Dear Mr. Durham:

I received your name from the Rivercrest Properties office this morning as the point of contact for your property at the Shoppes of Wilton Manors in Wilton Manors, Florida. I am a long-time resident of Wilton Manors, as well as the former President of the recent Wilton Manors Main Street organization. My focus as a dedicated volunteer has been primarily on the Wilton Drive Corridor with an emphasis first on safety and then on the success and sustainability of our businesses.

With the installation of your new fence along the perimeter of the Shoppes, there is now an increased safety problem. Since patrons cannot ingress and egress through the parking lot to get to the sidewalks on Wilton Drive, they are now forced to enter through the main driveway into the Shoppes, facing vehicular traffic coming and going. I have attached a photo indicating the problem we now face. I am not sure how this could have been approved by the city, but I know the problem must be addressed. I am hoping that you are considering putting sidewalks in place of the current shrub wall to allow for safe pedestrian flow in and out of the Shoppes. If sidewalks were planned, they should have been put in place prior to any such fence construction.

I am furthermore perplexed that with the need for more parking that your company did not consider the benefits of a parking structure where your current renovation is nearing completion. I can only imagine the parking headaches that will increase ten-fold with such a large number of new tenants. I think this will create frustration and escalate an already horrific parking problem, and eventually be detrimental to your largest tenant, the Alibi. I have been told by one of the owners of the Alibi, Jackson Padgett, that they pleaded with your company to consider a parking garage, but that it was out of the question, for whatever reason.

Be that as it may, I find it personally offensive and against all principles of new urban design to put such a fence along an Arts and Entertainment district that is trying to welcome neighbors, visitors, and tourists to our area. What is says to me is, “KEEP OUT!”

I hope both Rivercrest and the City of Wilton Manors will address this issue as soon as possible to prevent anymore injuries or death along the Wilton Drive corridor.

What constitutes a relationship, a family, or even a life-long covenant in the Jewish and Christian scriptures is not as cut-and-dry as the opponents of marriage equality would like to believe.

What people who use it as a weapon to protect their privilege and marginalize others need to know about is that rather than being a memo dictated by God, the Bible is a collection of writings by many authors spanning three continents and more than 1,000 years.

1. The “Bible” is not the “Bible” in the “Bible.”

The Biblical canon was closed centuries after the life of Jesus. The church existed for generations before there was a Christian Bible. And even still, the text differs slightly depending on if one is Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant, Mormon, or Jewish. Whether there is one Testament or there are two or three, and how many books are in those Testaments depends on which tradition one embraces.

2. The Bible is a human document.

Some believe the Bible is divinely inspired, others do not, but either way the actual writing was done by humans, the reading is done by humans (and readers make meaning), and how the words are used are determined by humans. With or without the notion of a divine presence nudging people to record their thoughts, opinions, beliefs, and desires, the obvious fact remains that the work of Biblical writing, reading, interpreting, and application is the work of human beings, and humans don’t always agree.

3. There are no original texts.

The original documents, that is, the first pieces of paper (or papyrus) upon which the Biblical authors wrote, no longer exist. The oldest scriptural documents extant today are handwritten copies of handwritten copies (which leaves quite a bit of room for human error).

4. Biblical ethics and knowledge don’t always withstand the test of time.

Biblical writers accepted slavery, child abuse, war, and the secondary status of women as common standards of their day. They assumed the earth was flat, never knew of the Americas, and had never heard of the law of gravity. Aerodynamics, quantum physics, and psychology were unknown to ancient writers. They didn’t know about egg cells or chromosomes, and didn’t even understand procreation the way we do today. Their creativity and genius should not be ignored, but what they did not know was a lot. We learn more as time goes by; we are not limited to what people knew millennia ago.

5. The Biblical texts were not written in any modern language.

The texts were written in ancient languages (sometimes without any punctuation), so translation problems must always be considered. Our Bible is a translation of copies of copies of copies of texts handwritten in ancient languages in ancient, pre-scientific cultures. It’s still fascinating and beautiful and useful, but not if used as a weapon to defend bigotry and discrimination.

