# Black church opposition to marriage equality in Illinois **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 1, 2013, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839 "2013-06-01T04:07:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/61 "2013-06-09T19:29:47Z")
> [@Cyros](#): > > The reason the metaphor works is that we recognize the meaning of the word marriage to include and depend on bringing two separates together and creating a one. Indeed, I would argue that unless this were the salient point of the word the metaphor would fail. However, it is quite possible to employ a metaphor because it is known to be a metaphor and to be utterly amazed that anyone would consider it as a fact. In fact, the whole point of using the metaphor “marriage” has always implied the union of different things, not like things: The biblical metaphor of the marriage of God and His people; the metaphor of a marriage of jazz and film; the marriage of chocolate and peanut butter; the marriage of strength and beauty. These are different things that are united for one reason or another. Uniting the same things has not employed the word marriage for the metaphor. (I have never heard anyone refer to a “marriage of Country and Western.” Country and Western are simply associated because of their similarities and are not called a marriage.) ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/62 "2013-06-09T20:28:06Z")
> [@Belowjob2.0](#): > > As I noted above, the denial of full citizenship rights to black Americans based on the rigid color line was a weird American thing. Didn’t exist elsewhere. Not in Mexico, not in Puerto Rico, not in Argentina. Going back in history, it didn’t exist in medieval Spain or medieval Portugal, or in the Roman Empire. In all these places, people of African ancestry intermarried into the general population and disappeared as a distinct group. No need for marches, fire hoses, or special regulations. > > Gay marriage, on the other hand, is a radical change from the status quo everywhere it’s been proposed. > > The whole point of the Civil Rights movement was for black Americans to have the same rights as any other American citizens. No reason to expect black Americans to view the issue any differently than other Americans. > > Incidentally, the OP was transparently racist. I’m having trouble trying to parse what point you think you’re making in this word salad. I don’t really care what the status quo was in Midieval portugal, nor do most of the bigots in the black community who don’t think gay people should not have the same rights as them, it is utterly not relevant. Simply because you SAY there is no reason for black Americans to view the issue any differently, don’t make it so. You have not given any explanation as to why blacks support civil rights for themselves and not for gays and why that isn’t hypocritical, other than repeating your conclusion again and again without showing your work. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/63 "2013-06-09T20:29:55Z")
> [@Nzinga\_Seated](#): > > “On the DL” is simply black slang for “In the closet”. It isn’t unique to black people at all. It’s not simply in the closet, it is a closeted gay man who sleeps around on his woman with other men in secret. A gay virgin cannot be “on the DL”. ---
**Author:** ![Nzinga\_Seated](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b5ac83/32.png) [@Nzinga\_Seated](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nzinga_Seated)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/64 "2013-06-09T20:32:21Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > It’s not simply in the closet, it is a closeted gay man who sleeps around on his woman with other men in secret. A gay virgin cannot be “on the DL”. Ok. When I speak of closeted gays, I very rarely have virgins in mind. I, and other black people I know, use DL and closeted interchangeably, because most of the closeted men I know, white and black, date women. (and men) ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/65 "2013-06-09T20:39:47Z")
> [@Nzinga\_Seated](#): > > Ok. When I speak of closeted gays, I very rarely have virgins in mind. I, and other black people I know, use DL and closeted interchangeably, because most of the closeted men I know, white and black, date women. > > (and men) That’s true with most closeted white guys as well. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/66 "2013-06-09T21:56:12Z")
> [@jackdavinci](#): > > I do think it’s a bit of an oddity that the black community doesn’t take its own history as motivation to be a little more proactive in expanding their viewpoint. You mean it’s like the pot calling the kettle black? ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/67 "2013-06-09T22:01:43Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > I’m having trouble trying to parse what point you think you’re making in this word salad. I would suggest a remedial reading course. > [@rogerbox](#): > > don’t really care what the status quo was in Midieval portugal, nor do most of the bigots in the black community who don’t think gay people should not have the same rights as them, it is utterly not relevant. Yes, you love to not know. Because ignorance is a valid defense. It’s medieval, by the way. Simple point: banning people of African ancestry from marriage and the same rights exercised by other residents in a nation is a weird American phenomenon, an outlier. In most other parts of the world, and most other times in history, no one did that. It’s great that the US gave up the practice after centuries of doing the wrong thing, but it was always a case, as I put it above, of fucking the family pet. Weird, destructive, perverted, wrong. Gary marriage, on the other hand, is a radical change everywhere that it’s been enacted or proposed. This doesn’t mean that gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed. It just means it’s a much bigger change. > [@rogerbox](#): > > Simply because you SAY there is no reason for black Americans to view the issue any differently, don’t make it so. You have not given any explanation as to why blacks support civil rights for themselves and not for gays and why that isn’t hypocritical, other than repeating your conclusion again and again without showing your work. That would be “doesn’t make it so”. In addition to remedial reading, let me recommend basic grammar. Do Mormons give an explanation why they support civil rights for themselves, and not gay marriage? Do conservative Lutherans? Again, the whole point of the Civil Rights movement was for black Americans to exercise the same citizenship rights as other Americans. No more, no less. Black Americans have no special obligation to support progressive causes, and the alliance between black Americans and progs has always been a marriage of convenience. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/68 "2013-06-09T22:42:01Z")
