Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Rainbow Club Incident


  • Please log in to reply
89 replies to this topic

#51 cbellomy

cbellomy

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 650 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wedgwood

Posted 03 July 2009 - 10:57 AM

jefffwd, I didn't seriously suggest that the neighborhood didn't want the bar. I just thought it was a possible cover story for ordering the raid.

I remember the 6. My gay friends used to frequent it back in the day.


#52 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,038 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 03 July 2009 - 12:14 PM

QUOTE (monee9696 @ Jul 3 2009, 08:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
A shame. But I am starting to think that most of the demonstrators I see on the news (non-stop) want the gay and straight communities to be polarized.



I am not going to make any judgments about the Fort Worth demonstrators because I do not watch television news and the only local coverage I have read is what is here and on the Star-Telegram website. I certainly do not have a problem with local gay people and others being concerned about what has come out thus far in the news and holding demonstrations to make that concern known to the people responsible for looking into it. But I did a google news search for "Rainbow Lounge" and have noticed that there are people in publications elsewhere who seem very eager to make as much hay out of this as possible in portraying Fort Worth as some homophobic backwater as a means of attempting to make a wider, agenda driven point.

This touches on something that I alluded to in the little parody conspiracy theory I put up a few postings back. There is a tendency, over time, for activist groups to sometimes regard The Cause as being bigger and more important than the actual injustice which it initially sought to address. A good example of this is certain activists in the black community who often speak and act as if we are still living in the world of Jim Crow. Ever since I was a child, there has been history of certain individuals on the Dallas City Council or on the Dallas County Commissioners who have been quick to pounce and turn any sort of confrontation between a white public official and a black person into a racial incident and fan the flames of racial division. Sadly, there are certain activists and politicians who have a vested interest in racial divisions and antagonism - that is what their constituency is based on and if it went away they would be out of a job. And there are activists who actually promote and encourage such feelings of division in their own communities and pressure people to conform to it. Thus we hear the tragic stories of talented, intelligent black students in very rough neighborhoods of certain cities asking NOT to be be placed on the honors list or be valedictorian because they fear the reaction of their neighborhood peers who would regard them as "Uncle Toms" who sold out to "The Man." In other words, the expectation that talented black teenagers in such an environment are confronted with is the notion that they must sacrifice their intelligence, sacrifice their talent, their dreams and their ambitions in order to conform to stereotypes that are convenient to The Cause.

As gay people become more accepted in society, I do not think it is unlikely that there are going to be activists who, instead of saying "gee our goals have been accomplished, we can go home now" will look for ways to expand The Cause and to keep it going. It is a tendency in any organization and movement to seek ways to perpetuate itself.

And there is a history of certain gay activists overreacting. Some months ago there was a ballot initiative in California over gay marriage that made national headlines. Had I been a California voter, I would have voted FOR gay marriage. But after the gay marriage side lost the election, certain gay activists overreacted in a HUGE way and engaged in what can only be described as Brownshirt tactics. The names and addresses of private individuals and businesses who had made financial contributions to the opposing side were published with the implied suggestion that they be targeted for intimidation and harassment. Regardless of where you happen to be on the political spectrum, consider the potentially chilling impact that this could have on free expression if it were to catch on. Anytime you express an opinion in public, anytime you make a financial contribution to a candidate or cause, imagine having to ask yourself: Am I opening myself up for intimidation and harassment from those who disagree with me? If such tactics persist, the long term result will be that people will keep their opinions to themselves and become non-political as a matter of policy in order to stay out of trouble - which is what people have to do in order to survive in third world countries where authoritarian regimes come and go as a matter of course. This sort of thing is one of many examples of what I see as a disturbing trend of our political institutions and political life showing the first stages of degenerating down to what is considered normal in Latin American and the third world.

But I DON'T think that people voicing concern over the police raid is, in and of itself, an overreaction. It is something that needs to be looked into.

QUOTE
Now I am standing by for many to quickly point out that today the police are coming after Gay's but watch out, tomorrow they will be coming after architect lovers or photographers. Crap, of course.


But the fact remains that it wasn't all that long ago when the police DID come after gay establishments. This is a historical fact - for example, the Stonewall incident. A few years ago, I read an article about how, in decades past, local police in certain parts of Texas would be tipped off and would raid gay social gatherings in private homes - in the name of enforcing moral purity, of course. So even if there is an overreaction, up to a certain point, I think it is understandable why gays might be a bit touchy and sensitive about such things.

And I disagree with your notion that concern over other groups being potentially targeted in the future is "crap." I don't worry so much about the local police force. But I AM concerned about the possibility of IRS enforcement being used to intimidate and punish political enemies and others who are on the Wrong Side. I AM concerned about the massive alphabet soup of government regulatory agencies being used to intimidate and harass corporations who fail to make the Correct campaign contributions or fail to tow the proper Politically Correct "consensus." When there is a concentration of power, there will always be people who will eventually rise who will seek to use that power - which is why it is so crucial that the power of government be very strictly limited.

There is certainly a history of groups being targeted in our country. Blacks were targeted. Gays were targeted. And, until the Supreme Court overturned the law a few years ago, it was actually illegal in the state of Texas for gay people to.....well, you know... in the privacy of their own bedrooms. And if you go to other countries, people are targeted on a regular basis. In Venezuela, those who actively supported the ouster of Chavez a few years back found themselves on a government circulated list which blacklisted them from being able to hold government jobs or jobs with the State owned oil company or with the increasingly long list of companies that are being nationalized in that country. In Honduras, when the recently deposed president attempted to ignore that country's constitution and set himself up for an illegal third term in office, citizens were pressured into signing a petition in support of him under the threat that, if they did not, they would be denied access to government run health care. You say it can't happen here? Well, why not? The only thing that makes us any different from the rest of the world in that regard is that we do not allow such things to happen. But if we let our guard down, they eventually will happen here. We are not so special that we are somehow exempt from such things - especially given that such things are actually the norm in most parts of the world and have been down through most of history. You know the old saying... the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. And that is why anytime ANY branch or agency of ANY level of government oversteps its legitimate authority and responsibilities or targets and treats some group of citizens differently than everyone else, it needs to be taken VERY seriously.
Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#53 txsloth

txsloth

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lubbock (the Fort on weekends)

Posted 03 July 2009 - 01:02 PM

Email from Mayor Mike:

Fort Worth Mayor asks acting U.S. Attorney to review Rainbow Lounge investigation

Mayor Mike Moncrief released the following statement July 3, 2009:

We all join in wishing Mr. Gibson a speedy and full recovery.

Currently, two investigations are underway to review the circumstances and events that took place at the Rainbow Lounge early Sunday morning. The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission (TABC) is conducting an investigation and the Fort Worth Police Department’s Internal Affairs Division is conducting its own investigation.

I join Police Chief Jeff Halstead in encouraging any eye-witnesses to the events under review to come forward and share their observations.

