This publishing controversy reminds me of my own less consequential decision regarding a Prism & Pen writer.

For background, I often publish articles in Prism & Pen that I personally disagree with on some level or another. Because we exist to amplify queer voices, and because getting queer people to agree about anything is as possible as herding cats, diversity of expression in the publication goes without saying.

But we won't publish just anything. Of course we draw the line at hate speech and discrimination, and once, not so long ago, we had to draw that line.

A fairly new writer who had once worked for an infamous Christian anti-LGBTQ hate group had submitted to us a series of articles, which we published, about how he had seen the light and now understands that gay people in sexual relationships are compatible with Christianity.

Then one day, I looked over a new submission of his to find that he was promoting "ex-gay" people and groups who teach that same-gender sex is sinful and that gay Christians should not have sex.

I declined that article, telling the author that Prism & Pen could not align with or appear to support such a hateful message.

He published the article on his own, and soon I noticed him promoting it on social media with the header, "If you're a gay man, Jesus may be calling you to be celibate."

That put me in a serious ethical and moral bind. The man had published several articles in P&P, some of them more than just a little popular. We had marketed his writing on several online platforms. People reading stories he published with us would (because of how Medium and other platforms work) likely be offered his latest piece, which in my opinion was anti-LGBTQ hate speech – a defense of anti-queer theology and systems of oppression.

So, after considering the implications, I cut all P&P ties with the writer and removed all his previous articles from the publication.

Diversity of expression is one thing, but support of hate speech is another, especially when active marketing comes into play. How could I look myself in the mirror if I was marketing hate speech?

I could not, of course, nor should that publishing house in Mexico feel compelled to do the same.

Free speech includes the right not to speak, not to market hate.