It didn't strike me as the most professional piece ever written, either. However, it depends on whether it was written as a news report, or essay form editorial. I've read some pretty rough stuff by established left wing americam journalists; who write under the cover of an essay (their opinion), and use "popular" language without apology.
I really don't see a big difference in the original poster's writing style, and the St. Maarten editorial writer's style. Actually, they're both using negative labellng, equally. They're on opposite sides of the spin, that's all.
If some people think that the editorial was outrageously unsympathetic to whatever they read into the comments, the same could be said of the victims comments; with their media machine trashing St Maarten.
Tell me the difference, in style and hyperbole, between these victims calling everyone (who doesn't stand behind their political agenda) a homophobe and gay basher, and what the editorial writer had to say.
Also, these "terms/name calling" seem to be part of the public debate. The writer isn't introducing these terms and social history, but merely recognizing and pointing them out.