Seventeen replies counting mine (assuming nobody just snuck in) in about three hours. People vote with their keyboards.
My topics don’t get 16 replies in three days. Not whining, just noting. More replies would probably mean I was getting a new orifice installed by the posters.
That was not a topical reference either. As for the topic:
Let’s get ready to RUMBLLLLEEEEE!
FUNDIES versus FLAMERS in a knockdown drag-out (get it?, “drag”) smack down for the undisputed civil rights championship of the world.
In white corner wearing white trunks with little red crosses, weighing in at an omnipresent omniscient infinity of pounds: some really caring people who love the sinner but hate the sin. They just don’t want gays to have “special rights.” They have some interest in particular parts of the Old Testament but pretty much ignore the rest, including the rest of Leviticus. Their tastes run towards Amy Grant, Pat Boone (until he started getting all weird) and all that really cool Christian rock — THE FUNDIES! The Fundies.
In the fuscia corner wearing peach trunks with rainbows, black leather chaps, and a feather boa, weighing in at a fabulous undisclosed amount of pounds: some folks who would like to be able to share in most of the civil rights that us straght people do. For example, the right to join in unions upheld legally. They would like to have their partners be able to make decisions in the hospital for them if they are incapacitated. They would like the rules of intestate succession (dying without a will) to allow their partners to inherit their money, etc. They love Donna Summer, Gloria Gayner (no coincidence there), Bronski Beat, and show tunes, the FLAMERS! The Flamers.
No Christians or gay people were seriously hurt in the making of this parody, I hope.
Doesn’t the OP apply to virtually everything we ever talk about here? it’s just blather, aint’ gonna change a damn thing. Except maybe a few private minds.
I understand that some of you have experienced hatred. I understand that some of you know of occasions that hatred turned towards violence. I can understand the distress that might cause. BUT…it is not the mere voicing of opinion by the “straight supremacist” or “homophobe” (do we have the birth of a new word on SDMB?) that brings these things about.
Reverend Phelps can talk on and on, endlessly, about homosexuality. Those who are already inclined to believe him will adopt his words…the rest of us will laugh and mock him. He doesn’t make an impact, and he’s the most visible and vocal anti-gay personality in the news.
I live in Missouri. It’s frickin’ Missouri. Now, Columbia may very well be the Berkeley of Missouri, but it’s still Missouri. Even here, I have no doubts about assessing the situation, and it’s public acceptance of gay rights. The attempts to put a non-discrimination clause related to sexual orientation in the university charter have had a surge of grassroots support on both occasions.
Do I encounter individuals who still harbor a bias? Yes. Has that bias ever affected the freedom of my homosexual friends to do as they will? No. They can (and do) prattle on about gays, but they’re all bark and no bite. Every time I hear an anti-gay proposition from some local redneck, I thrust it in their face that I’ve roomed on two occasions with gay persons, defy them to challenge me, and they back off. Maybe that’s because I’m 6’2" 265 lbs, or maybe it’s because they were just making what they thought was a “joke” at the expense of people who weren’t around. It may still be trendy among rednecks to bash gays, but they back off quick if you throw some real world experience at them.
The long and short of it is this: their talk don’t walk. You wanna bring violent actions into it, that’s another discussion entirely. People with violent predispositions will carry on as they do, and seek minimal justification for their actions, hiding behind whatever makeshift morality they can find. After all, nobody ever does anything at all unless they can justify it to themselves, no matter how twisted the rationale.
The hordes of people who tell me I shouldn’t smoke or drink…they aren’t preventing me from lightin’ up a pack a day and drinkin’ all the alcohol I can afford. Sticks and stone might break my bones, but words will never hurt me. Only state policy, the use of force by the government, can do that. Put it to the people. I bet you’ll find that the position that gay people should be free to pursue their romantic relations as they see fit is overwhelmingly popular. Strip away the legal portions of marriage, ask the question right, and I bet most people wouldn’t have much problem with civil union ceremonies either.
So a few people on the extreme edge of an issue are shouting at you, what’s the problem? The idea itself isn’t harmful. If some people use the idea as a basis for violence, that doesn’t make the idea itself dangerous. Over the years, “liberty” and “freedom” have been the rallying cries for so many murders, but that doesn’t make those ideas dangerous. Let H4E prattle on, ignore her if you will, but don’t spew vitriolic filth (and considering some of the remarks I heard, I mean filth) feeling you must oppose the remarks with vigilance. Ignorance and irrationality will be ignored in the long run, you have nothing to fear from those sources.
black455, do you have a cite for this (or just the name of the city so I can look up their charter)? I’d like to be able show it to others who think equal rights are ‘special treatment’.
Both occasions? can you not see that the very fact that something as self evidently decent as non-discrimination requires more than one attempt to achieve disproves your theory?
On this issue, there is no room on the fence. If you ignore the bigots, if you pretend that in any way shape or form they could possibly have a valid point- you are not on my side.
You call the comments directed at the bigots filth. Nothing anyone opposed to them could ever say could match the soul blackening filth of their words. They can see right and wrong just as clearly as the rest of us; they choose to ignore it in favor of a book. They ignore real world sufferring in favor of believing in perverted fairy tales.
My question to you is, why should they have to “strip away the legal portions of marriage, ask the question right”?
Why not just allow marriage as is?
We had a vote here a few years back and the vote against it won out over the minority that see marriage as a union between two people who love each other, no matter what their sexuality is. I don’t see that as much progress.
I have a good friend who has way more gay friends than I do and even she voted against it. That’s what I don’t understand. Apparently things are not as rosy as you think they are. And talking about it here may not have an obvious effect to you, but I don’t see how it can hurt.
Well, I am all for equal rights. I am totally against hate crimes laws. I don’t care if someone got beaten to death because he was “a fucking faggot” or “She just doesn’t fucking listen”, it’s an equal crime. The law should be completely blind and that includes correcting injustice. You shouldn’t compensate for injustice, just correct it.
I have had sex with both men and women and received some weird reactions to it. Very few people actually have a normal view of it. I oftentimes get the reaction from gay people that I had some sort of obligation out of solidarity to tell them about it instead of making them wonder about it cuz I set their “Gaydar” off. I think the discrimination comes from both sides in the issue, and generally both sides are fairly intolerant.
However I think there is something to the idea that our society is more tolerant than it once was, and that doesn’t get acknowledged as much as I think it should.
As for the mention of murders of homosexuals in large cities, yes it is fairly common. It happens in New York City pretty regularly from what I understand. Hell I’ve had guys get MAD at me because they thought I was a girl and were attracted to me. As if it’s MY fault they were attracted to me. I have cross-dressed in my time but I generally dress in just baggy pants and t-shirts.
Homosexuality is not totally accepted, but there is some major progress. However, I do not think there should be special laws including them, however, there should not be any special laws excluding them either.
I don’t mean to downplay the rest of your post, I just have to address this:
I have been involved in mass beatings (of myself). People have taken delight in hurting me physically with any number of things. It is not the act itself that hurts but the thought, the motive behind it.
Words, to me, hurt far more than physical action. And I doubt that I am alone in this.
It’s a romantic and idealist idea that sexuality, regardless of the prefix, is accepted in this country. I wish it were true. I’d love to see my friend Charlie marry his boyfriend Q and have them be accepted by America. But the fact of the matter is that this is not the case.
Most visible? Most vocal? More than Pat Buchannan? Anne Coulter? Jesse Helms? Jerry Falwell? Pat Robertson? John Ashcroft? George W. Bush?
Attempts? Both occasions? You mean it didn’t pass on the first go? Did it pass the second time? Do you really believe the failure of a non-discrimination clause represents acceptance?
Ask your gay friends if they think this is true. Go ahead, I dare ya.
Sorry, are you talking about the homophobes or your gay friends here?
The fact that you personally can intimidate a few bigots impresses me less than the fact that you apparently regularly come into contact with people who feels no qualms expressing their bigotry to strangers. This doesn’t say “acceptance” to me, it says these attitudes are so common most people don’t raise an eyebrow when they hear them.
I agree with you to a certain extent. Were there no such thing as homosexuality, I somehow doubt the scum that beat Matthew Shephard to death would have gone on to be valued members of society. However, the attitudes of people like Jersey Diamond and His4Ever contribute to an atmosphere that says, “It’s okay to target gays, no one’s going to care if you kill one.” And all too often, they are correct.
Right, because homosexuality is completely analogous to your drug habits. Come back and try this argument when people are attacking you with sticks and stones for having a beer.
And you know how we determine state policy? By voting. If a bill comes up saying you can’t refuse to rent to people based on their sexuality, how do you think His4Ever is going to vote?
You are deluded. Ever hear of the Defense of Marriage Act? And what the fuck is the point of getting the right to marriage if all the legal portions of it have been stripped away? The legal portions are the parts we want!
Again with the delusions.
Ignoring ignorance? Listen, you pinhead, that’s exactly the fucking problem! If we let these ideas go unchallenged, more people will believe them. It’s by countering their arguments and showing how little basis in rationality, ethics, and simple human compassion they have. Burying our heads in the sand while these notions are allowed to run free is going to make things worse, not better.
And, goddammit, if the debates bug you so much, stop fucking reading them. But please stop whining because people are standing up for their essential human dignity, because if makes you look really fucking petty.
Rexdart, just for shits and giggles, when’s the last time someone:
Physically attacked you for smoking or drinking
Called you a name for smoking or drinking
Implied there was soming intrinsically wrong with your smoking or drinking or your preference.
Assumed that you were some disease-ridden worthless piece of trash because you preferred smoking cigarettes and drinking tequila to, say, smoking pipes and drinking cheap booze
I was going to add something about passing legislation that would limit your rights as a smoker/drinker, but A) those are about things you (at least initially) choose to do, whereas sexuality isn’t. Coming up with number 4 was difficult enough.