Members of the City Council and I have confidence that Chief Halstead is leading a thorough and professional investigation. Once the Fort Worth Police Department’s examination is complete, I have asked the acting U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, James T. Jacks, to independently review the findings of the Fort Worth Police Department’s investigation to ensure the department has thoroughly and impartially carried out its obligation to all the citizens of Fort Worth. I encourage the TABC to follow the same course.

Fort Worth has a history of inclusiveness, and the Fort Worth Police Department has a history of responsible and professional service to our citizens. The police department’s internal investigation and the outside review is meant to ensure all citizens are professionally and responsibly represented by our police department. I am most appreciative to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for assisting us in this effort.



#54 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,038 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 03 July 2009 - 01:10 PM

Gee, sure doesn't sound to me like what one would expect from a mayor of a narrow minded xenophobic, homophobic backwater. I wonder if the writers in various publications and websites in various parts of the country who have tried to paint Fort Worth as such will take note of it. Somehow, in many cases, I doubt it. It doesn't fit the template.
Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#55 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,557 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 03 July 2009 - 01:31 PM

QUOTE (Dismuke @ Jul 3 2009, 01:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Gee, sure doesn't sound to me like what one would expect from a mayor of a narrow minded xenophobic, homophobic backwater. I wonder if the writers in various publications and websites in various parts of the country who have tried to paint Fort Worth as such will take note of it. Somehow, in many cases, I doubt it. It doesn't fit the template.


That is a very diplomatic statement, one that SHOULD be covered in subsequent coverage of the incident. I think it reflects a serious concern that one errant incident could seriously compromise years of progress in making Fort Worth a more attractive city to outsiders and to potential citizens. Afterall, inclusion and tolerance isn't news; hate, repression, and violence is. In my view: The press coverage thus far seems to favor the public's version over that of the police department, and in what seems to be some conflicting statements it looks as though the police, state and local, blinked first in presenting their side of the story. I will be content for the present to allow the investigations to go forward. I would add that I think the TABC investigation should be reviewed by the state Attorney General's Office to assure the same thoroughness and impartiality the acting US Attorney will do for the Police Department investigation. My previous experience with the TABC makes me guess that some TABC officers might go to extremes in performance of their duties as well as sticking together when placed in the spotlight; somewhat like the federal ATF. Whether that was the case in Fort Worth remains to be seen.

#56 stgo2019

stgo2019

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Location:Northern New Jersey

Posted 03 July 2009 - 02:03 PM

I agree with ramjet, monee and dismuke.

In this part of the country those "activists" have a lot of clout. I find it hard to believe that anyone can take them seriously... but many do.

Anyway, as a former FWPD officer I can assure you that the department has ZERO interest in suppressing the rights of any member of the community, with the exception of the individuals committing crimes.
In fact I remember several years ago my unit spent several days providing 24 hour protection to a homosexual couple in Meadowbrook due to a threatening letter.

I know that the vast majority of Fort Worth citizens have no idea what goes on when they are comfortably sleeping at night, but if your curious the department has a citizen ride along program. Just go to you local Neighborhood Policing District and talk to the desk officer. I guarantee that it will be a eye opening and educational experience.




#57 ramjet

ramjet

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 591 posts
  • Location:Austin and Fort Worth

Posted 04 July 2009 - 06:47 PM

Wow! This has been a very constructive and thoughtful forum discussion - most substantive in a while. I very much appreciate all the comments which affirm the inclusiveness of Fort Worth. I believe it's a progressive and inclusive community, perhaps just not up on the latest from Chelsea. My thought is that the Rainbow Club incident was isolated and not at all representative of local law enforcement or the attitudes of most Fort Worthians. After all, the City of Fort Worth was the first big Texas city to include sexual orientation in their anti-discrimination policies. And kudos to Mayor Mike for turning this over to the objective and federal US Attorney office. (He's a good mayor...) I think they will get to the truth. And pay no mind to the flying monkeys from the east side of the turnpike. Happy 4th to everyone! I'm on my way to the fireworks here in Austin to celebrate the birthday of our fantastic - and fabulous - United States...

#58 jefffwd

jefffwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,487 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 05 July 2009 - 11:03 AM

Well, this sure has people far beyond D/FW talking this is an article from the New York Times that was picked up by the San Francisco Chronicle (where I saw it). I am sure it is running today in other publications as well...

Anger over raid on gay bar grows in Texas
James C. McKinley Jr., New York Times

Sunday, July 5, 2009

(07-05) 04:00 PDT Fort Worth, Texas --

The grand opening sign still hangs above the door of the Rainbow Lounge, but the dance club already has become a rallying point for gay men and lesbians after a raid by law enforcement last week left one man hospitalized with a head injury and prompted complaints of brutality.

The raid in the early hours last Sunday by Fort Worth police officers and agents from the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission has set off a political uproar and galvanized gay advocates in Fort Worth, who have traditionally been less vocal than in Dallas and Houston. After years of keeping a low profile, gay men and lesbians in Fort Worth say they are furious, and their complaints have spread on the Internet, attracting support from gay rights groups across the country.

They have organized protests and formed a new organization, Fairness Fort Worth, to keep track of various investigations into the incident that have begun or been requested. They also have taken up collections and organized a benefit concert to help the injured.

"It has brought this community together so tight - it's almost impermeable now," said Randy Norman, the manager of the lounge.

The incident has drawn even more attention because of its timing. It came on the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall riot in New York City, widely considered to be the start of the gay rights movement.

Law enforcement officials have begun an investigation into the accusations of brutality, and internal affairs officers from the state liquor authority were interviewing employees of the club Friday afternoon, sifting through conflicting accounts of what had happened.

Fort Worth's police chief, Jeffrey Halstead, initially stood behind his officers, saying Monday that patrons had provoked the scuffle by making sexual gestures toward officers. But as the week went on, Halstead backed away from that stance. By Thursday, he had ordered an inquiry, suspended operations with the state beverage commission and promised to give police officers "multicultural training." He declined a request for an interview.

"Make no mistake, if our officers acted in error, this department will address the problem," Halstead said in an open letter to the community posted on the city's Web site on Thursday. Halstead said the state agents, not his officers, had been the ones who had taken the hospitalized man into custody.

Alan Steen, the administrator of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, has put two officers involved in the raid on desk duty and said an inquiry would be conducted.

Several witnesses said six police officers and two liquor control agents used excessive force as they arrested people during the raid.

Chad Gibson, a 26-year-old computer technician from Euless, about 15 miles northeast of Fort Worth, suffered a concussion, a hairline fracture to his skull and internal bleeding after officers slammed his head into a wall and then into the floor, witnesses and family members said. Another patron suffered broken ribs, and a third had a broken thumb, said Todd Camp, the founder and artistic director of Q. Cinema, a gay film festival in Fort Worth.

The officers entered the bar at 1:05 a.m. without announcing themselves, witnesses said. Earlier in the night, they had visited two other bars looking for violations of alcohol compliance laws. Those bars do not cater to gay patrons, and the officers had made nine arrests at those establishments on public intoxication charges, officials said.