Rev. Dr. Durrell Watkins is the Senior Minister of Sunshine Cathedral, a progressive and inclusive Fort Lauderdale-based ministry affiliated with Metropolitan Community Churches and the International New Thought Alliance.

Since last September’s Democratic National Convention, I’ve been eagerly awaiting Charlie Crist to prove that he has a compassionate heart, and clearly argue his position on marriage equality. I have also been waiting for the Democratic National Committee and President Obama to make things right with LGBT Convention delegates, and facilitate a meaningful dialogue with Crist on issues important to LGBT Floridians. Both the DNC and President Obama have fallen flat on their faces and failed miserably to ensure such opportunities existed between Crist and LGBT activists.

In the days leading up to the 2012 Democratic National Convention, I publicly raised the issue as the only openly-gay elected delegate (out of eight delegates who were representing DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s congressional district at the Convention). Officials from the DNC shamefully berated me when Steve Rothaus of the Miami Herald published a blog post entitled “Gay Democratic Delegate: Convention Speaker Charlie Crist ‘the Ultimate Political Whore’.”

On March 27, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). LGBT activists have been applauding the leadership of many Democrats and Republicans who signed on to amicus briefs arguing DOMA’s unconstitutionality.

Remarkably, no amicus brief was submitted by Charlie Crist, who is reported to be employed by the Orlando-based mega-law firm of Morgan & Morgan. Crist is said to be earning an annual salary of $1,000,000, and I find it mind boggling that given all the resources of that law firm, Crist decided instead to audition for the hybrid role of the  Tin Man and the Cowardly Lion (from the “Wizard of Oz”), choosing to remain silent on the DOMA arguments before the Supreme Court.

It was a missed opportunity for Crist to prove he has a compassionate heart, as well as an opportunity for the DNC and President Obama to make amends for their insensitivity concerning Crist’s speech last year at the Democratic National Convention.

Throughout Crist’s political career, he always hid in the closet or pandered to religious conservatives when a controversial issue demanded a real leader to step forward.

Charlie Crist, I’m following your advice: I’m judging you on your past action for supporting a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in Florida, and for the absence of your leadership in the argument about the unconstitutional nature of DOMA.

Michael Emanuel Rajner is the Legislative Director for the Florida Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Democratic Caucus, and serves on the Broward County Human Rights Board. A slightly different version of this piece originally appeared at The Bilerico Project.

Imagine that, Ru Paul.

It took many marches, parades, demonstrations, firings, evictions, lawsuits, and the untiring efforts of countless supporters to help change the image of our community and to provide it with the dignity which it has since come to enjoy. Some say it took the ravages of AIDS to wake our community up, to acknowledge and adapt to its new political imperative in order to ensure its survival. Others might just thank “Will and Grace” for letting people understand that gay life is like every other sitcom, except that we are more inclined to stretch the boundaries of everyday life.

The measure of our success is nothing less than full equality, and we are far from it. Just because a same-sex couple can walk down Wilton Drive holding hands doesn’t mean those same two persons can canoodle a mile away on Galt Ocean Drive. It’s great that we have ordinances in place that legally protect us from certain types of discrimination, but discrimination is an insidious menace that permeates the very bones of our ordered society, and is often undetectable.

A supporter on whose lawn in Victoria Park I had placed a campaign sign woke up one morning to find the sign missing. Not knowing that the supporter had video cameras, he waltzed to the front door of his next door neighbor and on his iPad replayed the video to her, revealing her ‘caper’. Her response was simply, “I don’t want gay stuff near my lawn.” Did I mention this was in Victoria Park, once the bastion of gaydom?

Yet as I go door-to-door and appeal to our community’s numbers to support campaigns that will advance the LGBT cause, I’m often greeted by those famous sisters, Apathy and Complacency. There they are: hair in curlers and soft bunny flip-flops warming their toes. They are all happy and content in their world. But outside the bubble of content in which many people see themselves living, is a world simmering with distrust and distaste for who we are.

