The Daily Caller

The Daily Caller
Politics
 Vandalized posters at the Department of Labor (TheDC)  

Department of Labor employees deface posters equating gay rights with civil rights

5:16 PM 06/20/2011
Matthew Boyle
Investigative Reporter

The Daily Caller has obtained two photographs from inside the Department of Labor (DOL) elevators where Obama administration employees have again defaced photos equating gay rights with civil rights.

A worker or group of workers in the DOL ripped off a portion of these posters that compared gay rights to African American civil rights.

Pictured prominently on the poster is Bayard Rustin, an openly gay civil rights advocate and labor leader. Next to Rustin’s photo is a quote from him: “To be afraid is to behave as if the truth were not true.”

Underneath Rustin’s quote is a description of him: “Bayard Rustin — a labor leader, civil rights advocate and openly gay man — paved the way for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people to make their own unique contributions to the world of work, the U.S. Department of Labor, our country and the world.”

On both of the photographs with vandalized posters, Rustin’s quote and descriptions are torn from them. For the vandals to reach the posters, they had to break into a locked display case as evident in the photographs.

A Department of Labor spokeswoman did not immediately respond to TheDC’s requests for comment, but this isn’t the Obama administration’s first experience when it comes to vandalized posters promoting gay rights. Back in June 2009, a similar defacing streak occurred.

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis was apparently furious then. According to The New York Times, Solis shot off an email to DOL staffers deploring the vandalism.

“It appears, however, that some members of the Labor Department team have a different view, as it has come to my attention that most of the posters have been continually defaced or removed,” Solis wrote then. “On several occasions, even the poster frames have been torn completely off the elevator walls. I do not believe these actions represent the majority of our employees, so I refuse to let this situation define us.”

See two of the vandalized posters:

Tags: Department of Labor, LGBT
← Older Comments
  • williamousa

    As Clark Gable said in Gone With the Wind. “Frankly my dear I don’t give a damn.”

  • Pingback: Department of Labor employees deface posters equating gay rights with civil rights

  • Pingback: GayPatriot » In the Bush era, this would be news

  • truebearing

    What’s this? Intolerance within the rainbow coalition? Conflicts over the “civil rights” franchise? Who could have predicted the professional parasite class would fight over who is the biggest victim.

  • brian

    Such disrespect for Big Brother. Shocking

  • cramos

    As a person of color I applaud the defacing of these posters……quite honestly the civil rights laws have been highjacked to accomadate many special interest leaving people of color behind. In corporate America they were used against people of color while opening vast opportunities to mostly white women.

    A few people of color made it thorugh but only under the label of special programs….as if we were dullards unable to compete equally further creating stigma.

    Even tho I am Gay………the correlation of Gay Rights as promoted by government and the remidiation of 200 years of slavery “simply do not equate”

    One cannot escape ones blackness…..but a white Gay man can pass if he chooses to.

    Gay rights are a cultural adjustment which is making progress.

    • qizarek

      A white gay man can marry his partner?

  • californiacitizen

    Homosexuality is a choice no matter what the activits say. One very skewed and flawed “study” does not constitute proof (of being born that way). Since they choose their lifestyle, this has nothing to do with civil rights.

    If we continue the course we are on, gay marriage will one day be allowed nationwide. At that point (or somewhere along the way), you might want to remember what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah.

    • Cute Bison

      “Homosexuality is a choice no matter what the activits say. One very skewed and flawed “study” does not constitute proof (of being born that way). Since they choose their lifestyle, this has nothing to do with civil rights.”

      You’re confusing three different concepts: the condition of being physically attracted to those of the same sex (homosexuality), the origination of homosexuality in an individual (nature vs. nurture), and homosexual activities or a homosexual lifestyle (gay sex, gay marriage/unions).
      Regarding your first statement, it’s far more than a few driven “activits” who believe homosexuality (the condition of being physically attracted to those of the same sex) is in fact not a conscious choice, but rather most all psychological understanding of the condition has come to that conclusion; to put it simply, there are very few, if any, serious researchers left in the field of Queer studies who believe that the attraction experienced by a gay person is chosen attraction rather than felt attraction.
      Regarding your second statement, you’re quite right, there’s been no conclusive evidence yet determining the root of homosexuality in an individual (which is a different question than that of choice).
      Regarding your third statement, you’re, again, confusing issues. Engaging in homosexual activities is absolutely a choice, just like engaging in heterosexual activities is a choice. Being homosexual (the condition of being physically attracted to those of the same sex) though is now widely understood not to be a choice. If it’s not a choice, than it’s essentially an intrinsic part of the being of an average adult homosexual, regardless if it’s believed that it’s with him from birth or from upbringing. That essentially makes it a civil rights issue.
      I think state gay marriage is sort of an inevitability going forward as more people come to understand this reasoning. If you wish to preserve what you (and many others) feel to be the sanctity of marriage, I’d recommend working to get government out of marriage completely.