"They were hyped up," Camp said of the officers. "They came in charged and ready for a fight. They were just telling people they were drunk or asking them if they were drunk, and, if they mouthed off, arresting them."

The raid prompted swift action. Hours later, more than 100 people were protesting on the steps of the Tarrant County Courthouse. As the week went on, calls for an independent investigation grew, with a state senator, a group of local business leaders and two churches joining the chorus.

"It has caused a lot of soul-searching within City Hall and beyond," said Kathleen Hicks, a council member who represents the neighborhood where the bar is located. "Fort Worth has been able to move quietly along and avoid all the tension and strife that you have seen in other cities, but sometimes you need to have tension and strife. I hope that this will be a wake-up call."

#59 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,557 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 05 July 2009 - 12:49 PM

Here is an excerpt for a FWST article that ran today:

"As gay people, we are the last frontier of acceptable discrimination," said Carlos Vasquez, a member of the Fort Worth school board. "A lot of times, whether we disagree with each other philosophically, politically and emotionally — as gays, we have come together as a family."

Fort Worth has a gay pride parade, gay and lesbian bars, gay rodeos, gay-friendly churches and organizations that promote social-service causes. Recently, the historic Broadway Baptist Church was kicked out of the Southern Baptist Convention because, church leaders said, of Broadway’s lenient stance on homosexuality.

Joel Burns, a Fort Worth city councilman, is, like Vasquez, an openly gay elected official.

And in 2000, city leaders amended Fort Worth’s anti-discrimination ordinance to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation.


It might help if the New York and San Francisco papers would do a little digging and provide a little more balanced view, especially considering that investigations, internal police and federal attorney's, are underway.

The complete article is at:

http://www.star-tele...ry/1469328.html

#60 vjackson

vjackson

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,324 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 06 July 2009 - 09:50 AM

QUOTE (Templeofheaven @ Jul 3 2009, 12:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Did you guys realize that Star-Telegram had to shut down the "comments" to reports on this incident? The reason being there were too much disagreements and polarized attitudes. However, on Dallas Morning News, the comments have been open and it seems people there who had commented so far have been more sympathetic and accepting.

I read some of the comments in the Star and was shocked at some of the responses. Pure ignorance and hate. When I came to Dallas, I was shocked at how gay friendly the city is and how visable the gay community is. I have many gay friends in FW and its strange how FW has been almost the polar opposite. I"ve heard some say that FW is so laid back that the gays just blend in. Who wants to blend in? Imagine if the Asians blended into San Francisco or if the blacks blended into Harlem or Cubans blended into Miami. Those groups made huge cultural impacts on those cities. Not to stereotype, but I've always felt gays are good for neighborhoods and good for cities. Oaklawn in Dallas is one of Dallas's most vibrant and popular urban neighborhoods. Gays were there when no one else wanted to be there and the transformation started with them. And the whole transformation of N. Oak Cliff in Dallas that has the city actually on board with running trolleys through the area and granting money for developments, started with the gays migrating and transforming neighborhoods there.

I guess what I'm trying to say is maybe if FW's gay community was allowed to grow (not stagnate as my gay friends claim) attitudes toward gays would change. I don't believe for one second that the cops were groped by man hungry f##s as the cops claim. That's just insulting and sadly a typical response to pray on people's homophobia. This is really embarrassing for not only FW, but for Texas. A state in which cities like Houston, Dallas and Austin seem to be very welcoming to the gay community.

#61 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,038 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 06 July 2009 - 11:46 AM

QUOTE (vjackson @ Jul 6 2009, 10:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
When I came to Dallas, I was shocked at how gay friendly the city is and how visable the gay community is. I have many gay friends in FW and its strange how FW has been almost the polar opposite.



But you cannot make the case, as you seem to be suggesting, that Fort Worth is somehow, therefore, bigoted because gays are more visible in Dallas than they are in Fort Worth.

Indians (of the Asian, not American variety) are also far more visible in places such as Irving and Richardson than they are in Fort Worth. But that doesn't mean that Fort Worth is somehow hostile towards Indians or that they would be unwelcome here.

Gay people, like Indians, constitute only a small percentage of the overall population in the area - which means that the area can only support a very finite number of businesses and institutions which cater primarily to those groups. It is normal and natural for people who share values, mindsets, cultural backgrounds, etc. which are outside the mainstream to wish to cluster together in communities - especially if there are significant barriers such as language, cultural differences or societal prejudices. And it is normal that businesses wishing to cater to such groups tend to locate where there customers are located. Once such a pattern and cluster is established, a critical mass eventually develops.

If you are Indian and wish to live in a part of town where there are lots of others who speak your native language and where you have nearby access to Indian grocers, video rentals, etc., chances if you move to the Metroplex you are going to choose to live in or near Richardson or Irving. It would be VERY difficult for Fort Worth to suddenly compete in terms of having a concentration of Indians simply because the critical mass has been established elsewhere and it continues to build upon itself.

The same principle applies to concentrations of gay people and a bunch of other things that I occasionally read where people attempt to knock Fort Worth for not having certain things that Dallas has.

For example, there is always the complaint that Dallas has more upscale shopping than does Fort Worth. Of course it does. Only a small percentage of the population can afford to shop in such stores and Dallas County, having a significantly larger population than Tarrant, has a larger number of such people. Thus that is where clusters of such stores tend to locate - and, again, because of the principle of critical mass, it becomes very difficult for other parts of the region to compete against those clusters. If a given store's appeal is unique and limited enough that the entire Metroplex can only support a single location, chances are it is going to locate in one of those Dallas clusters. And because such a store is unique, people will be willing to drive from Tarrant County in order to shop there - which acts to even further the momentum of the critical mass.

The same is true for entertainment districts - something else people attack Fort Worth for not having. When you are talking about something such as shopping or nightclubs which have a narrow enough appeal that people are willing to drive 45 minutes or so to patronize, chances are Dallas is going to have an advantage over Fort Worth. There are certain advantages that Dallas County gets to have as a result of having the region's largest population concentration. It is profoundly unfair to bash Fort Worth as being backwards for things that are primarily the result of it having a smaller population than the nearby big city next door. And cities such as Austin and Houston do not have a larger neighbor next door - so they have their own concentrations of things that, here in the Metroplex, tend to naturally gravitate towards Dallas.
Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#62 vjackson

vjackson

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,324 posts
  • Location:Dallas

Posted 06 July 2009 - 12:51 PM

Good points, but I didn't meant to suggest FW is necessarily bigoted or backwards, but even an article in the Star yesterday said gays don't feel comfortable holding hands with his/her partner in Sundance Sq. (I've seen guys holding hands in Plano) Many of my gay friends love FW and love living there, but they've also expressed similar sentiments. Why is that?
I was mainly responding to the poster's statement that responses to the DMN site seemed more accepting. FW is approaching a pop. of over 700,000 in a metro area approaching 6 million and the gay pop. on the FW side of DFW is probably much larger than you think. I don't think nightlife and shops necessarily matter in regards to the sentiment of a city. Santa Fe NM isn't big at all, but has a thriving arts scene that is known to be very gay friendly and welcoming. There is no gayborhood there or strip of gay bars and shops, yet the city is known to be very gay friendly and accepting. IMO, FW could easily support its own gay bars, shops, etc. and there is enough of a gay pop. there for real visibility. I can't help but think it hasn't happened because it's not wanted. I could be totally wrong...and that would be a good thing.

