I KNOW that's what he means... I just want HIM to admit it (although it is nothing but crazy POOP to say).
I've read this entire thread. I've read a great number of hateful postings and some articulate and witty retorts to those, but I did not find one that answered the question posed. I have a good number of years behind me; I've had a front row seat and some minor parts on the stage for a significant portion of the gay liberation/rights movement, having been a political activist since 1964; add to that I'm a retired civil rights lawyer. Combined I believe I have adequate practical and legal knowledge to give your question a shot. First there is no gay agenda per se, not in the sense of an agreed upon compact or a devised battle plan. Gay people are as diverse as are their straight counterparts. Just as it is impossible to attain unanimity among heterosexuals so it is with homosexuals. So the idea of any gay person or group, no matter how representative, setting an agenda is laughable. There are, however, a number of issues upon which most (certainly not all) gay people and gay organizations (yes, even the gay Log Cabin Republicans) do agree. Succinctly we seek equal rights, not special rights. Among these are: The right to keep a job based on our job performance without fear of being fired for who we are or how we make love. The right, without regard to our sexual orientation, to live where we want and can afford so long as we maintain our abode, don't disturb the neighborhood with noise or raucous activities, pay our rent or mortgage on time, and behave civilly toward our neighbors. In short nothing more or less than is expected of any other member of the community. The right to marry and live with the person we love. The right for that person to be a full legal partner in life so that he or she can visit and make medical decisions when we are in a hospital and/or incapacitated; may obtain benefits such as social security upon our deaths; be recognized as our closest relative; inherit in first place absent a will; and all other martial benefits that appertain to heterosexual partners who have exercised their right to marriage. Some, though not all of these things can be legally designated without marriage, however they require a significant amount of time and money to put in place. When gay marriage is fully recognized these marriage benefits come automatically. The right to adopt. Both gay men and lesbians have parental instincts. Just as with heterosexuals this does not apply to all homosexuals, but those for whom it does should have as much right to seek to adopt as anyone else. To base denial on sexual orientation alone is the very essence of bigotry. To say a gay father is more likely to sexually molest his adopted son than a straight father is to molest his adopted daughter is preposterous and without a scintilla of supporting data. Are there cases of a father molesting an adopted son? I've never heard of one, but no doubt it has happened as I've heard of biological fathers who have molested their natural sons. At the same time I've heard of straight fathers who have molested their adopted daughters and the number of biological fathers who have had incestuous relations with their natural daughters is reported to be 16,000 per year in the United States. Based on the statistics it may well be that a gay man, who is screened, is less likely to molest his adopted son than a biological father is to have incestuous contact with his natural daughter. The right to openly serve our country in the military. Patriotism and love of country is not the exclusive right of heterosexuals. There is no verifiable data that legitimately supports denying gay men and lesbians from serving openly as they have surreptitiously done as long as there has been a military. The right to display affection for those we love without fear of ridicule or hostile reaction. While I, personally find any excessive public display of affection, gay or straight, to be mildly offensive, I can see no rational reason to ban either so long as it does not become openly sexual. At the same time gay couples and friends must enjoy the same rights to publicly show their love and affection when greeting one another in the form of an embrace and/or kiss just as straight friends might. And if a partnered or married same-sex couple have been physically separated for a period of time, with one away serving in the military or on business or for whatever reason, they should be able to display the same amount of love and affections in an airport lobby as any straight couple might, rather than having to bottle it up until being in private. The right to openly be who and what we are. The very notion, expressed in some of the posts on this thread, that gay people should have to hid or return to the closet is offensive and deliberately hateful. I remember, back in the day, a bigot, much the same as these, screaming at me that if I didn't have anything to be ashamed of why did I keep it secret. Now the homophobic chant is apparently: OK be gay, but keep it secret. Heads you win, tails I lose. NO THANKS. I don't know about your house, but in our home the only gay thing about our closets are the designers whose names are on the clothing labels. Free to advocate for gay information to be part of school sex education. Let me deal with the old bugaboo first. There is NO SUCH THING as gay recruiting. Our community is made up strictly of volunteers. I know there have been millions of gay men, who in a sad attempt to conform have attempted to lead a straight life, marry and have children. There really is not such incentive on the gay side; instead gay people have to confront prejudice, hate, violence and discrimination. How many straight people do think are going to lured over by those advantages? Ask yourself, if you're a straight