The N-bomb is dropped on black passersby at Prop 8 protests

Blame Ourselves

We didn't "lose" to the fundies on Prop. 8. We threw away the remarkable gift of marriage that the California Supreme Court handed us last Spring.

The No on 8 fight was one of the most inept battles ever waged by gay groups, even surpassing all the incompetent battles of the past. It was disorganized, unfocused, timid, underfunded (until late on). The fight proved every joke ever made about the incompetence of committees doing anything.

True, some pros were brought in late on, and they kept the loss from being even worse. But it was too late.

The entire movement has been set back years because of this incompetence. The religious right has been heartened and strengthened by their victory, and they'll now move on toward amendments in West Virginia, North Carolina, New Mexico, Iowa, and the other states. And they'll win many of those battles. Marriage legislation in New York, now that Democrats control both houses? Forget about it.

---

by: S1 @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 15:32:58 PM CST

Bullsh*t--this was not a badly run campaign

FACT 1:
NO ON 8 raised more money to fight Proposition 8 then the annual budgets of most of the LGBT organizations in the state of California (between 35 and 40 million dollars, in 5 months).

FACT 2:
Only one anti-gay marriage measure had ever been defeated before (in Arizona) and that state amended dits constitution on Tuesday, 56-44%. We're now at 1 win and 29 losses.

FACT 3:
Every single major newspaper in the state of California, plus every major elected official (Both Senators, the Governor, the mayors of the 5 largest Cities) all endorsed NO ON 8.

FACT 4:
The field campaign for NO on 8 had more than 10,000 volunteer shifts filled BEFORE Labor day 2008, more than any other field campaign in the history of California ballot measure.

It pisses me off to hear no end to monday morning quarterbacking from people who weren't even there.

The campaign was not perfect (hello, a TICK mark in the NO and GREEN colors?) but it was not the dysfunctional mess it is being characterized as.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Mad Professah Lectures http://madprofessah.com
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." George Orwell

---

by: Mad Professah @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 16:12:15 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sorry, but the NO Campaign failed

The No on 8 Campaign was all but invisible while the proposition trailed in the polls. It wasn't mobilized until weeks after the Mormons started going door too door and waging their ground campaign. The pros who were brought in to run this campaign basically sat on their butts and let us get complacent about it.

Frankly, I've been wondering if it was intentionally thrown in order to generate a court case to settle the issue once and for all, which in my opinion is a potentially brilliant but extremely risky gamble since if the CA Supreme Court rules that it is a revision and not an amendment, and therefore invalid it ends any further attempts to put it on the ballot. If the CA Supremes vote to uphold I see it going to the federal courts to determine the constitutionality of revoking a right by popular vote and possibly the constitutionality of same-sex marriage bans altogether. Again if the SCOTUS rules in our favor, which if history is any indicator they should regardless of whether or not they are personally conservative as in the CA Supremes, it pretty much ends the argument although it doesn't keep the bigots from trying to figure out how to bring it up again like they keep trying to do with abortion.

Let us not forget our most cherished rights are those we fought tooth and nail to get. This is a setback and there are many battles to be fought before this war is over.

Never try to train a pig. It's a waste of time and it annoys the pig.

---

by: cali_techie @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 00:57:13 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Blame Ourselves

I totally agree.  It was disgustingly pathetic on our side.

---

by: Marsha @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 16:16:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I prefer to the blame the fundies:

James Dobson et al, all the fundie churches, especially the Mormon Church, the vast majority of Repugs., and most of all, the 52% of Californians who voted yes on H8, regardless of their race.

I completely agree that this racism rearing its ugly head in our community needs to be nipped in the bud, stat!  

Tax the Christian Taliban!

---

by: Wolfgang @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:51:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sad.

All of this hating from us at the African-American community will get us nowhere. We've have got to stop this madness of blaming and focus on the ones that funded this amendment in the first place.

---

by: Robyn @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 15:38:33 PM CST

Racial Tension

It is harder to understand why African-Americans would support Prop 8 than the other groups...  because they should understand.  But, fundamentally, this is an education issue and black people have been taken for granted (probably not least by people like me who think they ought to understand), and we have work to do.

---

by: tro @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 15:39:07 PM CST

Sometimes I feel so ashamed...

...to be part of the human race.

---

by: johnbinpt @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 15:49:02 PM CST

The Cycle Repeats

This reminds me so much of the early labor movement, when companies like Ford would deliberately bring in African-American scab workers to divide and conquer when strikes were threatened or occurred. We know that the anti-gay hate movement used exactly these kind of wedge politics to encourage African-American pastors to speak out in favor of anti-gay hate amendments in 2004, in part as a way of getting AA support for the criminal Bush regime. The LGBT movement did nothing in the past four years to counter that effort, so we should not be surprised to see higher percentages among California AA voters, even if they are negligible in the overall CA vote. As an aside, I also wonder how many voters were just confused by the "No means Yes" vote for this amendment (isn't that a chronic problem with this kind of wording) and how many were swayed by the deceptive advertising indicating Obama supported Prop 8, when in truth his anti-gay positions are not that harsh.

But we have also seen this before in other marginalized groups. I am of Irish descent and from Massachusetts, and it has always been shameful to me to see how many of the die-hard Boston racists were Irish-Catholics. It seems once a former minority gets political power, we see the exact same kind of scapegoating of other groups, as a means to retain that power. You can see that in quotes like the Washington Post had today "gay people were never considered a third of a person" (the sad part of that quote is the historical ignorance - it was 3/5 of a person). It all boils down to the idea that civil rights are a zero-sum game.

On the other hand, we live in a racist society, just as we live in a sexist society. It should not be shocking that there is racism in the LGBT community, any more than it should be shocking that "straight-acting" gay men are considered more attractive and more valuable than "nellie queens." You cannot seperate a sub-group from the larger culture it inherits.

The question is how do we reach out, not just to the AA community, but to all conservative religious groups? Is it as simple as my hanging a pride flag outside my house to educate my AA neighbors that I am part of the group they are taught to hate in some of the DC churches? Do we need to highlight the role of Bayard Rustin in the Civil Rights movement? Do we need to educate people on the federal and Supreme Court decisions that were required before the LGBT community could have freedom of speech (didn't happen until the 1950s), freedom of assembly (1970s) and freedom of association (2003)? Does outreach to the AA community differ from the outreach to other minority communities, like Latinos, who also voted for Prop 8?

I'd like to hear your thoughts, Pam, on how we constructively attack these issues.  

---

by: CPT_Doom @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 15:50:10 PM CST

Great Post!

If only one thing comes out of this I hope it's that the assumption other minority groups will AUTOMATICALLY understand/empathize with our plight and issues gets nipped in the butt.   History is rife with too many frightening examples of the oppressed's eager willingness to spread the pain.   As a black gay man, am I disappointed in the AA poll numbers?  Yes!  Do I think the gay community has rested on its collective laurels with regard to outreach to this and other communities?  Yes!  But dwelling on these facts and using them as ammo to hurl at one another across the cultural divide gets us nowhere.  How about, for once, we wise up and use this information in inform our next steps.  

Let me remind everyone that the gay marriage struggle is now 0 for 30.  What other civil rights movement in the modern era can lay claim to such a disastrous record?  That record purposefully leaves out the first AZ vote (which eventually passed this year), though that campaign has a lot of "lesson learned" with regard to building coalitions with groups we think instinctively hate us.  Tons of outreach was done in AZ senior communities to defeat the first measure.  Imagine if that effort had been duplicated in CA this year (with regard to the "over 65" crowd and others).  Full disclosure:  I don't live in CA so I can't say how the No on 8 campaign was run.  But you can't look at these poll number (regardless of how accurate you think they are) and honestly think enough outreach was done.

Like the AZ seniors, the AA community is no monolith.  There are inroads to be had and hearts and minds that can be swayed.  One thing I like to point out to my black non-gay friends and family is that, of all the presidential candidates in the history of this nation, only 4 have ever advocated for equal marriage rights for gays.  The punch line?  2 of them were black (Al Sharpton and Carol Mosely Braun).  Also, like the overall AA community, the "black church" is not a singularity.  There are MANY progressive churches and pastors who advocate on our behalf (the infamous Rev. Jeramiah Wright for instance).  Hell, if Louis Farrahkan (of his own volition) can invite black gay organizations to participate in the Million More March, other linkages with AA communities, churches and organizations are surely out there.  We just need to find them.  And your "one person at a time" approach is as good a place as any to start.  Additional suggestions:

- Don't reinvent the wheel.  There are many minority community-leaders and politicians on record as having some (if not full) support for this struggle.  These guys have rolodexes full of the right folks to approach about roundtables, info-sessions and town hall meetings.  Gays have supported them with our votes and it's time to get a little something in return.

-  Learn from the successes of others.  I never thought I'd see blacks marching with Latinos during this summer's immigration protest, but it happened.  And because the Latino community MADE it happen.  Their strategies may not work across every community but it's a start.

- Let's not write off our friends as enemies.  I live in Chicago and I was quite surprised to learn that some of the staunchest supporters for the civil unions legislation be crafted in IL are our "down-state" Republican lawmakers.  Granted, it's not marriage, but give credit to the IL folks for approaching these guys to compromise on something that might have a chance of passing.

That's my two cents.  Anyone else care to add?

---

by: RickyG @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:15:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Frankly, I'm perplexed by this entire conversation.

Not the part where white gay men are some of the filthy-mouthed bigoted assholes in SoCal, which is sad and true. The part where we're healing this tragic divide at a time of crisis for couples of all races whose CA marriage licenses may have lost their legal force.

In CA, the AA community is small and the payoff in votes may not be there.

Mathematically, it's impossible for the spin (OMG the black women took my rights! they were right here in my pocket!) to be true--there are not enough black folk in CA who can and do vote for the slur to be accurate.

Having figured that out, I question why the road to getting our equality back has to go through those voters.

I'm strongly in favor of a grassroots campaign that reaches out to communities of color, but not because I think that's the best way to reverse Prop 8's damage to our families--because it's the right thing to do.

Getting there is half the fun. The process of bridging the racial divide will be rewarding for its own sake and will benefit my own family immensely. I'm in favor. But not as a quid pro quo, because that doesn't make sense.

But wait, there's more!

---

by: PhoenixRising @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 00:09:51 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Insanity

Sometimes I don't understand people. People get screwed, and then screw others? This shouldn't happen, ever. Horrible, and despicable.

Humans suck.

---

by: justnick @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 15:53:07 PM CST

Blaming the black community is wrong on many levels, but....

...the numbers do not support the notion that blacks gave Prop 8 its margin of victory.

Exit polls say that 70% of the black vote was in favor of Proposition 8 and that African-Americans comprised 10% of the vote.

I'm not sure that exit polls are good for this kind of math, but it appears that even if no African-Americans voted in the California election, Proposition 8 would have still passed.

Total votes in favor of Prop 8 - 5,419,478
Total votes against Prop 8 - 4,908,887
(sum total vote 10,328,235)

estimated number of black votes - 1,032,836
estimated black votes in favor of Prop 8 - 722,985
estimated black votes against Prop 8 - 309,851

Estimated votes for Prop 8 without black votes - 4,696,493
Estimated votes against Prop 8 without black votes - 4,599,036

So it appears that even in no African-Americans showed up at the polls, Proposition 8 still would have passed by approximately 100,000 votes.  We shouldn't be pointing the finger of blame at the black community.

If you want allies, you have to be an ally.

---

by: dale @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 15:55:12 PM CST

awesome, dale!

Insightful math that needs to be propagated across queerdom quickly, as well as to the Hillary supporters who want people to second guess the Obama nomination!

---

by: greatwhitebear @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 16:08:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Also:

The poll itself was in no way an accurate representation of...much of anything, actually.

The poll was 2,240 people.

10% of the voters were black (as compared to 6.7%, which is the total black population of the state)

70% of black voters polled said they voted yes

Rounding up, that's a grand total of 157 people.

The number of white voters who voted yes? Around 670.

The map also shows that the main no counties were all along the coast. Everything east of (and including) Sacramento went no, along with Riverside and OC. The only one of those areas that has a significant black population is Sacramento.

---

by: Darkrose @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 16:28:32 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Missing the point perhaps

The main curiosity of the data is that 94% of the black vote was for Obama - of those 70% voted for Prop 8.  Latino's voted similarly but 71% went for Obama, and 53% of them voted for Prop 8.  In fact, all the groups listed went basically 50/50 on the Prop 8 vote.

Why didn't the black and Latino votes go more for the NO-8 side than they did?  Isn't that what one would expect from a  lopsided Obama voter percentage???

Had that happened, this discussion wouldn't be going on.

 

---

by: dkl @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 17:26:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Poll data flawed

http://www.dailykos.com/hotlis...

This post lays it out with all of the numbers crunched, but the basic idea is that the poll methodology was deeply flawed, and should not be taken as an accurate summation of how the vote went.

---

by: Darkrose @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 17:33:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

i can't get that page to load.

is it possible for your to paste the text in here?

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:02:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

See below

Dale linked to it. My link fu is made of fail--sorry.

---

by: Darkrose @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 19:54:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

If the 10% figure is absurdly inflated, it only increases the absurdity

...of blaming the black community.

Darkrose, your link took me to Daily Kos's State of the Union homepage.  I see that a recommended diary is Shanikka's Facts Belie the Scapegoating of Black People for Proposition 8.  She argues that the estimate of the black vote being 10% of the total turnout is absurdly high - that it would require about 90% of eligible black voters to actually show up at the polls.

If the 10% figure is inflated, then the calculations I did would have to be adjusted. They would then show that Prop 8 passed by an even greater margin than 100,000 votes if no black voters showed up at the polls.

A worst case would use my original numbers.  But even they show that we shouldn't scapegoat the black community.

If you want allies, you have to be an ally.

---

by: dale @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:31:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, and Pam has posted on this topic (and took a lot of flack)

We absolutely need to do a better job reaching out to the black (and Hispanic, too, I might add) community.

Cindy Rizzo has an excellent article over at Bilerico.  She makes three suggestions for our community:

1. Strengthen the movement of LGBT people of color

2. Strengthen and support our straight allies in communities of color.

3. Become a movement that stands for racial justice.... If we want allies, we have to be an ally.

I think these are all solid ideas and worth discussing.

If you want allies, you have to be an ally.

---

by: dale @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:42:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I can't think of how to reach out to the Black (or Latino) communities any more

I was teaching until two years in urban locations.  The anti-gay harassment from those two communities, both the students, and their parents, ended my career.  The white students may have suspected, may have thought, may even have disapproved.  They weren't the ones stealing and daily vandalizing my room--all of which apparently were my fault.

I tried.  I did my part to reach out.  I tried to help the next generation, and got vilified for it.  My anecdotal experience says there is no way to reach out to people that would rather drown than take a hand from someone who is gay.  

This isn't monolithic.  I knew a handful that were receptive.  But that's a bare handful.

I feel really bad for black members of the LGBT community.  I can understand what they're going through, with the pressure from family, community, and church to "fit in" to a heterosexist norm.  I'm not the only LGBT member of my family, but I'm the only one to have accepted and dealt with it.  

If someone's got a better idea, let me know.  All I could do was use my talents and abilities to benefit their children.  

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #

---

by: MileHighDawg @ Tue Nov 11, 2008 at 00:52:34 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Use the Right Numbers, Will Ya?

In 2004, there was 1.035 million black voters in California. Between 2000 and 2004, the black population there increased by a little over 5%. Apply the same population increase this year, and you get 1.087 million black voters there.

You are asking us to believe that black turnout fell this year? Are you crazy? Every indicator from elsewhere in the country says that black turnout rose by 20%. Apply it to California, and you get a black electorate of 1.3 million. Apply a 70-30 split like you did, and that's 910,000 votes for Prop 8, and 390,000 votes against. Take out black voters, and you get 4.499 million for and 4.519 million against.

Look, we get nowhere by bullshitting ourselves. Gay people have a big problem in the black community. This shouldn't cause gays (especially white gays) to start yelling, "nigger" at black people. Instead, it should cause the gay community in general to ask itself how we might better approach black people.

I can think of a couple ideas off of the top of my head.

1. Get more black people into leadership roles in the gay community. There has been some progress, but all to often, the face of the gay community is a white, 20-something, male underwear model.

2. Examine racism in the gay community below the "leadership" level. I think there is too much of a sense that "gay = white."

3. Be a little less frothy. The black community, in general, is considerably less affluent than the nation as a whole. All too often, gay people -- and especially gay men -- are seen as part of the white celebrity beautiful people set. It's an inaccurate image, and it's time to think about the socio-economic image we present to the larger world.

4. Find a way to encourage more black gays to come out of the closet. Studies have shown that the single biggest factor in improving popular attitudes about gay people is personal knowledge of someone who is gay.

One other thing. The CNN exit poll that showed 70%-30% black support for Prop 8 also showed a narrow margin of white and Asian opposition to Prop 8, and a narrow margin of Latino support for it. A lot of white gays looked at those numbers and said, "See? Blacks are the problem."

Not so fast, I say. The Census Bureau collects comprehensive data on who voted in elections. In 2004, voter turnout was 66% among black Californians, 44% among Asian Californians, and 47% among Hispanic Californians. And those numbers are for citizens, so illegal immigration is not the issue.

It could easily be that black voter prejudice against gay people is much higher than Asian and Latino voter prejudice because a whole lot more blacks vote. Non-voters tend to be less educated and less affluent than voters, which is the same group of people who tend to be more prejudiced against gay people.

It could simply be that the more prejudiced segments of the Latino and Asian citizen population aren't voting, while the relatively high (especially this year) percentage of blacks who vote sweeps in more of the less-educated, less affluent, and more prejudiced part of that population. The real disaster could await us if Latinos and Asians start voting as often as everyone else.

So, like I say, I think it'd be a big mistake for gay people to start getting mad at black people. A much better idea is to try and figure out how to address the problem. And something else to remember: The worst victims of anti-gay prejudice among black people are -- ta da! -- gay black people. Not whites, or Asians, or Latinos, but black gay people.

Racism is NOT the answer to this disappointment!

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 22:12:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

William, I agree with much of your post, but you use the wrong numbers

Every indicator from elsewhere in the country says that black turnout rose by 20%. Apply it to California, and you get a black electorate of 1.3 million. Apply a 70-30 split like you did, and that's 910,000 votes for Prop 8, and 390,000 votes against. Take out black voters, and you get 4.499 million for and 4.519 million against.

The numbers I based my calculations on are the actual number of votes cast for and against Proposition 8.  The size of the black electorate doesn't matter - the number of votes cast does.  Assuming that 10% of the Proposition 8 votes are from blacks, then excluding those votes still would have had Proposition 8 winning by 100,000 votes

Now, many persons have questioned whether African-Americans actually cast 10% of the votes in the California election.  Shanikka, over at Daily Kos, really rips into that idea.  But going with your figure of a 20% increase over 2004 voting levels, which was 6% in California, then the percentage of black votes out of the total would have been only 7.2%, which would magnify the victory of Proposition 8 if no blacks had voted.  

On the other hand, that 6% figure is based on the 2004 CNN exit interviews and after reading Shanikka's article you may be skeptical of their claims. :))

If you want allies, you have to be an ally.

---

by: dale @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 23:17:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

shanikka's Math Was Flawed

Rather than repeat it right now, I'll just post the link to my analysis of the numbers. Unfortunately, I believe shanikka got it wrong.

BANNED for TOS violations.

---

by: William Wilson @ Mon Nov 10, 2008 at 13:01:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

This is inexcusable

We need to change black community from the inside, not drive them further away. If you want to blame someone, blame an incompetent campaign, and blame the cult who poured millions of dollars into this.