#63 stgo2019

stgo2019

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Location:Northern New Jersey

Posted 06 July 2009 - 01:47 PM

Why do some people want to be treated equal but different all at the same time.
Kind of like having your cake and eating it too. dry.gif



#64 ramjet

ramjet

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 591 posts
  • Location:Austin and Fort Worth

Posted 06 July 2009 - 02:04 PM

Great points, Dismuke and vjackson. The more I’ve read and thought about this incident, the more I believe it was an isolated one for Fort Worth. And how the rush to bash the entire city by some was ridiculously unfair. (And I’m one of the guilty…)

Note that earlier this year the New York City Police Department was criticized for targeting gay men at bookstores and trying to entrap them into paying for sex. The harassment backfired and resulted in a very public renouncement by the Police Commissioner and Mayor's Office. And currently, gay residents on the the Upper East Side of Manhattan are being terrorized by a brutal gay basher who has struck several times in the last couple of weeks. Yes – all in Manhattan – the gayest place on earth. Do these incidents suggest that the city is no longer gay friendly? Hardly.

Even over in Dallas, noted in this thread as one of the Rainbow Utopias of Texas, the very prominent and high profile pastor at the very large and influential First Baptist Church recently dropped a theological atom bomb from the pulpit in a sermon that pretty much excoriated anyone who was gay, the gay rights movement, the entire gay community, and all of the enablers and conspirators who sympathize with them. The sermon made headlines across the world, much like the Rainbow Lounge incident, but at least for myself and likely for many others, I did not assume this one person’s thesis represented the mindset of the entire city of Dallas.

The citizenry of Fort Worth deserve the same consideration in the court of public opinion. To me, this is not even close to a “Fort Worth compared to Dallas” or “compared to any other place” thing. This is a uniquely Fort Worth situation about an unfortunate incident that happened in the community and more importantly, how the community as a whole responds and moves forward.

So far, again in my opinion, after a wobbly start, the City of Fort Worth, city and state officials, and the gay community there have responded in a transparent and responsible manner by initiating an outside investigation; have debated and demonstrated with passion, not hysteria; and engaged one another in a spirit of tolerance and understanding. All of which are much more representative of the Fort Worth that I know….

OK. I’ll shut up now…


#65 jwodae

jwodae

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 41 posts

Posted 06 July 2009 - 05:23 PM

Overall I think Fort Worth is an accepting city, though maybe not as much as Dallas, but for a reason. If Fort Worth were a free standing urban-center city with 700K population, the city would look and feel a bit different than it is now. The fact that the metroplex has two major cities, somehow pushed the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth to seek their respective "roles" to co-exist, thus causing intra-metroplex migration: those that are pro-progressiveness tend to move closer to the east side, and the traditional/laidback to the west side. If Fort Worth were free standing like Santa Fe NM, I can see Fort Worth being more diverse and inclusive, since it would be the only game in town! My comments may sound generalizing but they are not intended to be exhaustive.

#66 cberen1

cberen1

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,302 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 07 July 2009 - 11:51 AM

I hadn't weighed in on this issue yet. For the record, I don't think this kind of violence is premeditated, but neither is it acceptable. It happens all too often to racial minorities as well. Law enforcement is a tough business and I'm glad it's not my business.

This particular incident has brought more visibility to the FW gay community than anything else I can remember off-hand. I always felt that the FW gay community could be more visible, but this isn't ideal visibility.

Couple of questions:

1. As it relates to visibility, does this kind of visibility hurt the gay community, or galvanize it (somewhat)? Or both?

2. Does this change how a young gay person feels about coming out?

#67 jefffwd

jefffwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,487 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 28 July 2009 - 09:17 AM

Very sad news... shakehead.gif I am starting to think this bar is cursed.

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Bartender at Fort Worth’s Rainbow Lounge killed in Arlington traffic accident
By Pegasus News wire

Arlington police think the car crash which took the life of Bradley Larson, who worked as a bartender at Fort Worth's Rainbow Lounge, may have been alcohol-related.

The fatal accident occurred around 6:15 a.m. Sunday morning (July 26). Responding officers reportedly found alcohol in the car, along with a possibly illegal white powdery substance.

Toxicology and other test results are pending; the driver of the 18-wheeler into which the car driven by Larson plowed (while traveling at speeds near 100 mph, according to witnesses) was not seriously injured.



#68 stgo2019

stgo2019

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Location:Northern New Jersey

Posted 29 July 2009 - 05:15 AM

It's not surprising this hasn't received as much pulicity as the so-called "raid" and I haven't heard of any protests or out cry from the gay community. My guess is that Larson was a known drug abuser and alcoholic. Luckily thing he didn't injur or kill any innocent people.
Sadly, this validates the FWPD and TABC to an extent.

"Larson was also arrested last week on a DWI charge and a charge of possession of a controlled substance and was free on bail at the time of his death, records show.

Cpl. G. Monreal, a Dallas police spokesman, said officers stopped Larson about 6 a.m. July 19 after seeing him speed through a Dallas intersection. A police report said officers estimated his speed at 80 mph in a 35-mph zone, Monreal said.

During the traffic stop, officers noted a strong odor of alcohol coming from Larson and noticed his speech was slurred, Monreal said. He said Larson refused to take a field sobriety test and was arrested on suspicion of DWI.

During a search of Larson, officers found a small bag of what appeared to be narcotics, Monreal said. A field test indicated that it was cocaine, he said."



#69 txsloth

txsloth

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lubbock (the Fort on weekends)

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:56 PM

QUOTE (stgo2019 @ Jul 29 2009, 06:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It's not surprising this hasn't received as much pulicity as the so-called "raid" and I haven't heard of any protests or out cry from the gay community. My guess is that Larson was a known drug abuser and alcoholic. Luckily thing he didn't injur or kill any innocent people.
Sadly, this validates the FWPD and TABC to an extent.


On what planet would it make sense for this to receive the same type of publicity? How exactly does this validate anything, to any extent?

#70 stgo2019

stgo2019

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Location:Northern New Jersey

Posted 29 July 2009 - 05:01 PM

I don't know.
I guess maybe my mores are a little "out there" but I would think that condeming a business that promotes and supports illegal activity to the point where they put the general public in danger, killing one of their own in the process would be a rational thing to do.

I guess if Mr. Larson had slammed his car into the back the car of someone you cared about that would be OK with you TXSloth.