> [@Belowjob2.0](#): > > . . . the whole point of the Civil Rights movement was for black Americans to exercise the same citizenship rights as other Americans. No more, no less. . . . Well, Russians, Poles, Hungarians, Irish, French, Japanese, Chinese… You know. All those black people. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/69 "2013-06-09T23:16:30Z")
Below, I think it was pretty obvious that Roger made a typo regarding his spelling of “medieval” similar to how you made a typo regarding “Gary marriage”. Beyond that, while hardly cool, the US treatment of blacks was hardly that different from the way various minorities were treated throughout the world and anti-black racism has hardly been confined to the US either in the past or the present. In fact quite a few African students I knew who’d been to Eastern Europe where they were often greeted by monkey noises would say it’s worse in much of Europe. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/70 "2013-06-09T23:28:09Z")
> [@Belowjob2.0](#): > > I would suggest a remedial reading course. > […] In addition to remedial reading, let me recommend basic grammar. Try making your case without these snide comments. ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/71 "2013-06-09T23:46:57Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Below, > > I think it was pretty obvious that Roger made a typo regarding his spelling of “medieval” similar to how you made a typo regarding “Gary marriage”. > > Beyond that, while hardly cool, the US treatment of blacks was hardly that different from the way various minorities were treated throughout the world and anti-black racism has hardly been confined to the US either in the past or the present. > > In fact quite a few African students I knew who’d been to Eastern Europe where they were often greeted by monkey noises would say it’s worse in much of Europe. While deplorable, the mis-treatment of immigrants is a separate issue from the long running abuse and exclusion of natives. And no, there really wasn’t a rigid colorline anywhere else in the New World, or in the Mediterranean during the Middle Ages or earlier. What we’re talking about is a distinctly American pathology here. In the US, we’re talking an extensive, well organized system of economic and political oppression, not just name calling. [QUOTE=Trinopus] Well, Russians, Poles, Hungarians, Irish, French, Japanese, Chinese… You know. All those black people. [/QUOTE] In the US? I was obviously talking about the US. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/72 "2013-06-10T00:39:51Z")
> [@Belowjob2.0](#): > > . . . In the US? I was obviously talking about the US. Yes, in the U.S. The American Civil Rights Movement was about more than just black civil rights. That was the biggest part of it, because that was the biggest part of systematic denial of civil rights. But the rights of people of other nationalities were, at times, abridged, and the overall movement addressed that, too. It’s only a nitpick, but when you said “No more, no less,” I thought it was worth mentioning. The Civil Rights Movement was also involved in women’s rights and handicapped rights. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/73 "2013-06-10T04:57:46Z")
> [@Belowjob2.0](#): > > Gary marriage, on the other hand, is a radical change everywhere that it’s been enacted or proposed. This doesn’t mean that gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed. It just means it’s a much bigger change. Cite? I think it’s a pretty big change to society for millions of its members to go from subhuman slaves to equals. Letting women marry other women is child’s play in comparison. Not that even if it were true you would have a point anyway. Civil rights are civil rights, and everyone should be for them, especially groups that should know better. I say “should know better” because human beings are amazingly self-oriented and it often takes suffering from something to sympathize with it happening to others. Obviously EVERYONE should be pro-SSM, since it’s a no brainer, but we’re talking with people here so the bar is pretty low. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 8:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/74 "2013-06-10T08:47:21Z")
> [@Cyros](#): > > As is the automatic demonizing of your opponents. > > You must admit to the fact that it is possible to be against SSM based solely upon an irrational response without being evil or bigoted. All it requires is to not put any thought behind your opinions and relying on the fact that you’ve held them for so long or learned them from a trusted figure to mean that they are correct. > > Take our own **Starving Artist** as an example. Do I think he is evil or bigoted? Not really, as evinced by his willingness to have same sex couples participate in the rights that are available to opposite sex couples. Do I think he is irrational in his refusal to allow them to call it a mdarriage? You betcha! This is evinced by his inability to mount an argument as to why we should not allow them this beyond vague protestations that bad things may happen without providing any mechanism that will cause these bad things or any indication as to what these bad things are. > > For those who oppose not only same sex marriage but also civil unions or any other form of governmental recognition of a gay couple’s formation of a family unit, knock yourself out and bash them as being bigoted aI’m gonna have to rummage around for some pliers, can’t get the hose unscrewed. :/nd evil but otherwise you are painting with too broad a brush. There is much to your post I agree with, **Cyros** , but I’m afraid you’ve confused me with someone else. To the best of my recollection I’ve never refused to call gay marriage a “marriage”, nor have I ever participated in a debate or argument in which I either refused or failed to defend a position opposing it. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 9:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/75 "2013-06-10T09:13:58Z")