I for one continue to push our agenda to ensure that we someday achieve full equality. It happens in steps: first by asking, then by urging, and ultimately by seeking a seat on the dais in order to let it always be known that we are an important part of society.

My fiercest opponent is not the other candidate. No, it’s those twisted sisters, Apathy and Complacency, who think that we don’t need one of our own at the table because are friends will take care of us. Yeah, right. If everyone who is eligible to vote did vote, we would never have to rely on the kindness of strangers. Otherwise, we will find out the hard way, that if we don’t have a seat at the table, we will more than likely be served on the menu.

Dean Trantalis, a former Vice Mayor of Fort Lauderdale, is a Fort Lauderdale-based attorney with a legal practice in Wilton Manors. He is a candidate for Fort Lauderdale City Commission, District 2, in a runoff election against Charlotte Rodstrom, which will take place on March 12.

I remember the first time I met Ed Koch. It was during his first campaign for Mayor of New York City. He came to a Democratic club in Queens. I was a member, even though I wasn’t old enough to vote.

I remember Koch being nervous. He fiddled with a button on his worn, rumpled gray jacket. He looked shabby. He lost that election. But then came the “make-over” in 1977, via Bess Myerson, a former Miss America. Suddenly, Congressman Koch was looking dapper in Pierre Cardin suits and Bess on his arm. This turned out to be a winning combination. It was assumed—at least on Koch’s part—that the reason for his victory was his “beard,” Bess.

At first, when asked why he was still a bachelor at his age, Koch would answer that he had always wanted to get married in the mayoral residence, Gracie Mansion, feeding speculation that he and Bess would eventually tie the knot while he was mayor.

However, as his career pro-gressed and Myerson pursued her own political ambitions and ultimate romantic tragedy, it became clear that voters didn’t care whether Koch was gay or not. It seemed that, in his mind, the fact that they didn’t care also meant that it didn’t matter. Mr. Koch lived with that assumption to the end of his life, refusing to answer questions about his sexual preference, insisting to the bitter end that the press had no right to ask and he had no obligation to talk about it.

In 1986, Mayor Koch signed an LGBT equal rights ordinance. However, his own policy of closing down gay bathhouses while keeping hetero-sex clubs open violated that very ordinance. Eventually, he was forced to close down all such clubs in an effort to stem the tide of the AIDS epidemic. It turned out to be Koch’s only (reluctant) contribution to the fight against AIDS. His tacit support of Ronald Reagan, the man who said that AIDS was God’s punishment of gays, was well noted. For the most part, Ed Koch sat on his hands while our friends died, one by one.

Larry Kramer is reported to have said, “[Koch] was an active participant in helping us to die, in murdering us. Call it what you will, that is what Edward Koch was, a murderer of his very own people.”

The few who knew Koch well would speak in hushed tones of a long-term relationship with his chauffeur. But Koch would go to the movies, to the museum, to the theatre—alone. What kind of a relationship could it have been with this secret lover who couldn’t be seen in public?

He would often go to gay-related events, such as gay film festivals—alone. We all saw him at these events, but we pretended not to see. We were expected to do our parts in the complicity of silence. Koch’s great shame of being a gay man was like a pile of shit he had stepped in, and needed to wipe off on the rest of us.

George Dauphin, a New York City native, is the Creative Director for Guy Magazine and the Florida Agenda.

Editor’s Note: On January 6, 2013, Greater Fort Lauderdale attorney Dean Trantalis, Esq. sent the following email to Gary Resnick, the Mayor of Wilton Manors, in which city Trantalis’ legal practice is based. In addition to being a former Fort Lauderdale Vice Mayor, Trantalis is a candidate for the Fort Lauderdale City Commission District II seat.

Hi Gary:

I was reading your column in the Town Crier, and in it, you made mention of the new city website. The new website was presented to the Economic Development Task Force prior to its going live, and we all expressed grave disapproval of its content.

You may be correct in noting that the new website may be easier to read and easier to find information. What it is lacking is an accurate representation of the people and culture which dominates the city. The website is the city’s porthole to the world, and unfortunately, its images in no way reflect what is ‘Wilton Manors.’