Maybe if the FWPD hadn't been pressured into not doing bar checks Mr. Larson would still be alive.
Karma






QUOTE (txsloth @ Jul 29 2009, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE (stgo2019 @ Jul 29 2009, 06:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It's not surprising this hasn't received as much pulicity as the so-called "raid" and I haven't heard of any protests or out cry from the gay community. My guess is that Larson was a known drug abuser and alcoholic. Luckily thing he didn't injur or kill any innocent people.
Sadly, this validates the FWPD and TABC to an extent.


On what planet would it make sense for this to receive the same type of publicity? How exactly does this validate anything, to any extent?



#71 ramjet

ramjet

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 591 posts
  • Location:Austin and Fort Worth

Posted 29 July 2009 - 06:19 PM

Can I suggest enough already? How about some respect? The guy died. However troubled, a life is gone. That's even a bad thing among those in prison - I know - that's my business. And in my book his death has no relation to the incident with the FWPD/TABC. Reading the above and the comments on Dallasmetropolis, it appears there's some real bad energy up there in the Metroplex...

#72 jefffwd

jefffwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,487 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 06 August 2009 - 11:23 AM

TABC Internal Investigation Results...

http://blogs.dallaso...oyees_viola.php dry.gif

#73 FoUTASportscaster

FoUTASportscaster

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 362 posts

Posted 06 August 2009 - 12:09 PM

QUOTE (txsloth @ Jul 29 2009, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
On what planet would it make sense for this to receive the same type of publicity? How exactly does this validate anything, to any extent?


I was wondering the same thing. How does a drunk, drug-addicted bartender validate the excessive force used by the TABC and FWPD on an unrelated third party?

QUOTE (stgo2019 @ Jul 29 2009, 06:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I guess maybe my mores are a little "out there" but I would think that condeming a business that promotes and supports illegal activity to the point where they put the general public in danger, killing one of their own in the process would be a rational thing to do.

I guess if Mr. Larson had slammed his car into the back the car of someone you cared about that would be OK with you TXSloth.


That still doesn't answer the question. There are alcoholics and drug addicts who work for all sorts of companies. Doesn't mean I can go into those companies and pick someone out at random and fracture their skull.

QUOTE
Maybe if the FWPD hadn't been pressured into not doing bar checks Mr. Larson would still be alive.
Karma


What a stretch.

#74 RD Milhollin

RD Milhollin

    Surrounding Cities Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,557 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Haltom City

Posted 07 August 2009 - 05:59 AM

It seems that the attorney for the city should have known that the US Attorney would not perform the investigation before suggesting a city resoulution. Is the US Attorney dodging a tricky job? Do other US Attorneys perform investigations or review other agencies' investigations? Or should the "Gay Rights Activists" and Councilman Burns request action from the FBI? It seems that there may be some intentional foot-dragging on this matter, perhaps hoping it will just blow over. Meanwhile, three agents for the TABC face possible job loss for apparent abuse of their offices.

http://www.star-tele...ry/1525480.html

Posted on Thu, Aug. 06, 2009 U.S. attorney says he won't investigate Rainbow Lounge inspection
By DEANNA BOYDdboyd@star-telegram.com

FORT WORTH — The U.S. attorney’s office will not conduct an independent investigation into the Rainbow Lounge incident in June, nor will it review the Fort Worth Police Department’s internal investigation as had been requested by the city, U.S. Attorney James Jacks said Thursday.

In a statement e-mailed to the Star-Telegram, Jacks wrote that although his office monitors reports of excessive force by local or state police, it is the role of the FBI to investigate complaints of civil-rights violations.

"At the conclusion of the local investigation, the FBI will, if appropriate, review the available evidence to see if there is predication to initiate a federal investigation for violations of federal criminal laws," Jacks stated.

Jacks also wrote that his office is not authorized to "review the investigations of other law enforcement agencies for the purpose of issuing some type of grade or report on the quality or results of that investigation."

Gay-rights activists had called for an independent investigation after the June 28 "bar check" by Fort Worth police and Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission agents, in which six people were arrested and one bar patron seriously injured.

On July 21, the Fort Worth City Council passed a resolution asking Jacks to investigate the incident, a step up from Mayor Mike Moncrief’s earlier request that Jacks conduct an independent review of the findings of the Police Department’s internal investigation.

City reaction

Until Thursday, Jacks had not commented publicly on whether he would conduct a review or investigation, and a city spokesman had declined to say what communication had been received from Jacks.

Moncrief did not return a phone message seeking comment Thursday evening. Jason Lamers, a city spokesman, declined to comment, saying officials want to speak to Jacks’ office and the city’s attorneys before responding.

Councilman Joel Burns, who with Councilwoman Kathleen Hicks had called for an independent investigation, said Thursday night that he was "disappointed."

"We as a city . . . made evident our desire to have an investigation done that both honors our citizens and the police that are involved — an investigation that yields irrefutable results about what happened that night," Burns said.

Mark White, an FBI spokesman, said that as of Thursday, the agency had received no complaints of any violations of federal statutes, including civil-rights violations.

"There hasn’t been any specific allegation that has been brought to our attention that warrants us stepping in and conducting an investigation outside what is occurring at this point," White said.

"That doesn’t mean there aren’t internal policy issues. That doesn’t mean there might not be violations of state law. But it has to meet federal statutes. Right now, we don’t have that. Maybe this will prompt someone to step forward. We haven’t had that."

DEANNA BOYD, 817-390-7655

#75 stgo2019

stgo2019

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Location:Northern New Jersey

Posted 07 August 2009 - 09:15 AM

QUOTE
I was wondering the same thing. How does a drunk, drug-addicted bartender validate the excessive force used by the TABC and FWPD on an unrelated third party?


A bartender has the responsability to cut off patron when they have had too much to drink. How is the Rainbow Lounge supposed to live up to that when they can't even cut off their own employees?

QUOTE
Maybe if the FWPD hadn't been pressured into not doing bar checks Mr. Larson would still be alive.
Karma


QUOTE
What a stretch.



An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.


I guess the PD should adopt the Fire Department method. Sit in the station until someone calls 911. Respond. Return to the station. It would be interesting to see where the Safe City Commission would rank Ft. Worth after a few months of that.



#76 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,051 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Near Southside
  • Interests:Writing, music, photography, games, sci-fi.

Posted 07 August 2009 - 10:27 AM

Where is the evidence that the Rainbow Lounge was where he even got drunk? Guy had problems - which appear to be completely unrelated to the Rainbow.

It really is a stretch to use this to badmouth the Rainbow without any evidence linking the two.

- Architecture/urban planning/transit blogger, Fort Worth Weekly

Fort Worth District 9 Zoning Commissioner


#77 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,038 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 07 August 2009 - 11:24 AM

QUOTE (Prairie Pup @ Aug 7 2009, 06:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It seems that the attorney for the city should have known that the US Attorney would not perform the investigation before suggesting a city resoulution. Is the US Attorney dodging a tricky job? Do other US Attorneys perform investigations or review other agencies' investigations?