Fetch my pearls, I need to clutch them!

---

by: RainbowPhoenix @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 15:58:21 PM CST

Sad, but not beyond comprehension

Many of the other groups listed above as predictors are groups that one can reasonably expect to be ignorant or uncaring about equality and civil rights ("uncritical churchgoers" would be 4 or 5 of the bullet points listed, for example).

I think that a lot of the frustration comes from the belief that the African-American community (singular for the sake of simplicity) should understand the struggle for equality and civil rights.  However, the "unthinking churchgoers" category probably provides a better explanation of the black vote on this issue than the race category.

---

by: theonly @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 16:00:28 PM CST

finding fault

Indeed, the Queer equality movement pissed away marriage equality like passing a couple of Blood Marys at tea dance.  The leaders of the response to Prop Hate failed to take a classism, racism, and ablism inventory on their messaging, and they apparently slept through the first two lessons in creating social change:  cultivate the not-so-obvious allies first, and share from the heart, not from the head.  After decades of fighting against ballot-box tyranny, we should have the talking points of our foes down pat and be prepared shoot them down succinctly and in plain talk before any pleas for fairness.  If people did not vote against Prop Hate, they were not necessarily homophobic, but possibly dreadfully misinformed or under-informed about the implications Prop Hate's success or failure--all they heard were fearsome tag lines from FOF and KOC and mousy cries for a "right" with no mention of responsibility from people who didn't otherwise look like they needed public intervention.  Were I not Queer, I might have sided with the other side, too.

---

by: greatwhitebear @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 16:05:40 PM CST

Marriage Equality March

in San Francisco today at 5:30 from Civic Center to Dolores Park.  Be there!!

---

by: Deelishn07 @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 16:06:31 PM CST

:)

As my own anger has calmed (despite being reignited last night) I realized that this is an opportunity.

An opportunity for dialogue.  A chance for us to air out the dirty laundry piled up in the corner of our closets.  

White Queers don't see the racism that they perpetuate.  Black Religious folks don't see the damage their homophobia does to folks.

I sat today for an hour with a professor (I think the vice chair or chair, but I am not sure of her actual title) within the Black Studies Dept at San Francisco State University College of Ethnic Studies.  I wanted to see how we might be able to bring about healing on both sides.

I don't know how or if it will actually happen, But connecting with this (seemingly) straight woman helped me a great deal.  We are going to continue to talk to each other, we will continue to bring folks into the conversation.

Amos Brown a former Supervisor here in San Francisco, who I never considered an ally before, was attacked on Sunday while giving a No on 8 sermon at one of the oldest Black Churches here in San Francisco.  

I think we have a golden opportunity here.  Let's all bring our dirt into a pile and see if we can plant a garden

Daigan

---

by: Daigan @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 16:08:07 PM CST

BRING it on...

Plant it...then it will need tender care and nurture and could bloom into a RAINBOW bouquet of the future. We have to keep denouncing homophobia at EVERY spoken and written instance of it.  We must continue to ADVERTISE via multiple media how wonderful it is that we are diverse, but eliminate hate.  We must develop ways to constructively denounce homophobia from the pulpit...this should be done by young congregants I presume...empowered by PFLAG or some similar group.

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.

---

by: Orion45 @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 17:31:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Just wanted to add my voice to this

This is inexcusable.  Stop the blame game.

---

by: Morry @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 16:31:55 PM CST

*beats head against wall*

The majority of people who voted yes were voting religiously, not racially. This isn't a civil rights issue for yes voters, it's about the unreasoning hate of the Other that gets poured into their ears every Sunday. It's coming from a culture that says anything other than a macho straight man and his submissive woman is deviant. I saw blog posts about people staffing No On 8 tables at the polls, and the people who walked by cursing, flipping the bird, screaming about deviants, sinners, and hellfire. They came in all colors, all sizes.

Anti-gay hate - hell, ANY kind of hate in this country - won't die until churches stop screaming it at the pulpit. And sadly, they have a tax-exempt constitutional right to do so. And we, being far better than they are, would never vote to take that constitutional right away from them.

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi

---

by: Keori @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 16:39:20 PM CST

Constitutional Right?

Where in the Constitution does is guarantee Churches Tax Exemption.

Tax Code is written and re-written by Congress.

I am all for the Sunday Hate Factories paying taxes.

Make the foul mouthed bastards get day jobs.

This is moral and immoral. The moral thing, the thing that everyone knows is right inside, though some are afraid to say, is EQUALITY. Inequality is immoral.

---

by: mickdansforth @ Mon Nov 10, 2008 at 04:49:33 AM CST

[ Parent ]

History repeating.

The black community (as a whole) should not be blamed for the passing of Prop. 8.  They are seperated by support and opposition of the proposition.

However, it's the militant black preachers like Jesse Lee Patterson, Harry Jackson, Ken Hutcherson, O'Neal Dozier, Miles McPherson, etc. who are responsible for the majority of Prop. 8 votes.  They preach race-baiting cow pies like "being black is not a choice" and any other excuse to burn crosses on the lawn of the LGBT community.

