Is there too much homophobia at DU?

[arcos]

[The Jacobin]

1. Uh.

Realizing that trying to force gay marriage on the country before its ready is not homophobia, its political survival.

[Touchdown]

7. Uh. We never "forced" anything.

The religious right drives any and all debates on gay rights. Gay people are too small a population to "force" anything on anybody.

This has been true ever since Anita Bryant in the 70s. Get that, if you get nothing else.

What is ironic is that we win when they drive the debate. They overplay their hands everytime.

[KharmaTrain]

11. They Overplay When They Know You'll Overplay

If you don't think the scenes of gay marriages were shown in churches across the country and that didn't hit home with "heterosexual" America, look again, it did enormous damage to Democrats.

As others, I strongly support total equal rights for anyone and sexual discrimination must be eliminated, but one must win by being smart, not emotional.

Rove played the Gay marriage issue like a violin as he knew that if the GLBT community was inflamed it would make lots of noise inside the Democratic tent...which it did...and this was used to scare their flock into greater intolerance. It's a viscious cycle.

As I had posted earlier and was flamed...I've seen a real change in the GLBT attitude in the past 15 to 20 years. It has gone from keeping one's sexuality out of the workplace (even though I know these people are homosexuals and don't care) to getting cold shoulders or even taunted if I just look at some the wrong way. There's an elitism that has to be addressed or this will continue to be used to beat Democrats in Red states and nationally.

[Touchdown]

15. And now they're coming after the Trade Unionists, and you do not speak up

Nice. As a gay mman, I want to thank you for your ever so shallow support. Fair weather friend.

[donheld]

21. Your comments made a touchdown

Touchdown. I'm with you all the way. We did not drive this wedge issue, i will NOT accept blame. Maybe "scenes of gay marriages" to drive the wedge deeper. We Gay and Lesbians did not show these "scenes of gay marriages" or spin them into horror tales. To those who want to blame us i say Go Cheney yourself.

[Puglover]

42. Someone on Franken yesterday

said that the Democrats support of equal rights is a badge of honor even in defeats. I happen to agree.

[MrTriumph]

53. Flaunting convention did enrage much of the electorate

Blunders of the gay rights movement last spring: 1) The storming of government offices to get marriage licenses. 2) The well publicized mass weddings.

In the 60s Blacks reached out to whites asking for understanding and slowly whites came to see the validity of their position. The leaders of the movement knew it would take time and they'd have to enlist the support of non-blacks.

This last spring gays proved they did not understand how to achieve their goals. They were impatient. They were abrasive to their opposition. They learned nothing from the approach black Americans took to strive toward equality.

Don't take my word for it. ELEVEN states easily passed gay marriage bans and more are going to. Does that sound like progress?

[donheld]

55. Excuse me for being blunt

your full of it. If people flocking to seek equal status under the law is "flaunting" then let me be the first to flaunt.

[Behind the Aegis]

20. Abortion

They also showed vile pictures of abortions. Should we abandon our pro-choice stance because the Rethugs aren't ready for it? They also said we would ban the Bible? Should we erase all pictures of Muslim, Hindu, etc. people because it might offend the Rethugs? Who is setting our platform, them or us? Either stand up for what is RIGHT or crumble in shame!

[KharmaTrain]

24. Who Said Abandon?

Wow...touchy touchy...

Trust me, the moment I hear law passed to start identifying people as "gay" I will be on the streets with my pitch fork and torch.

At this particular time, I consider the issues of an illegal war and the destruction of our overall civil liberties of far more value than of one specific group.

Don't try to do the wingnut trick of mixing abortion and gay rights...two completely different issues. Both have their value but in proportion to the overall interests of both the country and the majority of what is left of the Democratic party.

If gays feel so discriminated against and that anyone who is a Democrat who dares to even raise a hackle is a homophone then this might be a good time to form your own party and then see how good that works.

Yes, the GOOP created the Gay marriage ammendment to use as a wedge issue that they know scores high with their herd and that can can a strong reaction (which it does) from the gay community and creates problems within the Democratic party.

We all need one another here and need to expand, not contract. Now if you're up for building walls, knock yourself out, but I see a far greater need to rebuild a totally destroyed party right now, and the blame games and pity party just don't cut it.