Just for the heck of it, remember the movie _G.I. Jane_? It’s about a woman undergoing Navy Seal training and runs into all the expected barriers and outrageous unfairness and whatnot, but there’s a scene (as she starts gaining the respect of some of her fellow Seal candidates) of a black guy telling her about his grandfather who served in the Navy during WW2 and how because of his race he was limited to menial postings, though he was capable and eager and willing to do a lot more. It was unfair then and it was unfair now, was the message. But then about midway through the movie, some creep trying to undercut her takes photos of “Jane” at a beach party with a bunch of Navy nurses and with just that, implies she might be a lesbian - boom, instant threat of dismissal, and nobody seems to really notice that if it was unfair to prejudge people by race and gender, it was also so by sexual orientation (not that character actually _was_ gay - the filmmakers treated the audience to a bathtub scene with her and her boyfriend early on). I was vaguely annoyed that the character defended herself against an baseless implication she was gay, instead of just saying “what the fuck difference does it make? Isn’t this whole thing about whether or not I could complete the training?” The only reason I bring it up is noting that while a lot of people will protest Unfair Treatment Situation 1 and Unfair Treatment Situation 2, there’s often an Unfair Treatment Situation 3 that doesn’t strike them as unfair at all. ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 9:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/76 "2013-06-10T09:32:06Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > There is much to your post I agree with, **Cyros** , but I’m afraid you’ve confused me with someone else. To the best of my recollection I’ve never refused to call gay marriage a “marriage”, nor have I ever participated in a debate or argument in which I either refused or failed to defend a position opposing it. My apologies for the misrememberance. ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 9:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/77 "2013-06-10T09:39:45Z")
Missed the edit window. After a quick search it appears that it was **Magellan01** who I was thinking of. ---
**Author:** ![BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 10:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/78 "2013-06-10T10:16:16Z")
> [@Condescending\_Robot](#): > > I don’t believe in mushy-headed liberal Christianity any more than in backwoods conservative Christianity. Certainly the latter has worse direct consequences for sexual minorities, but the impulse of the former to apologize for and defend the inherent goodness of everyone Do liberal christians defend the conservative ones? It seems unfair to lump them together just because they believe in the same god. There are a crapton of Americans I wouldn’t want to be caught dead with, but that doesn’t mean I’m not proud to be one[sup]TM[/sup]. > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Just for the heck of it, remember the movie _G.I. Jane_? > > … > > I was vaguely annoyed that the character defended herself against an baseless implication she was gay, instead of just saying “what the fuck difference does it make? Isn’t this whole thing about whether or not I could complete the training?” Haven’t seen the movie, but isn’t part of the gay issue that she could’ve legally lost her job from the army for being gay, but not for being a woman? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/79 "2013-06-10T15:14:03Z")
> [@BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed](#): > > Haven’t seen the movie, but isn’t part of the gay issue that she could’ve legally lost her job from the army for being gay, but not for being a woman? Yes, and this was seen as normal. There wasn’t a moment where any of the characters in the movie (as I recall) went, "Hey, wait a sec… ---
**Author:** ![Condescending\_Robot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a183cd/32.png) [@Condescending\_Robot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Condescending_Robot)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2013, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839/80 "2013-06-10T16:20:45Z")
[quote=“BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed, post:78, topic:659839”] Do liberal christians defend the conservative ones? /QUOTE] Ultimately, “liberal Christianity” is a fortress of contradictory platitudes, and there is a choice to be made between being a rational, moral person and being a Christian. Different people go to different sides when the hour of decision comes. There are certainly those who are willing to flog the “hippie Jesus” construct, which is just as much a self-serving delusion as “supply side Jesus,” that band together with other Christians against atheists or insist that ultimately that guy with the shotgun going out hunting for “fags” is just a little mixed-up and is on some level a good person. This usually manifests itself in less extreme ways, but it can lead to some really awful implications, my favorite being liberal Christians who chastise conservatives over shunning gays since Jesus told us to love everyone…even murderers and child molestors! Gee, thanks for putting me in such great company. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/black-church-opposition-to-marriage-equality-in-illinois/659839.md?page=5)