I am shocked that some racist remarks are made by some of the protesters.  That provides fodder for the fundies and will sink the LGBT community to the fundies' scum-covered level.  Also, blame doesn't get anybody anywhere.

---

by: Blood From Machines @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 17:01:05 PM CST

How

Why are you blaming Black preachers and some of the Black comunity for the majority of yes votes, when the majority of the votes that were cast were cast by White people.  I don't expect you or many of the finger pointers to understand this, but why don't you read this great diary from Shanikka at Daily Koz, and maybe it will help you see how your arguement doesn't make sense.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/...

---

by: Cadence @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 17:32:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]

this treatment of fellow members

   of our community is not acceptable to me. I hope that this problem is settled in a peaceful way and that people can reconcile and have more understanding. I met this kind of hatred a couple of days ago when I met a lesbian from my school and she was about as racist as could possibly be. Obviously she was a Mccain supporter and she pulled me off to the side when we were walking home and told me that she "isnt comfortable with a n* in the white house."
  I responded that it was irrational and that she shouldn't be worried about how a person is going to govern based upon their skin color. Sorry if that was a little irrelevant to the post.

  I don't see anyone to blame but the fact that the higher up mormons from in Salt Lake, and those evangelical nutjobs raised money illegally in order to subdue our rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That and our own action being a little late. We should have also been more vicious in our tv commercial response to the yes on h8 campaign.

"It's hard to free fools from the chains they revere." ~ François Marie Arouet.

---

by: TSinGarnNC16 @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 17:24:52 PM CST

It's not just gay whites blaming blacks for H8.

I had to argue this down no less than 3 times with white hetero neighbors who were wanting to console me about the passage of H8.  Each one was willing to listen to the facts and to back off of this "blame the blacks only" thing, but ti is disturbing to me that they didn't bother to question the charge in the first place.  It's that kind of latent bigotry that people don't realize they have, isn't it?

Unfortunately the papers keep repeating the 70% thing without doing the rest of the math to put that number into proper context.  I would like to see some solid follow-up journalism in the Sunday papers.  I hope I'm not holding my breath for nothing.  I'm going to try to write a letter to the editor of my papers today.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 17:33:21 PM CST

Yes, it is.

That very kind of bigotry.


http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

---

by: dyssonance @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:38:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I find it interesting ...

... that the papers are indeed focusing on the AA vote story when the same CNN exit poll data that they are basing this on shows a much more significant factor in people's voting: religion.  83% of people who reported attending religious services at least weekly voted yes, and 82% of people who reported never attending religious services voting no.  The focus on race instead suggests deep seated biases amongst the media.

Just to make sure I am understood, it's not okay to bash all Mormons because of the CJCLDS's organizing, fund raising, etc.  Nor is it okay to bash religious folk generally; some of the most dedicated-to-the-queer-rights-cause people I know are UUs.  But America does need to have a conversation about religion and forcing religious precepts on others via the law.

---

by: pgraydon @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:56:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sigh.

This is going to hurt us more than we know.

How disappointing.

---

by: Bachalon @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 17:47:45 PM CST

Backstabbing

The thing of it is, I didn't vote for an elderly, Republican, conservative, Catholic, White Protestant, gun-owning, Bush-voting, offshore-drilling supporting, terrorist-attack fearing, "better off", Iraq-war supporting, pro-life, McCain-voting, or inland California man for President. I did vote for a black man. So while those groups going overwhelmingly for Prop 8 feels like business as usual, blacks going overwhelmingly for Prop 8 feels like a stab in the back. That doesn't excuse responding in a racist fashion, but it does go a long way toward explaining why people are focusing on the role of the black vote in Prop 8's success.

---

by: chrishen @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 17:59:08 PM CST

This is an important point

I think you have identified the underlying anger behind these attacks. With the history of battles against desegregation, for voting rights and affirmative action, there appears to be an expectation that black people should understand what it means to have equality denied, and to naturally support others fighting for it. It was a scant 30 years ago that interracial marriages were illegal, after all.

However, the truth is more complicated. The history of the church in black culture is central. It's impossible to separate it from the conversation. And much bigotry about homosexuality comes from the church. Changing the conversation means changing the way the church is involved with black culture. And that will not come from without. It needs to come from WITHIN the black community.

Who can lead that conversation? :)

 

---

by: sleepdawg @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:36:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I have a question

I would like to know how often have the last two posters tried to go and engage Black people in a conversation about GLBT issues.  I'm not talking about being patronizing or hollier than thou, but actually making an effort to buid an alliance or at least an understanding.  We can't even seem to get some White gay people to build an alliance with non-White gay people, let alone trying to do it with Black straight people.  The idea that people should know how we feel sounds nice, but if we don't tell people how we feel, and all they see of gay people are the images that Pam has described and the garbage that has been spewed on too many GLBT websites over the past few days then what do you expect.  We can blame churches, but for me what has happened over the past few days is the main reason why Prop 8 passed.