Here is my guess as to what is happening. My guess is that we have a mayor and a city council that finds itself in an utterly impossible, no-win situation.

I am not aware of any basis on which one can suggest that top officials in this city are bigoted and anti-gay. And even in a worst case scenario with regard to the behavior of the FWPD officers on the scene, that is hardly something that can be blamed on attitudes held by the mayor and council or something which they would condone. The mayor and council have an obligation to fully address any injustices that might have been inflicted on patrons at that bar. But, at the same time, they also have to be fair to the individual police officers in their employ and make sure that they are not unjustly scapegoated and that one officer at the scene's career is not unfairly tarnished by potentially bad behavior of some other officer at the scene. If a high level of blame is found on either side, there are going to be people who were not there who will, nevertheless, be suspicious of and unhappy about the investigation.

My guess is that top FWPD officials and perhaps top city officials have, by now, a pretty good idea of what happened that night. It is not like there weren't plenty of witnesses on the scene and they also have the testimony of the police officers. And, to the degree that one has an understanding of what actually happened, it is not that difficult to determine what range of disciplinary action, if any, would be appropriate.

Unfortunately, merely getting to the bottom of the matter and doing the right thing is probably not going to be enough to satisfy all critics. No matter what the outcome of the city's investigation, there will probably be people who will claim that the investigation was tarnished by either political expediency or by internal good ol' boy networks. By having some outside law enforcement agency that does not have any dog in the fight have the final look at the matter is a way for city officials to at least try and demonstrate that they have a genuine desire to get to the bottom of the matter and take appropriate action.

From the Star-Telegram article:


"We as a city . . . made evident our desire to have an investigation done that both honors our citizens and the police that are involved — an investigation that yields irrefutable results about what happened that night," Burns said.



Here is the only problem with that: just because you have irrefutable facts on your side, that doesn't mean that your critics are going to take cognizance of them. If there are people who place an agenda over facts and find it advantageous to use the investigation to paint Burns as being anti-police, they will probably find a way to do so regardless of how irrefutable the report is. If there are activist groups who place their agenda over the facts and find it advantageous to use the incident to paint Fort Worth as being a bigoted backwater, they will do so regardless of how irrefutable the report is. If there are members of the national press who are too lazy to look past their standard stereotypes and templates about Texas, they are likely to continue writing articles that reflect those stereotypes and templates no matter how irrefutable the report is or how hard the city council tries to demonstrate that such stereotypes are not applicable.

Like I said - the city is pretty much in a no-win situation regardless of how it turns out. I am certainly sympathetic with the desire of the council to try and demonstrate that they have taken the all of the appropriate actions by bringing in credible law enforcement agencies from the outside. But no matter what the outcome is or who does the investigation, the city is likely to get another round of bad press as a result of this - and I suspect that there is little than anybody can do to stop it. All one can do is make sure that one's actions, attitudes and views are on the right side of the facts and have confidence that there are enough people in the world for whom that matters.


Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#78 Dismuke

Dismuke

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,038 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Interests:Late 19th/early 20th century history, popular culture architecture and music. Collecting 78 rpm records from the 1900 - 1930 era.

Posted 07 August 2009 - 11:37 AM

QUOTE (Atomic Glee @ Aug 7 2009, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Where is the evidence that the Rainbow Lounge was where he even got drunk? Guy had problems - which appear to be completely unrelated to the Rainbow.

It really is a stretch to use this to badmouth the Rainbow without any evidence linking the two.



Isn't it illegal for bartenders to drink while they are on the job? I don't know for sure that is the case - but I seem to recall hearing something along those lines somewhere, perhaps not even with regard to Texas. Regardless, I cannot imagine that management of a bar or any other workplace would condone employees getting drunk while on the job. And is it common for bartenders to hang around their place of employment when they are off the clock? I don't know any bartenders - but most people I know would say that they already spend plenty of hours at work and that is the last place they would like to be during their leisure time.

There will always be people who will engage in stupid and self-destructive behavior. Every one of us has the choice to engage in such behavior or to refrain from doing so every minute that we are awake. There will always be people who will make the wrong choice - and it is nobody else's blame other than the person who made the choice.
Radio Dismuke
1920s & 1930s Pop & Jazz
24-Hour Internet Radio
www.RadioDismuke.com


#79 jefffwd

jefffwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,487 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 09 August 2009 - 10:54 AM

On a lighter note, I was at Boomer Jack's in MP yesterday and I picked up a Fort Worth Weekly. I was flipping through and noticed a full page ad for The Rainbow... down in the left hand corner they had one of those red and white boxes that said . At least they have a sense of humor about this mess. rotflmao.gif

#80 jefffwd

jefffwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,487 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 28 August 2009 - 10:53 AM

Cool!!!

TABC Fires 3 Agents From Rainbow Lounge Raid newlaugh.gif
FORT WORTH (CBS 11 / TXA 21) The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission has fired three agents who were involved in the raid on the Rainbow Lounge in Fort Worth.

One man was seriously injured in the June raid at the gay bar.

In a statement, the agency says it fired Agent Christopher Aller, Agent Trainee Jason Chapman and Sgt. Terry Parsons Friday morning.

Aller, who has filed a complaint against agency Administrator Alan Steen, confirmed his firing to CBS 11. He told us he was at the TABC office for his regular shift today when he was informed of the termination.

Since the raid, the TABC has issued a report said that agency policy was violated during the raid, which the TABC conducted with Fort Worth police officers.

The Fort Worth Police Department suspended its work with the TABC following the raid. And the TABC changed some of its policies.

This week, the TABC announced it would investigate Steen based on public comments he made after the raid.



#81 Willy1

Willy1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 552 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 30 August 2009 - 09:59 PM

QUOTE (vjackson @ Jul 6 2009, 01:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Good points, but I didn't meant to suggest FW is necessarily bigoted or backwards, but even an article in the Star yesterday said gays don't feel comfortable holding hands with his/her partner in Sundance Sq. (I've seen guys holding hands in Plano) Many of my gay friends love FW and love living there, but they've also expressed similar sentiments. Why is that?
I was mainly responding to the poster's statement that responses to the DMN site seemed more accepting. FW is approaching a pop. of over 700,000 in a metro area approaching 6 million and the gay pop. on the FW side of DFW is probably much larger than you think. I don't think nightlife and shops necessarily matter in regards to the sentiment of a city. Santa Fe NM isn't big at all, but has a thriving arts scene that is known to be very gay friendly and welcoming. There is no gayborhood there or strip of gay bars and shops, yet the city is known to be very gay friendly and accepting. IMO, FW could easily support its own gay bars, shops, etc. and there is enough of a gay pop. there for real visibility. I can't help but think it hasn't happened because it's not wanted. I could be totally wrong...and that would be a good thing.