man could Brad Pitt tempt you to have a roll in the hay with him? If you're a gay man, does looking at Angelina or JaLo want to make you leave your boyfriend? You're right, both ideas are nonsense; so too is the idea that gays can recruit even if they wanted to. The whole point of including information on homosexuality in sex education courses is that there are doubtless kids in those classes who are going to be gay. They deserve as much information about their sexuality as does any other kid and maybe more. When a kid who is gay, where does he turn to for information? His heterosexual mom and dad are not very likely up on all the facts, if he's comfortable telling them. One of the reasons for sex education to begin with is the reluctance of parents to speak about sex with their children. How much less is that when the child is gay? Going through puberty is hard, add to that the realization that your sexuality is the opposite of most people and it becomes dreadful. We want gay sex education to help alleviate the torture confronting these kids. Gay is the only minority in which the person is left to deal with her or his minority status completely alone. If you are African-American or Hispanic or any other minority you at least have the refuge of your home and family to support you and give you comfort and protection. Not so for the young gay kid. He may very well hear homophobic comments at his or her own dinner table from the lips of those individuals from whom he or she should expect unconditional love. While it is too late for those gay men and lesbians who have reached adulthood, we still know how important it is; if we don't advocate for it, who will? So not a tool of recruitment, but a plea for knowledge and comfort. At heart, if there is a "Gay Agenda" it is the agenda of America. A group of citizens petitioning their government for a redress of their grievances that include being granted the same basic rights as their counterparts. Just as black Americans demand the same right as white Americans so too gay Americans seek the same rights as straight Americans; in both cases hateful bigots notwithstanding. It is this inexorable movement toward LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL that has made our great nation the envy of the world.
Are LGBT people a separate and distinct group that deserves affirmative action/special consideration in admissions and hiring in the same way African Americans have received such action/consideration due to past discrimination?
And that's why you won't win any converts. That's why we prefer to take a hard stance on DOMA and other issues. Because we know your agenda and while you claim to not have one you keep fighting to acquire it. That long diatribe is good to show in front of us heterosexuals so we know what it is we are fighting against. It'll help unify us to keep being hard cased about all gay issues. Because every time we give an inch you try to take the whole enchilada.
Which points do you have an issue with then? That is hardly a dark and evil agenda, seems very reasonable to me. Equal treatment.
The GLBTQ community may be recognized as a suspect class. That is not the same as being entitled as a group to the remedy of affirmative action. Gay people encountered prejudice in the work place or in attending college only if their status became known. Therefore as class affirmative action would be inappropriate as a remedy. Discrimination against members of the "gay" suspect class can effectively be addressed on a case by case basis as it occurs. Though I worked as a civil rights attorney my area of expertise is the rights of disadvantaged children and the developmentally disabled. An attorney dealing with gay rights may well have a different take. Still given recent court actions I feel fairly certain that my opinion is correct. African-American people, whose ancestors were forced into enslavement beginning nearly 400 years ago, have since emancipation faced 150 years of degradation, humiliation and second class status. With such a history of being disadvantaged the only way to redress such great injustices was to use such tools as affirmative action. The experience of gay people, while often receiving equally degrading, humiliating and inferior treatment was only imposed if the individual's sexual orientation was exposed or revealed. Most gay people were able to maintain a heterosexual facade and pass, often being very successful professionally and financially. Therefore as a class a remedy such as affirmative action is neither necessary nor appropriate.
My post was not intended to convert one such as yourself. I've learned long ago that there are some minds that can never be changed no matter how much truth and logic you present. My intention was to clearly explain what most gay people are seeking and direct that explanation to folks who are fair and reasonable. For too long the term "gay agenda" has been used to raise fear and suspicion. I've laid it all out on the table, to anyone with a open mind I believe our goals are reasonable. If you don't believe they are I challenge you to articulate, for all to see, just how they are not. If you do not feel I have correctly characterized a gay agenda, then you lay it all out for us and support it with facts to prove that what you write is in fact the agenda of gay Americans. I await your response.
Many conservatives will accept equal treatment for LGBT people, but will not accept their categorization as a suspect class. Only, and I mean only, African Americans can claim that, and then only some of them. Even then, it is very problematic. Sasha and Malia Obama do not need affirmative action. The ideal of individual liberty and the concept of equal protection require that everyone have equal rights. When this sinks in most conservatives will adopt this position.
