderful, godly upbringing, (thanks Mom and Dad) a godly husband, godly children and a church that I can grow my faith in Jesus Christ. “Thank YOU Jesus, for saving my soul!”

Here is Anne’s email address. And here is an email from Stuart about his decision to email Anne to politely complain about her boss’s opposition to gay rights. Stuart asked me to share the email with Slog readers, and he encourages you guys to follow his lead, if you’re so inclined:

I woke up this morn to this news on the radio… that one Rev. Ken Hutcherson at a church in Redmond, WA (which is real close to Microsoft, for those out-of-staters I’m sending this to) is threatening another of those tiresome boycotts that sometimes seem to get folks in the business world to cower and retreat. All because it looks like for the first time in 30 years of trying, Washington is about to get a gay civil-rights bill passed…

I know that I don’t necessarily have the power to stop his ignorant and evil threats and thoughts, and, when you go to his website, you can’t seem to send HIM a personal email voicing your opinion. What you can do is email his personal assistant, who, by proxy, is complicit in his views. I have sent a polite email to her, and it made me feel just a tad better.

My email went something like this:

“Since one cannot email Rev. Hutcherson directly on this site, I chose to email you, and ask, politely, what if one of your godly children turned out to be gay…would you want them to be discriminated against, and have no protection under the law?

Just asking…food for thought.”

Basically, I’m not looking for folks to be rude; I’m looking for these folks to stop and think for a minute what they’re doing and asking others to do.

I’ve never done a mass email like this before, but, after the Ford boycott and other endless threats by these people, I felt like I had to do something, albeit small.

Thanks,
Stuart

I’ll let you know if Stuart gets an email back from Anne, or her boss, and in the meantime, here’s that email address again.

Oh, and if you do write an email to Anne, and want to post a copy of it in the Slog comments for all to see, well, the link to the comments is right here ——>


CommentsRSS icon

I wrote Hutcherson an impolite letter several weeks back and mailed it to Antioch Bible Church's office address, and I received a response from him, albeit an unsatisfactory response. Nevertheless, I was able to fill three pages with my thoughts about him, and he read them. That was as much as I had hoped to accomplish.

She's pretty.

She sounds like my whackjob kin back in Eastern Kentucky.

After months of resisting, I finally caved in to one of Stuart's requests to send an email to a right wing wacko group. I guess I'll be on some interesting new emails lists now.

This is what I sent to Anne Comer at Antioch Bible Church:

Please do not organize a boycott against business that support civil rights for gay people.

All people should be protected by our constitution and giving
people equal rights should not be percieved as a threat to you or your religion.

The attacks on gay people and the people who support them need to stop.

Thank you,

Adam

How hypocritical. The Stranger is all alight about anti-gay initiatives that target a minority of adult people practicing their sexuality in private in the way they see fit, but they refuse to stand up for drug addicts who are treated like social and public pariahs (that would be . . . tobacco smokers).

Well, your editors and your little music writers who delight in enforcing the ban by policing the poor lone smoker at a bar (c.f. Dave Segal) got PUNKED today by The Seattle Weekly, who actually gets it.

Thank god there is still one truly progressive paper left in Seattle.

And oh, Mr. Segal, I hear the Seattle Police Department is hiring. You seem to posses the police instinct in spades. Why not give law enforcement a professional chance instead of publically persecuting a minority of people who support the industry you claim to represent?

No joke about Segal. They should have hired from the outside if Hannah Levin wasn't available.

Dave would look so boss in an SPD uniform!

Judging from the tone of your comments, I would think perhaps smoking isn't the cause of your social/public pariah status.

Comparing the public descrimination of gays and lesbians to the plight of smokers is absurd and insulting. Grow a good argument if you want to continue beating this dead horse.

last time i checked, "teh gays" didn't give innocent bystanders cancer.

I'm with Cienna.

golly looks like the editor at the seattle weakly is writing in to the slog again....

"trinity" me things thou dost protest way toooooo much!

love those seattle weaklings, especially the poor, poor, wet and lonely smokers on their staff.... boo hoo.

OMG are you Trinity from the matrix?!?!
I LOVE THE MATRIX!!!

We're pro-straight:

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=17046

Also, we're not against smokers smoking in private—just like homos get all homo in private. I would no more fight for the right to fuck my boyfriend in a bar in front of a bunch of straight people than I would support the right of a smoker to smoke in one in front of a bunch of non-smokers.

shite. dan has me rethinking my decision to vote for the smoking ban.