[Behind the Aegis]

26. What an answer!

You seem to think the Democrats should drop the "gay marriage thing." Isn't that abandoning the principle? I am glad to know you don't want us to wear the Scarlet "G," but does it have to come to that before you act?

It is not a "wingnut trick" to make a comparison! Abortion is as big an issue to the religious right as gay issues! It is not a case of apples and oranges!

So, we because we feel discriminated against, we should "fuck off" and start our own party? I thought the Democratic party was for us all! Am I mistaken? I don't think everyone is a homophobe, but some people here do need to deal with their own internalized homophobia!

So what if the GOP created a wedge issue? We let them run with it! We should not back down because it makes them happy!

You may not be for "group" rights, but we all belong to one group or another. I am asking for EQUAL rights, nothing more! If you cannot support that, then perhaps, you should create a party that is more willing to sacrifice its minority members!

[KharmaTrain]

29. Who Said Drop The Gay Marriage Thing???

It's the GOOP that created it! Sheesh. I'm one that believes the GMA is fully unconstitutional and an attempt to create that "Letter G". It creates a wedge that can be used over and over again.

You take things far to literal and are twisting what I'm saying. I'm attempting to communicate, isn't that what you were trying?

I didn't advocate Gays forming their own party...just that if you feel there are so many homophobes here...or the perception of it...then best to go where you feel you're best served and heard.

Yes, the Democratic Party is for ALL, but that also means putting things in perspective and to have priorities. Gay rights are an important issue, but definitely not anywhere near as important as this illegal war or the other rights that ALL American have and will be losing.

Now, please explain to me can many of us do right now? We have no House or Senate and ever growing hostile courts. Yes, we need to unite and stand together, but that's surely not what's happening here. In fact I'll bet the more I type, the more pissed off you or others are getting. If that's the case...sorry, that's how I see it.

I think agree on a majority of fundamental issues and the concept of true EQUAL rights. It's supposed to be the hallmark of the Democratic party to be open and honest about one's feelings, and you asked for it...I gave it.

[Behind the Aegis]

32. Implications

You have implied that the gay marriage thing was too much for the Rethugs and we should have not pressed the issue.

I read your comments as gays should form there own party, but it seems I was wrong, you were saying that if I don't like what is said here I should go elsewhere instead of trying to educate.

Gay rights ARE AS IMPORTANT as the illegal war! We are talking about civil rights! They are just as important! They are as important as the rights we all may lose!

What do we do? We protest! We make our voices heard! We hold the Democrats to the fire and MAKE them back our platform! I do NOT support the war in Iraq and will protest it! Will you protest the discrimination against gays?

I believe in equal rights for ALL, not SOME!

[KharmaTrain]

34. You're Reading Between Lines That Don't Exist

Nope...you read me wrong. My observation was that the Repugnican strategy was to create a wedge issue (such as done with Immigration and Hispanics) using a phony Gay Marriage Ammendment...one that I'm certain wouldn't hold up to a court test (but then that's under the Current court) to rile up the fundies and get them to the polls while attempting to create divisions within the Democrats (which now appears to be occuring...at least it wasn't during the elections).

What I was saying is Rove knew that by stiring up that hornest nest he'd score high with his base and get a big reaction from the gays within the Democratic party. He did. He played it like a violin all the way to election day. That was my initial point, and still is.

In fact I will try to look up a blog which almost cites how the San Francisco Mayor may have gone along with Rove's plans by making such a stink about opening up City Hall that led to a photo circus that ran on TV sets all over the REAL homophobe America. You can't tell me that didn't have a reaction...and that some attempted to exploit it for their own purposes...like, let say a Rosie O'Donnell.

I find it interesting in one paragraph you wonder if I'm intimating that gays should leave the Democratic Party (which I wholely don't) then in the next graph you say "we should hold the Democrats to the fire and make THEM back our platform". That sure doesn't sound uniting to me. Sure doesn't sound like you're quite with the same party I am at the moment. It's ok, I'll wait.

Again, we have little power and we won't for the next 2 years. Everyone's agenda from gay rights to abortion to the war to health care is in peril. Picking one over another at this point will come back to haunt later...it's a slippery slope. Now is the time to evaluate...figure out how to counter the misconceptions and start pulling together quickly, not waiting until 6 months before a Presidential campaign against a machine that has been going at it for years.

I'm not into trading my war for your gay rights. We handle 'em as they come. If there are pushes in states to pass anti-gay legislation, damn right I'll be there either in person or in checkbook to stand down the fundies.

My appeal has been to see if there are ways now to start working at the very grassroots again...develop a Democratic Party that answers from the bottom up, not the top down. To develop strong candidates in local and state elections who will be our ultimate safegaurd of rights and liberties.

[Behind the Aegis]

35. I think you are the one misreading

Wedge issues? If gay rights is one and you imply that immigration and Hispanics are ones too, should we drop them all?

As for holding Demos feet to the fire and make them back our platform, I was saying that they have come out in favor of gay rights and we should hold them accountable, not let them acquiesce because of the Rethugs!

Don't trade your war for my CIVIL rights! That is your choice! But, until I am a FULL citizen, I expect to fight for MY rights! Did you stand down the anti-gay initiatives in the 11 states that just passed the "marriage protection" acts?

Equal rights are for ALL Americans! Not just straight ones!

[KharmaTrain]

36. One More Try...

I'm saying GMA was a wedge issue created by Rove...not by Democrats. The Mary Chenney fiasco was an example of how that was used, too. Kerry didn't say anything any of us would find offensive, but it sure was used to stoke fires all over the place by Rove and his ilk.

Maybe you've given up on being a Democrat, but as detached as I feel at the moment, I still will be a part of this party as long as it stands up for the rights of the common man over the wealthy and powerful.

You make it sound like there was a gay platform. If so, I wasn't sent that memo. I thought it was an overall perspective on many different issues...and based on the importance to the most Americans. Right now we have an immoral war that affects everyone and a health care crisis that is leaving millions of elderly suffering, but without a real voice. Now do you think their voices should be heard? Or how about the blacks who were disenfranchised again and stand to face 1/10th of their population behind bars. We have many problems here...and sorry to say, Gay marriage doesn't fall in that same league in my view.

This isn't horsetrading here, it's working together for a variety of common causes. I view gay marriage in a similar light to inter-racial marriage (and I have gay friends who were the ones who pointed it out to me)...at first it was considered abhorant and alient, but through time it now is not a major issue. Gay marriage already has the popular support of a majority of American people, including me, and I hope that soon it will be a non-issue that will make the concept that someone ever thought about ammending the constitution look as foolish as bigots and racists are portrayed today.

Maybe the problem here is people are more interested in being only a part of the party, not in for the whole deal. I sense you want inclusion, not reaching out. If you consider yourself a Gay American ahead of an American, then we have a problem. If you're an American who is gay and shouldn't be discriminated or legislated against, then we're on the same page.

[omnithrope]

56. Well, this post certainly points towards "yes".

nt

[DrWeird]

2. There's too many freepers.

But we'll get 'em.

[high density]

3. I think there are only a handful of people

who are making a whole shitstorm of noise.

[arcos]

4. well, the results so far are surprising... n/t

[TheWebHead]

5. this is bullshit

Why get all pissed off about people giving serious examination to what caused us to lose on Tuesday? We know two facts, gay civil unions are supported by a small majority of America, while gay marriage is apparently overwealmingly opposed as shown Tuesday and exploited to the max by Rove and the true homophobes in Jesusland on the right.

There was a path to civil rights in this country from its racist past, and it didn't occur by jumping from the base of the mountain to its peak. It was a slow and steady climb, and we're getting closer to the top. Us "homophobes" here as you'd like to paint us are people who in large numbers support gay marriage, but if the backlash only drives the cause further into the ground and takes other liberal causes with it, you have to prescribe tough medicine.

[arcos]

6. 60% of Americans support civil unions or marriage for gays and lesbians...

POLICY TOWARD SAME-SEX COUPLES
TOTAL 2004 2004
...................TOTAL..BUSH KERRY NADER
Legally Marry...... (25%) 22% ..77% .....1%

Civil Unions....... (35%) 52% ..47% .....0%

No Legal Recognition (37%) 70% ..29% ....0%

http://us.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US...

[JETS]

44. These figures also suggest that 72% of Americans

believe that same-sex couples should not legally marry.

[Mike L]

46. So, 75% of voters were against gay marriage.

[Spazito]

8. I believe and hope that it is a small minority and some disrupters...

that are causing the furor. DUers, by a large majority, believe in equal rights, full stop.