Perhaps you don't understand and I can only speak for myself I accept and deliver equal treatment for ALL People. With respect to what you get within the USA, that is extended to all LEGAL citizens. What i do not accept is the divide that for some reason or other it seems liberals continue to support. I don't care if you are red, black, yellow, white, polka-dot, Asian, Hispanic or with whom you have sex and how you do it. i view us all as US citizens and there is no need for segmentation. You aren't an "Italian American", you are an "American". You are not a "gay male" (who cares how you have sex), you are a male. The fact that this forum has a subsection of "gay and lesbian rights" is part of the problem. Can you actually believe that some people want to segment society based upon how 3% of the population has sex? What's wrong with just being a man or a woman?
The term "suspect class" has specific legal meaning that I won't get into. What your post refers to is identity politics. If LGBT people attempt to use identity politics they will meet the same level of contempt and hatred as does any one who refuses to accept assimilation.
I believe you're confusing suspect class with affirmative action. They are not the same. A suspect class is any identifiable group that is or may be discriminated against based on being a member of the class. Therefore women, racial minorities, ethnic groups, GLBTQ, members of some religions all could be recognized as members of a suspect class. Designation as a suspect class means a higher degree of scrutiny is given once one has made a prima facie showing of discrimination. Affirmative action however is entirely different. It is a remedy applied by the courts to give a group that has experience significant discrimination over a long period of time, a degree of compensatory advantage to offset a playing field that is not level. I agree that gays do not qualify for even temporary advantage. This is due to being in a class where most members were able to mask their status, thus shielding themselves from pervasive discrimination. I do not fully agree with you that African Americans are the only suspect class that would qualify for affirmative action. I would argue that Native Americans could easily qualify for affirmative action, if they pursued it as a class. Of course I totally agree with your final point. No group or individual is fully free if equal protection of the law is not extended to everyone.
I worked for the New York State Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities and then for a non-profit agency that provided a full range of social, psychological, legal, residential and rehabilitative services for disadvantaged youths and the higher functioning developmentally disabled.
Enforcement and advocacy work. That's good, clean work. Thanks for the heads up about suspect groups, etc.
In a perfect world everyone would think and act as you do toward your fellow beings. Unfortunately it is unlikely that the world will achieve perfection in this area anytime soon. For all of history humankind has divided itself and it is such a natural, human tendency that a person doesn't even recognize that she or he is doing it. You yourself, as careful as you are to treat everyone neutrally, have made a political division in declaring what you "do not accept is the divide that for some reason or other it seems liberals continue to support." Did you even consider for a moment that you were dividing people into groups and making assumptions about them based on their group membership? There are divisions in society and inevitably the side that controls the wealth and power will attempt to dominate, intimidate and oppress even if they do so in a subtle, subconscious and unintended manner. Rarely does the powerless side attempt to gain, much less achieve equality under law without the assistance and support from members of the power class, those labeled as liberals. Liberals didn't create divisions, they merely recognize and work to reduce them. .
quite the contrary. Be misleading people to believe that they are a 2nd class citizen and can only succeed by punishing those who have succeeded only causes those to believe they can't do it on their own. Maybe it gives those who try to oush that a feeling of deity, who knows. I'd leave that to a psychologist to try and determine the motivation. It's not because how one has sex makes you any less a man or woman so the only reason I can see to try and push forward the nonsense is that it must serve some type of psychological satisfaction to those who wish to be in control Who knows. It makes no sense to me to slap on labels and tell group A that they can't do it on their own because they have sex this way. Or, to tell group b that they can't do it on their own because they are Asian Clearly there must be some reason for the "gay movement" to push their militant style. But, it has nothing to do with equality because other than what we do in the privacy of our bedrooms, there is no difference. Honestly, I think it's just a cottage industry which became larger and a money maker and those who are easily misled are being played.
The reason for the gay movement for civil rights is the persecution they have endured at the hands of those who would restrict those rights. What is militant about that? They called women militant when they sought the vote. They called blacks militant when they wanted a cup of coffee at a lunch counter, or free use of all the seats on the bus. Your use of "militant" makes you part of the problem. You are one of the ones slapping labels on people who just want the free exercise to pursue their happiness. Unless you want to step up and support gay people in their quest to have the same legal rights as couples that are supported by law in marriage, and not be demanding of them keeping their choices in the bedroom, as straights are not asked to as they hold hands at the local square dance or kiss each other goodbye for the day on the train platform, then you are part of the problem, trying to conceal themselves as an open minded embracer of all people. Are you willing to show your support, or reveal yourself as something else?
