Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Seattle to release names of gay and lesbian city workers
06.19.2009 5:00pm EDT
(Seattle) After a Seattle City Light employee filed for the release of the names of gay and lesbian city workers involved in a city-sponsored club earlier in the month, the city of Seattle reluctantly did the same. The city is claiming the state public-records act requires the names to be released.
Philip Irvin, a self-proclaimed civil rights leader who was thwarted in his attempts to create a city-sponsored group of ex-gay employees, asked earlier this month for the names of employees associated with the department’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, Questioning and Friends Club. Members of the club sued to prevent their names from being released claiming it would violate their privacy.“The city sympathizes with the concerns that plaintiffs have expressed,” Assistant City Attorney Gary T. Smith said in court documents. “Nonetheless, the city believes that the Public Records Act obligates it to disclose the records at issue.”
Read the full Seattle-Post Intelligencer story here.
I’d wager a month between the time Irvin gets those names and the LGBT city employees start receiving bible tracts and ex-gay “you can change!!!11!” propoganda in their mail.
I’d then wager a week until Irvin is the target of a class-action suit for harassment.
Aha. The Christian Taliban strikes again on their road to creating the Christian Taliban Republic of the U.S.A. – all in the name of Jesus, of course.
Gee, I wonder why anyone would want their names. Surely not to harass, intimidate, or vandalize…
Why would you think a nice right wing, evangelical, “ex-gay”, bigot would want to do anything like that?
Playing Devil’s Advocate:
If Gay folks have the right to the names of those who support anti-gay groups and legislation, why shouldn’t the opposite be true?
@Jonathan: These people aren’t supporting any legislation. They’re just gay and work for the city. Totally bullshit in my opinion.
This could be a blessing in disguise. Anyone should be proud of being gay. There’s no shame in it. I would even rub it into the faces of all of them ex-gays and say, “You guys are wasting years of your lives!”
Hmmm… Does that mean that the City must disclose the names of its African-American employees to the local KKK?
I’m confused. Is it listing all the lesbian and gay workers, or just the membership of the club (which includes Friends), or just the gay and lesbian members of the club? Are any other clubs also being published in this way?
The article is a little unclear. First, it says that the “ex-gay” requested the names of gay and lesbian club members, but the second paragraph seems to suggest that all club members’ names were requested. The ex-gay’s intent was, very likely, to get the names of gay and lesbian club members.
I think there’s a privacy issue here, because most members of the club are probably gay or lesbian. If I recall correctly, the Appellate Court of the Third Circuit has ruled that it’s a constitutional violation to force someone out of the closet against their will. Washington state is in the Ninth Circuit, which is the most progressive federal circuit and might very well issue a similar ruling. So the club could ultimately be successful in suing for a privacy violation.
If I were a club member, I wouldn’t want my name released to an antigay employee. If someone requested member names for another club, the city would probably feel they have to release them too. I think a lot of people will be angry about the way this “ex-gay” got the names, and hopefully the “ex-gay” club won’t be very successful. The city’s public records act should be more limited, in my opinion.
Yeah it sucks, but it’s the law. I think it makes sense. When Prop 8 came out, we, the gay community, posted a list of names who supported it. We can’t be hypocritical like this bigot, can we? (Maybe we can, but we shouldn’t be.)
I have to agree with Jonathan.
It seems the request is for membership of the club, which receives funding, and is covered under the Public Records Act.
I don’t see a difference between the taxpayer funded employee advocacy group and the Prop 73 signatures, both of which will be made public.
If an individual is afraid to own their decisions, they shouldn’t make them.
i’m sorry, but the analogy to prop 8 contributors does not work. the publication of names of those who contribute to political campaigns (for candidates and for voter intiatives) is quite different than membership in what seems to be a support group for LGBTA workers…even if the group is supported by the city. the publication of names of donors serves a legitimate, public interest…what legitimate, public interest does this serve? really?
What a gross violation of their civil rights..accent on GROSS!
Now, can I get a list of all the city employees that have 10% of their paycheck sent directly to the Moron church?