Your question is difficult, if not impossible to answer, especially the NO aspect because it can be interpreted that in answering NO one is supportive of that homophobic minority. To answer YES is to tar and feather the majority for, as I stated above, a small minority so I left your poll unanswered.

[babylonsister]

9. I don't have one problem w/gay marriages.

I think gays and lesbians are just as good/moral/fun/in love/ decent/tax-paying as white, black, hispanic, straight, and all the other categories I might have forgotten. For Shrubbie to want to change the constitution to disallow rights of fellow American citizens is wrong.

[Walt Starr]

10. Quite frankly, I see no homophobia on DU

:shrug:

[TeacherCreature]

13. Then you are either blind or have not been looking.

Skinner has even posted a statement about it tonight.

[Walt Starr]

14. Could you gie me a few links to threads

I'm sure I must have missed them all, but I've been busy in a few threads of my own.

[arcos]

31. for example...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1322626&mesg_id=1322626

[Xipe Totec]

57. That Sucker was Tombstoned and Good Riddance

Took too long in my opinion but better late than never.

[TeacherCreature]

38. There are very many of them.

Just look around--it's the story of the night.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1322626&mesg_id=1322626&page=

On edit: The link above is to the worst of them-but it's far from the only one.

[donheld]

22. Many are blind to it

because they don't wanna see it. All they have to do is read this thread to see it.

[baltodemvet]

12. I haven't rtun across it n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

16. See my post

I am appalled at the homophobia here disguised as "concern" for the party. See my thread...Gay Hell at DU

[dolstein]

17. It is NOT homophobic to point out that gay marriage costs Democrats votes

NT

[tedzbear]

18. Why not say, "bigotry against gay marriage cost Democrats votes."

The way you are saying it makes us gays the problem.

[dolstein]

23. Fine. Whatever.

Just as long as you recognize that this issue is toxic for Democrats in red states.

[Behind the Aegis]

25. Red states make the Democratic platform?

So are you conceding that we should allow the "Red States" to dictate the Democratic platform?

[davepc]

27. how about we make the platform red state friendly enough

that we can actually win some of them.

[Behind the Aegis]

28. we can...

..by becoming Red States! We should not tailor our desires to their 'likes' and 'dislikes' or that would be "selling out!"

[davepc]

30. yeah, because we have no common ground with them...sure

Our message of economic and social opportunity that made this party the party of the nation for 80 odd years is just SO DAMN WACKY to those backwards inbred redneck red staters.

United States of America; not the United States of the North East, Upper Midwest, and West Coast and Jesus freaks everywhere else.

[Behind the Aegis]

33. huh?

Your reply was confusing. Are you saying we should allow them to dictate our policies? I don't think so, but I could be wrong...or maybe it is sarcasm run awry.

[Xipe Totec]

59. That's like getting just a little bit pregnant n/t

[killbotfactory]

37. It didn't cost us votes, it brought out the wingnuts in the repub base

There's a difference.

[MrTriumph]

43. Beg to differ

There were many evagelicals that have begun to oppose the Iraq war. But the gay marriage issue is their #1 hot button. We did not pick up those voters. Could it have made a difference in the election if we'd picked up those voters in Ohio? Hmmm.

[donheld]

19. Any homophobia is too much

I've seen it just today so i say too much. I expect more of Progressives.

[mulderig]

41. Kerry's lack of balls

It wasn't the gay marriage issue that cost Kerry votes, or for that matter his pro choice stance. It was his lack of balls when it came to calling Bush to task for wrapping himself in a "mantle of life" while he busies himself denigrating the lives of others.

Kerry should have come out and blasted Bush saying that partial birth abortion hardly occurs in the U.S. It happens around 200 times a year in a country of 260 million people. Bush has almost sent that many people to death in Texas not to speak of Iraq.

Then he should has excoriated him for using gay marriage (an issue of no financial, physical or emotional consequence in the lives of most Americans) to distract from his diabolical handling of the war in Iraq. Not once did Kerry mention the "Lancet" report that estimates 100,000 Iraqis have died since the war began. No, I say. The blame lies squarely on the shoulders on John Kerry and his campaign managers for letting the Republicans lead them about by the nose yet again and being too myopic to see what every reasonable person here could see months ago.

[donheld]

54. Blame lets see no end to the blame game

Welcome to DU :hi:

[trof]

39. No, I think it's just about right.

Oh come ON.
Next question?
;-)

[baldguy]

40. "Too much"? Is there an ACCEPTABLE level?

