Some explanation please

Posted Wednesday, September 5, 2007, at 8:32 AM
View 6 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • I definitely see the difference. The reason why Naugle was removed from the board was because he made a general statement about a group of people based on a perception he had. Yes, some gay people do elicit sex in public restrooms(so do straight people) but not all gay people do that. And in a city which attracts a huge population of gay tourists and many gay people live there, those kind of statements would definitely cause some resentment from that community. That would be like me running out and saying that just because someone of a particular race is a murder, then all people of that race must be murders. It's just an ignorant way of thought and considering tourism is a huge factor for Ft. Lauderdale, it would be in their best interest to remove someone who promotes that kind of bigotry. You really cant compare that situation with what happened with Larry Craig because his actions was a representation of himself and no one else. Just because he was caught trying to solicit gay sex in a bathroom doesn't mean all senators are doing the same and that was basically the extent to which the comments by Naugle were perceived as. He was making generalizations about a group of people that was unfair.

    -- Posted by jaxspike on Wed, Sep 5, 2007, at 10:56 AM
  • I meant to say murderers instead of murders in that last comment.

    -- Posted by jaxspike on Wed, Sep 5, 2007, at 11:09 AM
  • That was spot on jaxspike.

    -- Posted by nathan.evans on Wed, Sep 5, 2007, at 1:04 PM
  • That's a good point MyNeighbor. But then the "act" wasn't to be done for money. I wonder if it were a woman initiating a man in the same manner (with no expectation of payment of any sort) if charges would have been filed.

    -- Posted by DannysGal on Wed, Sep 5, 2007, at 5:30 PM
  • Jaxspike... You said it best!

    -- Posted by darrick_04 on Wed, Sep 5, 2007, at 6:38 PM
  • -- Posted by nathan.evans on Thu, Sep 6, 2007, at 9:56 AM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: