What's with all the "gaytred" in the past couple of days?

post reply Forum Index » Off-Topic
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:34
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:race is not the same as gay. Nature and religous doctrine never are against race they are against gay.


...says someone who doesn't know their American history. I agree that the issues of race and sexual preference are separate, but yep, arguments of nature and religious doctrine have been used in racist ways, and still continue to be, though to a lesser degree.

There are people who believe blacks are inherently more criminal and that's why they're disproportionately incarcerated in the US and other nations with a history of colonialism and slavery.

But that's an issue for another thread. We should keep this one focused on gays rights, although the OP fucked that up herself by trying to bring race into the discussion.
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:39
quote
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Anonymous wrote:OP here -- I'm not suggesting anyone should be arrested for expressing offensive views. I'm just thinking that it's mean and small-minded and hating to spew such garbage about people who love people of their same gender. And I doubt Jeff -- who by the way does not have to allow any and all speech on this forum as he is not a state actor -- would allow threads saying things like "i don't think black people should be allowed to have the same rights as white people" etc.


There are two arguments made here on a pretty regular basis that are pet peeves for me:

1) The argument that "if a white person said (or did) something that a member of a minority group said (or did), everyone would [ do something undesirable ]"
2) The argument that "Jeff wouldn't allow ..."

First of all, not even my wife knows what I would or wouldn't allow. So, I am not sure how you have any idea. If you can find any single minority group that hasn't been upset and offended by a thread on this site, please point it out to me. I have even been offended myself by a thread about short men and another thread that was critical of the name we chose for one of our sons. I would absolutely allow a thread saying that black people should not be allowed the same rights as white people. More than likely, I would join that thread and tear a new orifice in the person who started it. But, absolutely it would be allowed.
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:39
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:race is not the same as gay. Nature and religous doctrine never are against race they are against gay.


There was a time where both "nature and religious doctrine" were used against certain races as well as against interracial marriage.


Not PP, but the issues that surrounded the interracial marriage movement are connected to the days of slavery, deep racism and segregation. These are not all of the same for the gay marriage movement. Race was an issue because Blacks for instance were seen as property and inferior. There were instances where blacks were murdered for talking to white people. Black men were killed for the assumption that they glanced or whistled near white women. The interracial marriage movement is not equal when you compare the racial discrimination prior.
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:42
quote
Anonymous
OP here. I do not understand how denying gay people the same rights as straight people under the eyes of the law is any different than denying African American the same rights as white people under the eyes of the law. In addition, I don't see any difference between hating or demonizing gay people and using "morality" or "religion" to justify it, and hating or demoninzing African Americans, and using "morality" or "religion" to justify it.
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:44
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:race is not the same as gay. Nature and religous doctrine never are against race they are against gay.


There was a time where both "nature and religious doctrine" were used against certain races as well as against interracial marriage.


Not PP, but the issues that surrounded the interracial marriage movement are connected to the days of slavery, deep racism and segregation. These are not all of the same for the gay marriage movement. Race was an issue because Blacks for instance were seen as property and inferior. There were instances where blacks were murdered for talking to white people. Black men were killed for the assumption that they glanced or whistled near white women. The interracial marriage movement is not equal when you compare the racial discrimination prior.


Have you ever heard of gay bashing? Or of Matthew Shepherd? No one is denying the atrocity of slavery and Jim Crow, and its unique and appalling place in American history. I'm just saying, let's learn from history.
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:45
quote
Anonymous
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP here -- I'm not suggesting anyone should be arrested for expressing offensive views. I'm just thinking that it's mean and small-minded and hating to spew such garbage about people who love people of their same gender. And I doubt Jeff -- who by the way does not have to allow any and all speech on this forum as he is not a state actor -- would allow threads saying things like "i don't think black people should be allowed to have the same rights as white people" etc.


There are two arguments made here on a pretty regular basis that are pet peeves for me:

1) The argument that "if a white person said (or did) something that a member of a minority group said (or did), everyone would [ do something undesirable ]"
2) The argument that "Jeff wouldn't allow ..."

First of all, not even my wife knows what I would or wouldn't allow. So, I am not sure how you have any idea. If you can find any single minority group that hasn't been upset and offended by a thread on this site, please point it out to me. I have even been offended myself by a thread about short men and another thread that was critical of the name we chose for one of our sons. I would absolutely allow a thread saying that black people should not be allowed the same rights as white people. More than likely, I would join that thread and tear a new orifice in the person who started it. But, absolutely it would be allowed.


OK, Jeff. Sorry.
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:47
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Why is race being brought into sexuality? Why can't these be separated?


THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

+1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:47
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:race is not the same as gay. Nature and religous doctrine never are against race they are against gay.


There was a time where both "nature and religious doctrine" were used against certain races as well as against interracial marriage.


Not PP, but the issues that surrounded the interracial marriage movement are connected to the days of slavery, deep racism and segregation. These are not all of the same for the gay marriage movement. Race was an issue because Blacks for instance were seen as property and inferior. There were instances where blacks were murdered for talking to white people. Black men were killed for the assumption that they glanced or whistled near white women. The interracial marriage movement is not equal when you compare the racial discrimination prior.


See, even discussing that much, many people overlook that there were other issues. In addition the larger black racism issues, there were many issues with hispanics and Asians as well. Do you know that until 1965 not only were Asians not allowed to marry outside their race, but in many states were not allowed to own land? There were separate laws on the books in many states dating from the days of the railroad slavery that specifically prohibited Asians from buying land or property, voting and many other rights.
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:50
quote
Anonymous
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:OP here -- I'm not suggesting anyone should be arrested for expressing offensive views. I'm just thinking that it's mean and small-minded and hating to spew such garbage about people who love people of their same gender. And I doubt Jeff -- who by the way does not have to allow any and all speech on this forum as he is not a state actor -- would allow threads saying things like "i don't think black people should be allowed to have the same rights as white people" etc.


There are two arguments made here on a pretty regular basis that are pet peeves for me:

1) The argument that "if a white person said (or did) something that a member of a minority group said (or did), everyone would [ do something undesirable ]"
2) The argument that "Jeff wouldn't allow ..."

First of all, not even my wife knows what I would or wouldn't allow. So, I am not sure how you have any idea. If you can find any single minority group that hasn't been upset and offended by a thread on this site, please point it out to me. I have even been offended myself by a thread about short men and another thread that was critical of the name we chose for one of our sons. I would absolutely allow a thread saying that black people should not be allowed the same rights as white people. More than likely, I would join that thread and tear a new orifice in the person who started it. But, absolutely it would be allowed.


Ack!, Jeff, you're short? I always thought you were cool, man.

[Post New]03/02/2012 11:51
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Why is race being brought into sexuality? Why can't these be separated?


THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

+1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000


Why do they need to be?
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:53
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:race is not the same as gay. Nature and religous doctrine never are against race they are against gay.


There was a time where both "nature and religious doctrine" were used against certain races as well as against interracial marriage.


Not PP, but the issues that surrounded the interracial marriage movement are connected to the days of slavery, deep racism and segregation. These are not all of the same for the gay marriage movement. Race was an issue because Blacks for instance were seen as property and inferior. There were instances where blacks were murdered for talking to white people. Black men were killed for the assumption that they glanced or whistled near white women. The interracial marriage movement is not equal when you compare the racial discrimination prior.


Have you ever heard of gay bashing? Or of Matthew Shepherd? No one is denying the atrocity of slavery and Jim Crow, and its unique and appalling place in American history. I'm just saying, let's learn from history.



Gay bashing and the Matthew Shepherd murder are not at all equal to the discrimination against ALL minority groups in America.
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:53
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:race is not the same as gay. Nature and religous doctrine never are against race they are against gay.


There was a time where both "nature and religious doctrine" were used against certain races as well as against interracial marriage.


Not PP, but the issues that surrounded the interracial marriage movement are connected to the days of slavery, deep racism and segregation. These are not all of the same for the gay marriage movement. Race was an issue because Blacks for instance were seen as property and inferior. There were instances where blacks were murdered for talking to white people. Black men were killed for the assumption that they glanced or whistled near white women. The interracial marriage movement is not equal when you compare the racial discrimination prior.


See, even discussing that much, many people overlook that there were other issues. In addition the larger black racism issues, there were many issues with hispanics and Asians as well. Do you know that until 1965 not only were Asians not allowed to marry outside their race, but in many states were not allowed to own land? There were separate laws on the books in many states dating from the days of the railroad slavery that specifically prohibited Asians from buying land or property, voting and many other rights.


Again, no one is saying that the two movements are identical. But they are undeniably similar. Why not acknowledge that?
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:54
quote
Anonymous
I suspect there is an issue of "my struggle is bigger than your struggle" going on here, especially when people are adamant about separating gay and race issues.
[Post New]03/02/2012 11:56
quote
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I suspect there is an issue of "my struggle is bigger than your struggle" going on here, especially when people are adamant about separating gay and race issues.


Completely agree.
[Post New]03/02/2012 12:00
quote
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Anonymous wrote:
Have you ever heard of gay bashing? Or of Matthew Shepherd? No one is denying the atrocity of slavery and Jim Crow, and its unique and appalling place in American history. I'm just saying, let's learn from history.


I was just about to write nearly the same thing. Of course, sexual and racial discrimination are different. Race in America has a unique history and race is normally something that can be determined visually. The impact of these factors can't be ignored. But, there is probably more in common then many posters seem to realize. Matthew Shepherd is one example of a gay man being lynched, but far from the only one. Shaw Middle School's Assistant Principal was targeted due to his sexual orientation. A number of transgendered people have been killed in DC in past months. Gay clubs have been burned down or attacked in other ways. Violent hostility is something that both the gay and civil rights movements have in common.
post reply Forum Index » Off-Topic
Message Quick Reply
Go to: 

Search   Recent Topics   Hottest Topics