Since I work in the city, on any given day one is certain to see two men walking down Wilton Drive holding hands, or groups of gay retirees having lunch at Georgie’s Alibi. There are retail shops catering exclusively to LGBT shoppers, and, need I mention, the street has numerous gay bars catering to all ages, sexes, and fetishes. Rainbow flags are flown everywhere, and even menu selections in some restaurants carry a gay theme.

Have you looked at the website lately? None of this exists. None. The Task Force had a lengthy discussion about it this past fall, and we were all shocked at the website’s lack of gay-themed images and content.

One need not embrace all aspects of the LGBT lifestyle. However, to virtually erase it off the web pages on the site is a palpable expression of homophobia. The Task Force brought this to the attention of city staff, and clearly, we have been ignored.

The Task Force was convened for the purpose of promoting the economy of Wilton Manors. Let’s face it: this is “Gayberry” not Mayberry. We cannot continue in our efforts to promote our city if we are being contradicted by our city staff which seems determined not to promote the LGBT presence in Wilton Manors.

I have waited these many months before I spoke up because I was hoping to see the appropriate changes made to the site. All I found was a stock image of a rainbow flag that could exist in any city. Not only that, but in the rotation of images on the home page, one must wait until the seventh and last photo appears before the flag even materializes.

This is totally unacceptable. While I don’t speak for the Task Force, I can tell you that each of us felt in our own way how the current website diminishes the LGBT community. This: in the very city that boasts having one of the gayest populations in the country.

I am hopeful that you will take whatever measures are necessary in order to correct this situation.

By ERDAL ERKUS 

When my friends told me that they have moved to a town called Fort Lauderdale, Florida I had a laugh. I thought they would be back soon, knowing that the heat and the population would not make their job easy, being both gay and Muslim.

They have told me many times that the city is a gay heaven, and so easy to live there. They [said] that they do not have any major issues living there, [but that] did not mean much to me.

So what could “gay heaven” mean to me? [It] was a bizarre word after experiencing London, Paris, Amsterdam, Berlin and Rome.

As a tourist from Europe, [when you think of South Florida] you think of the storms (although we don’t have hurricanes, so “hurricane” does not mean much to me, apart from what we see on CNN news), the Kennedy Space Center, Disney World—and the crocodiles in people’s pools.

Yes [despite this], Fort Lauderdale—of all the places in the world—has become my “dream city” for being gay: A place of freedom, comfort, weather, [limitless] possibilities, and [free exercise of] religion.

I can’t talk about all experiences I had [while I visited Fort Lauderdale], so I will only try to explain how I felt. I come from Turkey, a so-called ‘liberal’ Muslim country where people are supposed to be sort of free, but when [a] gay [person is] murdered, there is not much of a punishment for the murderer.

In that sense I guess you guys would never be able to understand how lucky you are to have a city called Fort Lauderdale.

Have a wonderful 2013 and all the best wishes.

Erdal Erkus lives in Istanbul, Turkey, the world’s second largest city by population.

There are two types of babies: There are boys and there are girls. Correct? Most people would probably answer, “yes,” but they would be leaving out 1.7 to 4 percent of the population, according to a 2009 study from researchers Zeiler and Wickstrom. That’s the estimated amount of children who are born intersex.

Regardless of which statistic you go with, intersexuality appears to be more common than Down syndrome in both the US and Europe. However, few people know about the condition.

Expecting parents are often eager to learn the sex of their baby, but they do not usually consider that their child could be somewhere on the continuum between male and female. (Most people don’t even know that sex is on a continuum, but it is.

The people who fall somewhere between on this continuum are referred to as “intersex.” This means that their chromosomes and genitalia are not exclusively male or female.

Imagine the surprise of new parents when doctors tell them that it is unknown whether “it’s a boy” or “it’s a girl.”