    • qizarek

      Sodom and Gommorah were destroyed for their lack of hospitality. Nothing in scripture supports that those cities were destroyed for homosexuality. Sounds like you belong to a cult and need to get out quick!

      • riseabove

        The well-known Biblical account of Sodom and Gomorrah reveals God’s feelings about homosexuality. God declared: “The cry of complaint about Sodom and Gomorrah, yes, it is loud, and their sin, yes, it is very heavy.” (Genesis 18:20) The extent of their sinful depravity at that time was apparent when two guests visited the righteous man Lot. “The men of Sodom . . . surrounded the house, from boy to old man, all the people in one mob. And they kept calling out to Lot and saying to him: ‘Where are the men who came in to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have intercourse with them.’” (Genesis 19:4, 5) The Bible says: “The men of Sodom were bad and were gross sinners against Jehovah.”—Genesis 13:13.

        Excerpt from: http://www.watchtower.org/e/20050408a/article_01.htm

      • klatoo

        You are obviously just plain stupid to think that.

        Read the Bible you idiot.

        To make a statement like that just proves you are stupid.

  • jonathan galt

    I would not even have that big of problem allowing the term marriage or matrimony t o be appropriated, even though it has been defined a certain way for years and the root is mater or mother; however, it will not and has not been left at that. Liberals have already sued catholic and other churches for civil rights violations unstated or municipalities for refusing to perform the rite/sacrament/ ceremony. In other areas groups who do not condone of the homosexual lifestyle because of their faith, have had suit brought against them by not offering services like counseling to homosexuals. In fact licenses have been pulled because of this, even though, the counseling would not have been helpful and maybe even negative for the homosexuals. At the same time my children cannot apply for scholarships and aid earmarked for blacks. I was told that regardless that my grandmother was born and raised on Egypt, I can not claim African American descent for legal purposes, due to the fact her parents moved there from England. Liberals use rights when advantageous and cry foul when others do the same. Our group has a non negotiable right to be recognized for whom
    You naturally feel you are but your grouphas no right to feel the way that you do.

    • qizarek

      What on earth are you talking about? You twisted the defacing of poster for equal rights to all homosexuals (and liberals?) have you targetted? Catholic churches refuse to marry all kinds of people…please show a link for the liberals that have sued catholic and other churchs for refusing to do ceremonies. I’m calling BS. Thank you.

  • ghost

    Solis wrote, “It appears, however, that some members of the Labor Department team have a different view”

    We can’t have that, now can we?

    • qizarek

      Have it, yes. Does that give you the right to damage property? No.

      • Iowa48

        uh, it wasn’t “property.” It was merely Communist propaganda.
        The NGLTF, Secretary Solis, the NYTimes and the DC have all jumped to the wrong conclusion on this issue. It obviously had nothing at all to do with the pros or cons of homosexuality at all, nor did it constitute acts of vandalism to the posters. The posters appeared to celebrate Bayard Rustin, a member of the Communist Party USA during the ’30s. At the time, the CPUSA was taking orders directly from Stalin’s Soviet Union. Therefore Rustin was an agent for a foreign power which advocated the violent overthrow of the USA as well as other capitalist countries throughout the world. Therefore whatever happened to the posters in the elevators was a political expression which every loyal
        American can and should support i.e. a protest against a Communist traitor and Communist propaganda witnin a Federal facility. I am sure Secretary Solis was completely unaware of Rustin’s history and definitely would not have promoted a Commie traitor if she had been aware of it. Probably the NGLTF was also unaware of this Commie’s background, however I would not doubt that the NY Times was probably fully aware of it. Anyway, there is no problem with the defacing of Communist propaganda, so it is a non-issue. It is very much like a civic minded citizen removing trash from a park.

      • klatoo

        You queers cant have it both ways.

        If someone speaks against your “plight” then they are homophobic. But in the same sentence you want to be able to say what you want, while restricting ANY speech against you.

        FU

        Queers are no more entitled to special status than potato beetles are.

        Again—–> FU

← Older Comments