I would no more fight for the right to fuck my boyfriend in a bar in front of a bunch of straight people than I would support the right of a smoker to smoke in one in front of a bunch of non-smokers.

Quite in keeping with the entire line of your arguments presented here within the last couple of months, this sentence is entirely irrational, almost nonsensical.

No adult person was either FORCED to go into a smoking establishment or to work there.

Adults can make up their own minds, and they have the right to.

Apparently you think this applies to those who CHOOSE to engage in anal sex, with its attendant (quite mortal) risks, yet you do not think it applies to a group of drug addicts who choose to use the drug they use, along with its attendant (quite mortal) risks.

In other words, it's all right for you to practice anal sex within the confines of your private property, but not okay for smokers to practice their addiction within the confines of private property that allows it.

That's grossly hypocritical, and that's why you've been punked by the Weekly.

Comparing the public descrimination of gays and lesbians to the plight of smokers is absurd and insulting.

It certainly isn't. Look at the billboards around town comparing smokers to people who eat rats. Yes, rats for breakfast.

Suppose someone tried to do this to a minority group of, oh, say, gays and lesbians. What do you suppose would happen?

Furthermore, all it takes is one thickheaded initiative penned by a Christian "do gooder" for a majority of suburbanite homophobes to rally around, and voila! Life becomes hell for gays and lesbians. Face it, along with smokers, they are one of the most hated minorities around, and it's actually fashionable amongst suburbanites to bash them!

For a parallel analogy, see post to D. Savage above.

last time i checked, "teh gays" didn't give innocent bystanders cancer.

Last time I checked, "teh nonsmokers" were never forced to patronize smoking establishments. Please grow a brain.

I'm with Cienna.

Ah, that means you're equally as capable of rational thought. Good for you!

And no, I don't work for the Weekly. I am merely applauding them for being rational and standing up for a persecutated minority of drug abusers. In this sense, they are one of the last truly radical or progressive papers in town. The Stranger has ceded that by its disgraceful defense of the smoking ban.

PS:

Oh, and calling Dave Segal!! A friend of mine who works at a recovery center for heroin addicts in the south end told me that the cops were out in force there, hassling the perps on the street smoking outside the establishment. Apparently they were not in strict alignment with the 25 ft. rule. One was even handed a monetary fine.

Given your excellent little adventure at the little squat black "workplace environment" at Madison, you know, that night you "sniffed out" the hapless smoker dude and reprimanded him, I think you would be a downright asset to the SPD at the methodone clinic. Lots of hapless addicts out there in the cold there just looking to get hassled on the street by hard-ass nonsmoker types like you. Go fer it, Segal!

Trinity = Dawdy

Don't you have resumes to get out? I hear teh gays are hiring.

Yeah, there's far too much persecutation going on in this town.

I'm so glad the "radical" weekly is there to stand up for the little guy.

And what the hell is "punked" supposed to mean, anyhow?

I like the entry where Trinity calls Dan's key sentence irrational and then proceeds to completely miss the (entirely rational and cogent) point.

I like the entry where Trinity calls Dan's key sentence irrational and then proceeds to completely miss the (entirely rational and cogent) point.

Yeah that was so stunning I had to get back to work for a minute. I'm a smoker strongly against the smoking ban and I'm still unable to suss out the meat of this guy's point. It would make more sense if he just dropped the gay and lesbian comparison thing altogether. Seems straw-grabby.

Do you really think it's the same person? The article was a pretty good read. Maybe he's just "letting it all hang out" while partying in an anonymous internet forum?

Hey Trinity:

I'm gay. Not a choice.
You smoke. A choice.

Equating the persecution of the two groups? Nonsensical.

I like the entry where Lostboy notices that Trinity calls out Dan but then totally misses Trinity's rational and cogent point -- that we're adults and no one ever forced Dan or anyone else to go to patronize a smoking establishment.

Hey, "Trinity"—thanks for the career advice. Unfortunately, I'd make a lousy cop—I don't eat doughnuts.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to persecutating smokers.

Ahem. Back to the Ken Hutcherson/Anne Comer issue.

Unfortunately, arguments like, what happens if one of your kids comes out as gay, don't work on those people. They're completely in denial. 'Nope. Can't happen to me. My family is "godly." La la la. I can't hear you.'

Good lord, what is with Dawdy trying to start a topically irrelevant smoking ban flame war on every SLOG thread?

I've met many a beautiful woman, only to find later that they were backwards, racist, hopelessly ignorant Christians. The beauty belies the truth within.

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).