Doctors assist in judging whether an intersex child is more likely to be male or female based on the presence of male or female genitalia and ‘XX’ or ‘XY’ chromosomes. These are common standards by which sex is determined, but parents ultimately decide the child’s legal sex as well as the course of treatment. Too often, their choices consist of multiple surgeries and procedures that cause the children physical and psychological trauma.

According to 2006 research by Anne Tamar-Mattis, intersex children are usually given female bodies, regardless of what other tests indicate, simply because it is easier to construct a vagina than a penis. But what happens when you raise a child as a little girl and she grows up to tell you that she’s a boy?

Gender Identity Disorder is common among people who undergo intersex-related “corrective” procedures in childhood. As cited in 2002 by Chau and Herring, many of these children never feel comfortable or identify with the body given to them.

To put it another way, dressing a child in blue and giving a Hot Wheels set to play with won’t make that person male. Similarly, constructing a vagina for an infant won’t make a child female.

Is it ethical to perform cosmetic surgery on an infant and ultimately decide the child’s sex for her/him? Tamar-Mattis found that “the strongest argument against genital-normalizing on infants is that every intersex person who has spoken publicly on the subject has spoken against surgery.”

Genital mutilation and castration are irreversible. It is impossible to know whether a person so young is male or female, and a drastic decision like surgery should not be undertaken without a person’s consent.

A recently-reported controversy involving a New Zealand church that sponsored a billboard campaign that announced, “It’s Christmas. Time for Jesus to Come Out” is stirring old arguments about the sexuality—if any—of Jesus Christ.

The billboards, sponsored by the Church of St. Matthew in the City in Auckland, depict an image of the baby Jesus, lying in the manger and wreathed in a rainbow halo.

The church’s pastor, Rev. Glynn Cardy, said the message of the billboards is to “lift” Jesus’ humanity.

Cardy told reporters that the question for believing Christians is whether it changes anything for them if Jesus had been gay. “The fact is we don’t know what his sexual orientation was,” Cardy said.

His associate pastor, Rev. Clay Nelson noted that, “There is almost nothing in the record of his teachings about sexuality, while there is plenty about the perils of being rich. Certainly he always supported the marginalized in society.”

Clay added, “Some scholars have tried to make the case that he might have been gay. But it is all conjecture. Maybe gay, maybe not: Does it matter?”

Maybe not. But the subject has legs, even after all these centuries (approximately 20 of them).

Many faithful Christians take their cues to Jesus’ sexual identity—or rather, lack of one—by the words of the New Testament’s Letter to the Hebrews 4:15, which says, “We do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.”

If we flip our Scriptures to the Gospel of John, things start to get murky when the text makes reference (John 13:23, 19:26, 21:7, 20) to the “disciple whom Jesus loved.”

It recounts the “beloved disciple’s” presence at the crucifixion of Jesus. Biblical scholars agree that this reference is a bit of self-promotion by the Gospel’s author—regarded traditionally to be the Apostle John—who identifies himself in John 21:24, and essentially inserted himself in the narrative.

In “St. John and Jesus at the Last Supper,” the 17th Century French Baroque painter Valentin de Boulogne depicts the “beloved” disciple as practically sitting in the Messiah’s lap (clearly there were no separate checks in this instance).

The 12th Century theologian and Roman Catholic saint Aelred of Rievaulx not only cast ambivalence to the wind, he threw the closet door wide open in “Spiritual Friendship,” a work that refers to Jesus and John’s relationship as a “marriage.”

That example was apparently noted by the first Stuart monarch of Great Britain, King James I, who foisted onto us the Bible edition that bears his name, much as he foisted onto the nobles of his court his own relationship with the barely-out-of-his-teens Duke of Buckingham, arguing with religious, and royal, authority, “I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his son John, and I have my [Buckingham].”

The Canonical (that is, official) Gospel of Mark (14:51–52) gives fleeting—and tantalizing—reference to “A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, [who] was following Jesus. When they seized him, he fled naked, leaving his garment behind,” and in front of Jesus’ mother, no less.

The Secret Gospel of Mark—an apocryphal text, and possibly a hoax—includes the suggestion that Jesus provided one-on-one tutoring into the “secrets of the Kingdom of God” alone one night to a partially-clothed youth.