---

by: Cadence @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:50:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I have an answer

The vast majority of white people are not comfortable engaging with Black folks about anything more controversial than the weather. That's because, despite the progress of the past 50 years since Brown, most white people have no close relationships with someone Black...or even regular contact with enough different Black folk to be able to select a friend who is part of that group.

But the real issue you raised was, Why are we letting people who don't know us learn what we want and need and hope for from a campaign of hate?

Good one, and I have no flipping idea. But a purge wouldn't be a bad idea.

But wait, there's more!

---

by: PhoenixRising @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 19:09:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I can't answer for them, but for myslef.

I had a very painful time a few years ago when a group of gay black people in my city kept accusing white gays for being exclusionist, yet these black people never showed up to try to take part in the work being done.  i think one or two of them were still smarting from real racist wounds from years before from other white people in other organizations, and instead of giving the new org a try, just went on with the same old accusations and assumptions about who was in the new org.  that of course fed the fears of newbies, and the snowball went from there.  so when i hear the call for "us" (meaning whites) to reach out to other groups, my response, in all honesty, is why is the expectation always that we whites must do the reaching out?  why isn't EVERYONE reaching out?  i will be happy to work alongside anyone who wants to work alongside me to further our common cause.  why the need for the gilded invitation?  people need to realize that not all whites are alike, and stop expecting to either a) get crap from us, or b) a gilded invitation.  where's my gilded invitation to volunteer for YOUR organization?

and speaking of the latter, i have always wanted to try to bridge this gap by having an official volunteer swap between whatever org i'm in at the time and a related org composed of mostly non-white people.  i haven't made the pitch to mgt recently.  maybe it's time to try to make that happen again.  it can be tough, because orgs are jealous of their volunteers and don't even like swapping them out.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 19:12:34 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It woks both ways

Just as people need to realize that not all Whites are alike, they also need to realiz that not all Black people are alike.

One thing  that you said highlights part of the problem.  We need to get away from obsessing over who reaches out first.  There are too many problems to worry about without us being petty.  Yes, Black gays need to reach out to White gays, and try to join mainstream gay organizations, even though we know that we will be in the minority, and that it will be hard for our voices to be heard, but joining these groups is the only way that we are going to change things.  And these overwhelingly White gay organizations should put out the call that they want more participation from  non-White gays, because again, nothing will change unless  we work together.  And all gay groups should work at communicating with heterosexuals, so they can understand where we are coming from.  I wonder if the No on 8 crowd did as much canvassing in churches and other areas as they Yes crowd did, or if they trd to target people who would vote in our favor and try to get out the vote.  I seriously doubt they did.

---

by: Cadence @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:06:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

canvassing churches

i think it's clear that the yes people already had a very extensive church conduit to work through.  the no people also took advantage of churches friendly to us, and those churches hosted phone banks, etc.  but there just aren't many churches friendly to us period, so there wasn't much time to reach out.  reaching out to religious institutions is an ongoing thing, not something that can be expected to gain much ground in the few months the no people had to put together the campaign.

my beef is that lgbt-friendly churches are not willing to lean on their members like the hater churches are.  and so there is a lot of lofty talk and some truly meaningful support, but it isn't nearly what it could be and it will never match what the catholic church and lds can deliver via their militaristically organized institutions.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:16:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

To answer your question

By "engage", do you mean speak with someone who is black, and about the topic of gays and lesbians getting married? Since you asked, the answer is 3 times in the last 2 months, during the period leading up to this week's election.

To put that in perspective, I visited my bank 4 times in the past 2 months. And I got my haircut twice. So it's somewhere up there with other regular activities of mine.

Now, if you don't mind my asking, how often have you "engaged" with members of a local conservative church about GLBT issues? Family members who are conservative christians? And does everyone in your family know about your sexual orietentation, including elderly members across generations?  

Churches are the distribution point in this trifecta and they must be confronted if gays and lesbians seek support from black, hispanic and asian communities. Charmed, persuaded, and coerced if need be through boycotts and petitions to remove their tax exempt status. Because time and time again they rally and damage to a devoted audience.

A good counterpoint conversation about this topis is also going on over at DU.

http://www.democraticundergrou...

---

by: sleepdawg @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:50:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You are right, but is it fair?

I have been so angry over all of Prop 8.  I am well aware that the blame need not be laid at the door of minority communities, particularly when the Yes campaign was paid for by an almost completely white church.  The thing is, I was deeply hurt when I read the breakdown of the numbers.  Not because I thought there should be some quid pro quo for voting Obama...I did that because I think he is exactly what America needs.  I was hurt because I just have it in my head that other minorities know what it is like to be treated as second-class citizens.  I go berserk when I hear gay men use the C-U-Next-Tuesday word about women because it is just the sexist version of faggot.  I expect more from them.  Likewise, I expected more of minority communities.

But really, is that fair?  Doesn't that let all of the white wackjobs who voted for 8 off the hook?  Should we expect more from each other than from the status quo?  I'm not sure.  I'm just hurt all around by this I suppose, and I'm still trying to process it.