Good points, VJacson.... It might surprise a lot of people here to know that FW actually has a larger number of same-sex couples who share homes that Dallas does. Dallas has more single gays though. But, there is definitely a "critical mass" in FW, as Dismuke would put it. There are a lot of gay people in FW who do not feel comfortable being open about their sexuality in FW, but feel perfectly comfortable and safe in Dallas. The Rainbow Room "raid" happened on the anniversary of Stonewall. To the gay community, that would be sort of like someone burning a cross in front of a bar that caters primarily to African Americans on MLK Day. The date holds great symbolism and significance to the gay community. I don't think it's a matter of critical mass... I think it's a matter of safety. There is a perception that it's dangerous to be different in FW because FW is so conservative. And, there is a huge perception - thanks to the extreme conservatives - that being conservative is the same thing as being biggoted or intollerant. Ironically, the Gay community and the Conservative Christian communities suffer from the same problem -- bad public images. The gay community is poorly represented by the "flaming gay" stereotypes, and likewise the Christian Community is poorly represented by the "Hateful Evangelicals" (like Jerry Fallwell, Fred Phelps, etc.). I guess you could say there is a battle of the stereotypes playing out in the media and before our eyes. We almost never see any conservative gay role models in the press, and we rarely see accepting Christians talking about gay rights on TV. Neither groups make for a good story.

None of what we're seeing is new. People of opposing beliefs have always been at war, and always will be. Violence against a minority group is the oldest story in the world. Even Christianity itself started as a minority group and over time grew in popularity and power. Today, even our government bows at the feet of Conservative Christian groups, despite the mythical "separation of church and state".

#82 Willy1

Willy1

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 552 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, TX

Posted 30 August 2009 - 10:54 PM

QUOTE (Dismuke @ Jul 3 2009, 01:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE (monee9696 @ Jul 3 2009, 08:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
A shame. But I am starting to think that most of the demonstrators I see on the news (non-stop) want the gay and straight communities to be polarized.



I am not going to make any judgments about the Fort Worth demonstrators because I do not watch television news and the only local coverage I have read is what is here and on the Star-Telegram website. I certainly do not have a problem with local gay people and others being concerned about what has come out thus far in the news and holding demonstrations to make that concern known to the people responsible for looking into it. But I did a google news search for "Rainbow Lounge" and have noticed that there are people in publications elsewhere who seem very eager to make as much hay out of this as possible in portraying Fort Worth as some homophobic backwater as a means of attempting to make a wider, agenda driven point.

This touches on something that I alluded to in the little parody conspiracy theory I put up a few postings back. There is a tendency, over time, for activist groups to sometimes regard The Cause as being bigger and more important than the actual injustice which it initially sought to address. A good example of this is certain activists in the black community who often speak and act as if we are still living in the world of Jim Crow. Ever since I was a child, there has been history of certain individuals on the Dallas City Council or on the Dallas County Commissioners who have been quick to pounce and turn any sort of confrontation between a white public official and a black person into a racial incident and fan the flames of racial division. Sadly, there are certain activists and politicians who have a vested interest in racial divisions and antagonism - that is what their constituency is based on and if it went away they would be out of a job. And there are activists who actually promote and encourage such feelings of division in their own communities and pressure people to conform to it. Thus we hear the tragic stories of talented, intelligent black students in very rough neighborhoods of certain cities asking NOT to be be placed on the honors list or be valedictorian because they fear the reaction of their neighborhood peers who would regard them as "Uncle Toms" who sold out to "The Man." In other words, the expectation that talented black teenagers in such an environment are confronted with is the notion that they must sacrifice their intelligence, sacrifice their talent, their dreams and their ambitions in order to conform to stereotypes that are convenient to The Cause.

As gay people become more accepted in society, I do not think it is unlikely that there are going to be activists who, instead of saying "gee our goals have been accomplished, we can go home now" will look for ways to expand The Cause and to keep it going. It is a tendency in any organization and movement to seek ways to perpetuate itself.

And there is a history of certain gay activists overreacting. Some months ago there was a ballot initiative in California over gay marriage that made national headlines. Had I been a California voter, I would have voted FOR gay marriage. But after the gay marriage side lost the election, certain gay activists overreacted in a HUGE way and engaged in what can only be described as Brownshirt tactics. The names and addresses of private individuals and businesses who had made financial contributions to the opposing side were published with the implied suggestion that they be targeted for intimidation and harassment. Regardless of where you happen to be on the political spectrum, consider the potentially chilling impact that this could have on free expression if it were to catch on. Anytime you express an opinion in public, anytime you make a financial contribution to a candidate or cause, imagine having to ask yourself: Am I opening myself up for intimidation and harassment from those who disagree with me? If such tactics persist, the long term result will be that people will keep their opinions to themselves and become non-political as a matter of policy in order to stay out of trouble - which is what people have to do in order to survive in third world countries where authoritarian regimes come and go as a matter of course. This sort of thing is one of many examples of what I see as a disturbing trend of our political institutions and political life showing the first stages of degenerating down to what is considered normal in Latin American and the third world.

But I DON'T think that people voicing concern over the police raid is, in and of itself, an overreaction. It is something that needs to be looked into.

QUOTE
Now I am standing by for many to quickly point out that today the police are coming after Gay's but watch out, tomorrow they will be coming after architect lovers or photographers. Crap, of course.


But the fact remains that it wasn't all that long ago when the police DID come after gay establishments. This is a historical fact - for example, the Stonewall incident. A few years ago, I read an article about how, in decades past, local police in certain parts of Texas would be tipped off and would raid gay social gatherings in private homes - in the name of enforcing moral purity, of course. So even if there is an overreaction, up to a certain point, I think it is understandable why gays might be a bit touchy and sensitive about such things.

And I disagree with your notion that concern over other groups being potentially targeted in the future is "crap." I don't worry so much about the local police force. But I AM concerned about the possibility of IRS enforcement being used to intimidate and punish political enemies and others who are on the Wrong Side. I AM concerned about the massive alphabet soup of government regulatory agencies being used to intimidate and harass corporations who fail to make the Correct campaign contributions or fail to tow the proper Politically Correct "consensus." When there is a concentration of power, there will always be people who will eventually rise who will seek to use that power - which is why it is so crucial that the power of government be very strictly limited.

There is certainly a history of groups being targeted in our country. Blacks were targeted. Gays were targeted. And, until the Supreme Court overturned the law a few years ago, it was actually illegal in the state of Texas for gay people to.....well, you know... in the privacy of their own bedrooms. And if you go to other countries, people are targeted on a regular basis. In Venezuela, those who actively supported the ouster of Chavez a few years back found themselves on a government circulated list which blacklisted them from being able to hold government jobs or jobs with the State owned oil company or with the increasingly long list of companies that are being nationalized in that country. In Honduras, when the recently deposed president attempted to ignore that country's constitution and set himself up for an illegal third term in office, citizens were pressured into signing a petition in support of him under the threat that, if they did not, they would be denied access to government run health care. You say it can't happen here? Well, why not? The only thing that makes us any different from the rest of the world in that regard is that we do not allow such things to happen. But if we let our guard down, they eventually will happen here. We are not so special that we are somehow exempt from such things - especially given that such things are actually the norm in most parts of the world and have been down through most of history. You know the old saying... the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. And that is why anytime ANY branch or agency of ANY level of government oversteps its legitimate authority and responsibilities or targets and treats some group of citizens differently than everyone else, it needs to be taken VERY seriously.