In the same vein, Bob Goss, who wrote “Jesus Acted Up: A Gay and Lesbian Manifesto” and “Queering Christ: Beyond ‘Jesus Acted Up,’” said that Jesus and John exemplified “a pederastic relationship between an older man and a younger man. A Greek reader would understand.”

Scholarship and theology on the subject has continued right into the last decade and ours. In 2003, Australian theologian Rollan McCleary wrote “Signs for a Messiah,” a book that considers “the theological implications of the sexuality of Jesus.”

McCleary goes so far as to draw up Jesus’ astrological chart, in which the planet Uranus prominently figures, something he says is common for many gay people. (Okay, maybe not so much with this guy.)

Religious people who condemn homosexuality often cite two Biblical passages: Leviticus 18:22 (“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination,” and Romans 1:27, in which St. Paul rails against “men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.”

Of course, Leviticus also calls it an “abomination”—and suggests you murder the girl!—if your daughter wears garments made from blended fibers, and Paul himself never says a word against slavery or polygamy (although his “natural use of the woman” remark leaves no doubt as to his feelings about feminism).

A review of Chicago Theological Seminary Professor Theodore Jennings’ book, “The Man Jesus Loved: Homoerotic Narratives From the New Testament” refers to the theologian/author’s assertions that “the Bible affirms and even celebrates homosexual relationships.”

In 2005, the openly-gay Episcopalian Bishop of New Hampshire, Rev. Gene Robinson, sermonized about the possibility of Christ’s homoerotic tendencies.

Still, not everyone is convinced, and the reality is that we will never know if Jesus’ vocabulary included “the love that dare not speak its name,” even it was spoken with an Aramaic accent.

On the other hand, from cradle to grave, the New Testament’s Superstar enjoyed an extremely close relationship with his mother (“Mary!”), he was bedecked from birth in gold and myrrh and had a penchant for burning frankincense, and his closest female friend was a hooker.

Biblically, I would call it a wash.

By Joseph Furner

There is something about this quote from outgoing U.S. Rep. Allen West that doesn’t sit well with me: “In the United States, we are blessed with the freedom to pursue our dreams and to disagree on what they should be—loudly and passionately if we wish—but we must never, ever relinquish this freedom, whether it is in the name of political correctness or economic justice.” (Washington Times, November 22, 2012)

West and many other politicians love to use the word “freedom” as if “all” people in this country have all the same freedoms. This is very narrow-minded of him, and disrespectful of people in this country who do not enjoy all the same freedoms and rights. He is clueless and insensitive.

West needs to stop lumping all Americans into one category. Gays do not have all the same rights and freedoms as heterosexuals, not by a long shot. Gays cannot marry in most states. Gays do not have rights to bring bi-national partners to the US like heterosexuals can now. Gays cannot jointly file taxes. Gays just do not have the same rights and freedoms—always persecuted, always treated like freaks by some, and just not completely accepted here.

Allen West forgets about all of this. Maybe is happy that he cannot be discriminated against or treated differently. But gays are not free to marry who we want, when we want, from wherever we want. We have to suffer and pay a high cost to be “out,” and be together with the person we love. Although West touts the freedom to pursue dreams completely, he forgets about this group of people: Shame on him. This offends me.

Gays need to fight even harder now with President Obama for full gay rights, to be able to do and receive every [federal] benefit that heterosexuals and heterosexual couples now receive, and not [via the individual] states.

Mr. West, stop touting that all Americans have freedom, because gays are still not completely free. Some people use the word “freedom” too lightly, almost taking it for granted. Politicians from both parties can continue to appease gays, but until 100 percent gay rights are actuated in this country, they should stop talking about the freedoms that “all” Americans enjoy.

If politicians really care about freedom for “all” Americans, they should make sure that gays also enjoy the same freedoms. Gays deserve full and equal equality in this country, with no exceptions. “All” people in the US must continue to work for equal freedom for “all” people in the US, gays included.

Joseph Furner lives in Lake Worth.