**
Perhaps being seen as equal under the eyes of the law does not appear to be a waste of time and effort to most homosexuals.
**
“attempts” … “both occasions”… Does this seem to you like a non-issue ? Does this sound like homosexuals have reached a position of equality ?
**
Your homosexual friends are unconcerned about being unable to marry are they ? Odd. I’ve heard a lot of homosexuals express the desire to be treated equally and not have their freedom to marry as heterosexuals do restricted.
**
O.K… So we strip away the legal stuff, all the rights to property, income, hospital visitation, etc… and what do we have left ? A government recognised civil ceremony ? Is this equality ? Is this a non-issue ? Why should the legal portions be removed ?
[BTW, I second the request for a link to the list of benefits that homosexuals are denied, due to their inability to legally marry.]
Have another read through your posts, RexDart. You seem to be convinced on one hand that homosexuals have nothing to gain by debating/complaining/protesting their current status since they are completely publically accepted, yet on the other hand, trying to ensure they’ll be close but never quite legally equal to heterosexuals. If this is wrong and I’ve unfairly characterised your position, I apologise and would appreciate clarification. If it’s right, I have to ask why ? Why shouldn’t homosexuals have the same legal rights as heterosexuals ? I can’t think of one good reason, perhaps you can ?
And finally,
**
The point is that homosexuals aren’t treated equally in the eyes of the law, and there is no reasonable justification for this continued state of affairs. Until this legal discrimination ends, there will always be a point to debating anti-homosexuals and there will always be a need to push for equality.
Let’s not jump on RexDart. Many times I’ve met straight people who, because they don’t have to deal with it, simply are unaware of the kind of discrimination we have to put up with. The worst we can really accuse them of is being ignorant about something they don’t find themselves personally implicated in. It’s irritating that s/he feels the need to shoot off his mouth rather than actually listen to gay people describe what we have to go through, though.
Rexdart, you are precisely the reason I started the Gaybashing thread in MPSIMS. Listen to the stories and see the sadness that people have to endure day in and day out. Progress has been made, but there is still a long way to go. It is a huge problem on many levels. The legal aspects aside, physical violence and emotional abuse are very much a part of the picture. I noticed in the stories people were sharing in the bashing thread, children are learning to hate at a very young age. The problem renews itself with each generation.
I used to say “that is so gay”, not realizing the true ramifications of the statement. I read a number of threads on this board that made me realize that it is not only insulting, but it perpetuates the problem. I no longer use the term (even as a “joke”) and I no longer say it around my 9-yr-old neice, because I don’t want to be the “pebble” that starts the wave. The threads on homosexuality DO make a difference. And not just on the boards, but in my daily quest to do the right thing.
The requersted link for the General Accounting Office’s list of the 1049 rights, privileges, and responsibilities associated with marriage, which are accessible only to heterosexuals.
And RexDart, it seems you’ve concluded that the progress that the gay rights movement has made is sufficient at its current level; that we should be happy with the concessions that have been made toward treating us like human beings, and that now we should shut up about it.
Let me ask you; would you find this situation acceptable if you were under the same legal restrictions and societal pressures and danger of random violence?
RexDart said, "Guess what, somebody on the danged internet saying he/she doesn’t approve morally of homosexuality will not affect your personal life one dang bit. Not at all. Nor would 1,000 people…nor would 1,000,000 people…nor would 10,000,000 people. "
You are so wrong. Attitudes on the Internet affect attitudes in real life. Maybe moreso than ever before. The number of people who are reached is a thousand times the number that would be reached at a KKK rally or similar hate event. The attitudes you see here are the same ones walking around in real life. Just because you can’t be physically beaten on the internet doesn’t mean you’re immune to the emotional abuse.
I’ve read through this thread and I’m going to add two points that haven’t been discussed yet. Hama should be so proud!
I have changed my position. Do you hear that RexDart? Thanks to my time spent on the SDMB and my readings of threads on gay debates I have changed my position on the concept of homosexuality. Two years ago I really didn’t know anyone that was homosexual. I didn’t care about their rights because, frankly, it didn’t affect me all that much. Three nights ago I not only went to a protest for gay rights in Topeka, I spoke up at a city council meeting in favor of proposals stopping discrimination. Guess what? I learned about the meeting through the SDMB too!
A quote by RexDart:
.
But he does. That meeting in Topeka? He was at it. He and his family were the first ELEVEN people to speak. The proposal to end rental discrimination to homosexuals failed. Fred Phelps won Tuesday night. He made an impact.
The room was so full that many people didn’t get a seat and had to wait outside. 90% of the room was made up of those that wanted the proposal to fail. Don’t think that didn’t make a difference too. Again, the proposal failed. They made an impact. Fred Phelps won.
If these two poionts don’t convince you, I really can’t think of anything that will. You’re wrong in saying that the SDMB doesn’t help fight ignorance and you’re wrong in saying that the homophobes aren’t winning. But believe what you want, I guess. Sometimes it does take longer than we thought…