Very insightful post, Dismuke. I will offer something else that you sort of touched on but didn't go all the way with. AFrican Americans, Native Americans, Hispanics, Muslims, women, and almost every other "minority group" including gays, has been subjected to horrific treatment by the government, church, and/or various other groups that considered themselves to be "the law" at some point in American history. As a reasult, reverse racisim is a very real thing. Also, I would like to add that all of these groups had to fight long and hard to "earn" their civil rights. The Gay community is sort of the last group that is left fighting for basic civil rights, mainly because it's the last group that it is still somewhat politically acceptable to openly express your dislike for. Times are changing and it's becoming less and less acceptable to be unaccepting - thank goodness! But, we've seen this old story many times before. It's the uber-conservative "Christians" standing guard at the gate of liberty and deciding who gets in and who stays out. I put Christians in quotes because biggotry and hatred are not part of real Christianity. I wish people would think about that before they spew forth Bible verses condemning homosexuality, or whatever the cause of the day is. It's an old trick that was previously used to deny rights to women, blacks, and pretty much every minority group. For example, the Bible gives instructions on how to treat slaves... yet no one today would dream of saying that they believe we should have slaves because the Bible say so. Can you imagine the reaction saying such a thing would cause? Anyway, I am on a slippery slope and I do not mean to offend any conservative Christians, as I am one myself. But there is a lot of hypocricy in organized religion! However, I am living proof that you can be a Christian and be open-minded and accepting. This is a public forum so I will refrain from putting too much personal information out there, but all you have to do is look back through history to see that the same group who tied people to stakes and set them on fire, hanged and stoned people to death during the Salem Witch Hunt, is still alive and well today. Sure they've evolved and changed the game a bit, but the game is still in play, and people are still dying in the pursuit of happiness. And, just like back in the day when people were being burned for witchery, the Christians who don't agree with the anti-gay movement of today, are basicaly being spiritually bullied into keeping quiet. But, they are out there.... Christians who support gay rights. That is where the true crime lives... sitting back, being apothetic becaues things don't affect you directly. In an ideal world, we would all take a stance against such human injustices, not just watch the "activist" on TV.

Anyway, here's to progress and people evolving and coming together. Hopefully, these types of problems will fade into history sometime in the not too far off future.

#83 FortWorthLowrider

FortWorthLowrider

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 445 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Fort Worth
  • Interests:The city of FORT WORTH

    LOWRIDERS

    TRUE CLASSICS CAR CLUB

Posted 14 October 2009 - 02:01 AM

QUOTE (Willy1 @ Aug 30 2009, 11:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Very insightful post, Dismuke. I will offer something else that you sort of touched on but didn't go all the way with. AFrican Americans, Native Americans, Hispanics, Muslims, women, and almost every other "minority group" including gays, has been subjected to horrific treatment by the government, church, and/or various other groups that considered themselves to be "the law" at some point in American history. As a reasult, reverse racisim is a very real thing. Also, I would like to add that all of these groups had to fight long and hard to "earn" their civil rights. The Gay community is sort of the last group that is left fighting for basic civil rights, mainly because it's the last group that it is still somewhat politically acceptable to openly express your dislike for. Times are changing and it's becoming less and less acceptable to be unaccepting - thank goodness! But, we've seen this old story many times before. It's the uber-conservative "Christians" standing guard at the gate of liberty and deciding who gets in and who stays out. I put Christians in quotes because biggotry and hatred are not part of real Christianity. I wish people would think about that before they spew forth Bible verses condemning homosexuality, or whatever the cause of the day is. It's an old trick that was previously used to deny rights to women, blacks, and pretty much every minority group. For example, the Bible gives instructions on how to treat slaves... yet no one today would dream of saying that they believe we should have slaves because the Bible say so. Can you imagine the reaction saying such a thing would cause? Anyway, I am on a slippery slope and I do not mean to offend any conservative Christians, as I am one myself. But there is a lot of hypocricy in organized religion! However, I am living proof that you can be a Christian and be open-minded and accepting. This is a public forum so I will refrain from putting too much personal information out there, but all you have to do is look back through history to see that the same group who tied people to stakes and set them on fire, hanged and stoned people to death during the Salem Witch Hunt, is still alive and well today. Sure they've evolved and changed the game a bit, but the game is still in play, and people are still dying in the pursuit of happiness. And, just like back in the day when people were being burned for witchery, the Christians who don't agree with the anti-gay movement of today, are basicaly being spiritually bullied into keeping quiet. But, they are out there.... Christians who support gay rights. That is where the true crime lives... sitting back, being apothetic becaues things don't affect you directly. In an ideal world, we would all take a stance against such human injustices, not just watch the "activist" on TV.

Anyway, here's to progress and people evolving and coming together. Hopefully, these types of problems will fade into history sometime in the not too far off future.

Well Said
TRUE CLASSICS CAR CLUB
Fort Worth Texas

United Lowrider Council

#84 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,125 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 06 September 2017 - 11:08 AM

Rainbow Lounge scraps plans to reopen. RIP to FW history.

 

http://www.wfaa.com/...r-all/471570222



#85 pelligrini

pelligrini

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 06 September 2017 - 12:15 PM

That's too bad.

 

I've seen a lot of work done on the proposed Lipscomb building (It's right across the street from our office), but most everything was on the Twilight side. I don't think anything has been done to the old building.

On a side note, it looks like Club Reflection, right across from the Rainbow Lounge building, is possibly expanding and renovating. They were working on the openings in a CMU wall facing Jennings this morning.


Erik France


#86 pelligrini

pelligrini

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 06 December 2017 - 09:55 AM

I just noticed this morning that the charred remains of the Rainbow Lounge have been removed and the site cleared. That must have happened within the last week or so.


Erik France


#87 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,404 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 07 December 2017 - 02:39 PM

That's too bad.

 

I've seen a lot of work done on the proposed Lipscomb building (It's right across the street from our office), but most everything was on the Twilight side. I don't think anything has been done to the old building.

On a side note, it looks like Club Reflection, right across from the Rainbow Lounge building, is possibly expanding and renovating. They were working on the openings in a CMU wall facing Jennings this morning.

 

CMU?  What does that stand for?


My blog: Doohickie

#88 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,439 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 07 December 2017 - 02:42 PM

Concrete masonry unit.  Cinder blocks.



#89 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,802 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 07 December 2017 - 03:09 PM

Very good, JBB!



#90 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,439 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 07 December 2017 - 03:23 PM

I've been around just enough construction recently to be dangerous.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users