Why is it that so many on DU feel it is acceptable for Human Rights to be "marginalized"

[saracat]

and that it is somehow valid to show "respect" for a person who considers large numbers American citizens to be of a certain class not entitled to civil rights and comparable to the worst of criminals?

We condemn other countries for Human Rights violations but yet we are asked by our PE to give respect to a man who practices Human Rights violations? And we are told it is acceptable to allow him to call on God on our behalf and on behalf of the United States of America at an Inaugural convocation?

We would be outraged if we allowed David Duke to give the convocation but because this is "only" concerning the insults to "women and the GBTL community we are to applaud this because Warren may bring the Evangelicals to realize the truth of Global warming?

And since when is an issue of basic humanity considered a subject for "disagreement"?

I want to know WHY it is felt we owe these opinions or anyone who holds them respect? And if so, do we owe the same respect to hate groups as they too have "opinions" ?

[Heidi]

1. Not to mention those who equate homosexuality with criminal behaviors

like incest and pedophilia. My husband and I (along with our Swiss goddaughters, sister-in-law and her partner and my mother-in-law) will be burning candles for 24 hours beginning at 6 p.m. ET tomorrow, and if anyone asks us why (and you can be sure people will ask because I have an exhibit going on in my studio through Christmas Eve), I'm just gonna tell 'em it's because my country has persecuted at least 10 percent of its population for as long as I can remember.

ETA: Light up the Night: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x101473

[Solon]

2. According to many on DU, that's not even hate speech!

:grr:

[Heidi]

3. They should be banned just like those who voted that AA Christians are "dogshit."

There's a prececent: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2742350

[Solon]

7. I don't expect it, on DU, homophobia isn't as serious as racism.

And that's the simple truth.

[Heidi]

10. The Admins listen.

Bend their ear.

[saracat]

12. Sexism isn't important either.

Homophobia and sexism are viwed as "finge" issues not to be taken seriously.

[mondo joe]

22. I don't like it, but I must agree. There are very different standards. NT

[saracat]

4. And don't forget women are equally despised and equated with the Holocaust!

[Heidi]

5. What? (nt)

[saracat]

11. Warren despises women as well as the GBTL Community. He compares

reproductive rights to the :Holocaust" Seriously.

[JackBeck]

26. Hmm...why does this not surprise me in the least bit?

:hug:

I'm planning on attending tomorrow night in NYC. Hopefully, it will have stopped snowing by then. We tend to get hit harder out here in the burbs.

[Marrah_G]

6. Because as long as it is not THEIR rights, it is okay

[Heidi]

9. Isn't it interesting how human rights become so much more personal

and URGENT when it's the bigots' rights in question?

[Warren Stupidity]

8. At this point the only answer I come up with is 'homophobia'.

[Jim Lane]

13. There's more sentiment for marginalizing the question of who gives this two-minute invocation

The reaction to the Warren selection is far different from the reaction to Prop 8. You can't explain that difference by saying that gay rights are being marginalized. So what does explain it?

Partly it's Obama's role. Many DUers are strong supporters of Obama, and are more likely to get defensive about criticism directed at him than about criticism directed at 52% of the California electorate.

The more significant factor, though, is the comparative importance of these two issues. I just can't get very worked up over the question of who gives a brief religious invocation. To us agnostics and atheists, having any member of the clergy performing such a role is a basis for resentment. Yes, there's some symbolism involved in the choice of Warren, but symbolism can be overrated. The actual policies that the new administration adopts are much more important. The curtailment of Californians' right to marry is much more important. Even within the context of gay rights, the attention that DUers are paying to Rick Warren is absurdly excessive.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

14. Ahem.

[ananda]

15. Stockholm Syndrome?

nt

[QC]

16. Because issues that do not personally affect them do not matter.

It's about as morally squalid a position as one can hold, but now it's being marketed as "pragmatism" and "post-partisanship."

[jonnyblitz]

17. some of our fellow gays seem to find it exceptable even. nt

[WeDidIt]

18. When one is a member of a majority, it's easy to dismiss the minority

as something less than human.

This has been true throughout human history.

I just thought that being "progressive" meant rising above that, is all.

[Solon]

19. Because they don't think GLBT people and their civil rights are important. n/t

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mondo joe]

21. Actually, marriage is a basic human right and a civil right.

And people ARE stopping gay people from being happy, from working and from enjoying freedom.

[mondo joe]

23. More information for douchebags:

Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 16

1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.


Loving v Virginia:

The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.

[JohnnieGordon]

25. People get fired for being gay all the time!

How ridiculous for you to deny that. And in the vast majority of states, including MINE btw, there are no legal protections for gays in employment and housing. No one's stopping me from being happy? Homophobes have ganged up on me and greatly reduced my ability to find happiness since I started being identified as gay in the 6th grade.

It's one thing to be insensitive about homophobia, it's quite another to seemingly have no concept of it's existence.

[1awake]

24. marginalized...

.. the GLBT community has been marginalized for years on end.. a fact I'm sure you have more insight into than I.

I have a question for anyone. I have seen more times than I can count straight people like me, tell the GLBT community members to wait.. bide their time.. sit back and shut up for now.. your time will come.. etc. My question is when?? When will it come, because it always seems to take a back seat to whatever the pressing issue of the day might be.. and make no mistake, there will ALWAYS be a pressing issue of the day. So when??

[S_E_Fudd]

27. Strawman arguments - Day 2...

Your post makes 3 (at least) false assumptions...

1. That by having Rick Warren give the invocation at the inaugural ceremony Obama believes it is ok to marginalize gay citizens. This is factually innaccurate.

2. That by extension then anyone here who agrees with Obama also believes it is ok to marinalize gay citizens..

3. The best way to convince the 10's of millions of Americans who follow Warren (and others like him) that do believe it is ok to marginalize gay Americans, is to shun them - ignore them and hope they go away, or use the type of divisive rhetoric that will simply harden them into their positions...

So I reject the entire premise of your question....

On the last note I find it somewhat ironic that the same people who howled in protest when Obama was accused of NOT wanting to engage with terrorist supporting regimes in Iran, Syria, North Korea and Cuba don't want him to engage opponents here at home...

[Ozma]

28. "Marginalized" by a prayer at a ceremony? I'm sorry

but your hyperbole is over the top.

As a gay person, I'm willing to roll with these slight insults to my sensibilities as long as the rights of gay people gets advanced in the next four years.

[saracat]

29. When "respect" and "honor" is paid by the President of the United States to a person who is saying a

"prayer" for the guidence of that president and is paraying on behalf of "All " Americans, you can bet Women's and GBTL rights are being marginalised. At the press conference they were already referred to as "issues" and not "Civil Rights".