Have you seen people go-off about their political views (even the smallest thing)? You are making the same mistake that so many other human beings make about people (in general, not just gays). The mistake is that those 'judging' others, don't realize how others identify with what defines them. YOU may not grasp it, but homosexual people don't just put-on 'homosexuality' as if they are picking what to wear for a day; for all they (and even others) know, they have always been the way they are. Have you ever tried to make someone try a food that they KNOW they don't like, yet you persist in trying to persuade or convince them that they SHOULD try something? Perhaps you've only witnessed that, in many cases frustration, aggravation and anger are the end-result. It is no different with homosexual HUMAN beings. And that is the point, homosexual PEOPLE are HUMAN (just like you). Is anyone going to come along and convince you to NOT be 'heterosexual' (inside, where the visceral definition of yourself resides)? Probably not. And you would likely react in some pretty serious ways to someone questioning your 'sexuality'. So, how do you expect homosexual people to respond or react socially to the BS that so many people have surely subjected them to? Let me tell you now, I strongly resent every time that someone questions my sexuality. I'm a professional military man (with every war since the 80's Gulf War under my belt), so I control my dislike as I've been trained to do. But make no mistake about it, YOU and others who likely try to understand homosexuality from only your own 'heterosexual' life experiences... have no license (social or otherwise) to define or negatively judge ANY other individual who is homosexual merely as YOU would please to. In essence, that's foolish, insensitive BS; you should expect only negative responses from people when presenting such a dehumanizing approach before them. HUMAN sexuality involves RELATIONSHIPS... not only what we do as we physically express ourselves during sexual relations. It is a person's expressions of interest in prospective mates, partners, and even serious relationships leading to 'marriage'. There is a lot that is common to human beings overall, but there is that sticking point with many, which tells them that ONLY "heterosexuality" is right, correct or moral. And homosexuals after facing that for many generations, are rightly learning to FIGHT against such thinking. Overall, they are no more "militant" about who/what they are, than today's political "Conservative" might be about increasing taxes. If you expect homosexual people to be particularly tolerant of people questioning their sexuality or putting them down... then you are making a great mistake; those days are in the past. And what you say above... is one of those infuriating expressions, that to fully understand the negative power of, you must apply to something which defines you as a human being. Gay people aren't just going through some phase, or taking on homosexuality as some "lifestyle". When a person is "homosexual", that is what they are; I'm not talking about those who might commit some 'act' here/there... I'm talking about people like myself; a man who could have a very beautiful woman dance NAKED in front of me, and never consider a single thought of doing anything more than being there; my weener resting calmly in my pants like a piece of fully-cooked pasta. I'm being semi-graphic in my description of that, to illustrate to SOME that truly homosexual people don't prowl the earth, 'choosing' or 'mistaking' what it is that attracts them to a particular person. Sexual-orientation, is NOT equal to sexual-preference. Gay people don't generally switch-gears at will and on some whim of fancy; it is erroneous to think/imagine they do that. So, if you find that some homosexual people are more "militant" (or flat out angry) than you expect, it would do you and any other person well to examine your own thoughts about what you think/believe homosexuality is truly about. It's as complex and substantial as heterosexuality; a LOT of people either don't realize it, or they willfully refuse to accept it as a reality.
a woman is a different gender from males and easily identified. An Asian is easily identified. A black personm easily identified. Unless you feel it important to tell me what you do in your bedroom how in the blue moon do I know that you are gay? And, to top it off, what relevance does how you have sex have on the job you do or your ability to learn or interact? To try and make any ties to how you have sex to being similar to people of different skin colors is not even close. I can tell who is black and who isn't I will never get trying to segregate yourself or create some type of new gender based upon how you engage in sex.
well written piece johhny c and much thought went into it. But, at the end, your graphic description is based upon sex. Do you think every guy who had the dancing naked woman would pop a woody? On several occasions i've been to nude baches and didn't go to full mast at the sight of every woman. It comes right down to sex. So please tell me since you are in the military. (and thanks for your service by the way) Does a heterosexual male fire the rifle any better than a gay male? Does a gay male follow orders any better than a heterosexual male? They are the same aren't they? I bet they put on their uniforms in similar fashion as well. I can only think of one thing that the heterosexual soldier does differently than the gay soldier. I'm sorry if it does not serve your "agenda" but that is the only difference.