Gays are just one issue the morlocks & humans differ on. Are we going to give in on EVERY issue to appease them? OK, segregate the blacks. Kill the abortionists. Send the furners home. Keep them jews away from my kids. Fire them Catlicks...

If WE don't fight for what's right, then who will?

[donco6]

45. The homophobia is a bit shocking to me.

Having been here this long and not having seen it in this raw, ugly form before. It's pretty discouraging to see what people really think. But maybe it's time . . .

[TexasSissy]

47. No. There are too many gay activists who care only about their

agenda, IMO. If you are a gay supporting gay marriage, that's fine. But to go on and on with the hundreds of posts about it, as if there's no other issue, or as if this is even in the Dem. Party Platform, tells me that some gay activists in this party want to force their issue onto the party members, many of whom support civil unions but not gay marriage.

There are other issues. You won't get any support by ranting on so about one single issue and refusing to acknowledge that most of America does not agree with your position at this time. This may change. But not because of gay leaders who are naive enough to think that forcing this issue in two states during a heated, close election year would be a good thing. And not because of gay leaders who refuse to try to see it from middle America's point of view, and work on that image that they see. Why should that be done? Well, if you want to make any headway, you need some of those votes, for one thing. Plus, it's just good to try to get people on your side and agree with you. You don't have to work as hard.

There are also the issues of healthcare, unemployment, affirmative action, right to choose, fiscal responsibility, Social Security, Medicare. They are all important, too, yet I see just tons of e-mails about gay marriage. Regroup, focus on the states that passed those constitutional amendments, and work to get the public on your side in those states, as well as in the states that might, but haven't yet, passed such amendments. Just my opinion.

[Skittles]

48. any homophobia at DU is too much

Skinner eloquently addressed this issue

[Endangered Specie]

49. Im sure that anyone who is outright homophobic has been TBed

Discussing how gay issues may or may not have affected the election is NOT homophobic.

Discussing future strategy regarding gay issues and political savyness is NOT homophobic

Being for civil unions is NOT homophobic.

Discussing the overall cultural feeling of America wrt gay rights and how the Democrats need or need not to adapt to it is NOT homophobic.

[brentspeak]

50. It is not "homophobic" to drop the issue of gay marriage

from the Democratic platform. What you might not understand is that most members of the party are not gung-ho about gay marriage even from a personal standpoint. However, those same Democrats are also completely accepting of gays as fellow human beings, and will fight hard to prevent job,etc., discrimination against them. I know I'm one who favors hate-crime legislation, as well as a complete zero-tolerance discrimination when it comes to job-hiring, housing, etc. And I support full partner benefits re. civil unions. But the whole thing about "gay marriage" is almost brand-new, anyway. Support of this brand-new, almost "trendy" issue is not the litmus test for who is and who isn't a "homophobe". No one's life is going to crumble if they can't be pronounced "husband and husband" or "wife and wife".

But all of our lives are going to crumble if we can't get rid of the Bush's and the DeLays -- the ones who are standing by outsourcing our livelihoods and drowning us in debt and launching needless wars.

If the "morals crowd" can't presently tolerate gay marriage, I'm not going to condemn them. Give them a good 10-15 years of living alongside gay people in a zero-tolerance-discrimination situation (as I described above), and likely that attitude will change.

[Minstrel Boy]

51. Wherever there's any, there's too much.

So yes.

DU's going through a collective nervous breakdown this week. It's partly disrupters, and partly fear and confusion. I'm hoping things shake out okay here in the coming days.

[sangh0]

52. Yes, but most of it is imported

from a foreign land whose name begins with an "F" but it's not France

[CBGLuthier]

58. Any is too much

Any homophobia from anyone claiming to be a democrat or LW is too much.

For those of you who suffer from this condition (homophobia), it's OK (kind of) if you must think that way, it is a hard conditioning to break, but to share those sad, backwards views with others is wrong.

[Capn Sunshine]

60. The fact that you have to run this poll

Just asking the question indicates the answer.

Damn, no wonder we lost ; people here can't tell a weak -ass campaign from scapegoats

[Bush was AWOL]

61. Is there too much anti-Conservative/Moderate Dem talk at DU?

Are you willing to negotiate with Democrats that don't feel the same way about the issues as you do? I'm starting to believe no.