---

by: ChristopherM @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:52:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Straight people of ANY color can't be expected to understand

that we're being stripped of our citizenship if we talk only to their heads, and precious little of that.

Never assume, is the main takeaway. Yes, it's crushing to realize that others who have been stomped by the majority don't seem to think that we're a minority, but if we don't communicate the truth of our lives and families--how could they be expected to think otherwise?

But wait, there's more!

---

by: PhoenixRising @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 19:13:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

YES...THAT IS EXACTLY IT...PhoenixRising...

I am straight, but I am an MD and fully supportive of equal rights for all minorities. Especially the rights that protect and support families with children.  People must take their stories to these congregations...couples, possibly not with children, present until after the first meeting should have been standing outside the doors of these churches with handout describing their lives and loves.  Along with them straight allies should be there and supportive.  It will take a long time for there to be acceptance.

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.

---

by: Orion45 @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:41:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

This is sort of the problem though

The principle here is, essentially, you scratch my back I'll scratch yours. The argument is that gay voter A voted for a black guy for president, therefore black voter B owes gay voter A something. Except, wait, what? You didn't vote for black voter B. You voted for a black guy, Barack Obama. Barack Obama owes you something. The other 37,334,569 black guys do not.

The identification of all black people as Barack Obama is easy to fall into and really, really common in punditry right now-- it usually takes a form something like "Barack Obama does not suffer from racism, Barack Obama is black, therefore black people do not suffer from racism"-- but this just plain not correct. There is more than one black person. As far as I see things this is just the flipside of the sort of incidental racism that at one time would have identified all black people with Willie Horton.

---

by: mcc @ Mon Nov 10, 2008 at 00:31:12 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Divide and Conquer...

... is only going to keep our community in the very position it's in now.

---

by: Mercedes @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:27:11 PM CST

well, for now...

I'm just gonna cry.

This is so wrong, people.

So wrong.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

---

by: dyssonance @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 18:36:44 PM CST

NO on 8 Addresses this in an email

Just got this from NO on 8

This has been an incredibly difficult week for Californians who are disappointed in the passage of Proposition 8, which takes away the right to marry for same-sex couples in our state. We feel a profound sense of disappointment in this defeat, but know that in order to move forward we must continue to stand together as one community in order to secure full equality in California.

In working to defeat Prop 8, a profound coalition banded together to fight for equality. Faith leaders, labor, teachers, civil rights leaders and communities of color, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents, public officials, local school boards and city councils, parents, corporate law firms and bar associations, businesses, and people from all walks of life joined together to stand up against discrimination. We must build on this coalition in order to achieve equal rights for all Californians.

We achieve nothing if we isolate the people who did not stand with us in this fight. We only further divide our state if we attempt to blame people of faith, African American voters, rural communities and others for this loss. We know people of all faiths, races and backgrounds stand with us in our fight to end discrimination, and will continue to do so. Now more than ever it is critical that we work together and respect our differences that make us a diverse and unique society. Only with that understanding will we achieve justice and equality for all.

Dr. Delores A. Jacobs
CEO
Center Advocacy Project

Lorri L. Jean
CEO
L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center

Kate Kendell
Executive Director
National Center for Lesbian Rights

Geoff Kors
Executive Director
Equality California

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 19:15:24 PM CST

I thought this week couldn't get worse.

The mix of emotions I've been struggling with since Tuesday is just overwhelming and difficult.

Yes, I know that black folks aren't the happiest about LGBT couples, and predicted that a strong majority of CA's few black voters would do what they could to marginalize and exclude our families.

But it's still personal and painful, because I can't cut those ties--that's my family too, now, and I need them to help me raise a healthy, happy mixed race child to full functioning adulthood.

I also know that white gay people can be racist pigs and my kid is not always safe with other families headed by same sex couples.

At the same time, the joy of seeing kids like my kid walking into the White House and having her shout for joy that the man she looks like was the winner, is real joy.

So the perfect topping for all that is reading that the least apathetic gay men in LA are openly racist assholes. Perfect.

But wait, there's more!

---

by: PhoenixRising @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 19:21:52 PM CST

My little sister

is black AND Mormon. Good thing she's currently working in Texas. If she were in CA this week I'd tell her to lay low for a few days for her own safety. THAT makes me sick.

FUCKING GOD, how is it that a day after such an historic Presidential election, the race-baiting protests have begun, but it was QUEERS who started them??

What the fuck is happening here?

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi

---

by: Keori @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 01:12:54 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Black and Mormon--and female?

Did she join the church as an adult? I'm just curious.

---

by: Darkrose @ Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 02:58:16 AM CST

[ Parent ]

N word

Ignorance is a terrible curse. So is not being able to count.
The work the AfricanAmerican community has to do to remove homophobia can only be accomplished by convincing one person at a time. Yelling out hate doesn't help anyone.

---

by: Robert M @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 19:50:16 PM CST

NOT one person...

You need to convince ONE CONGREGATION at a time... I have a multiracial friend in So. Calif who attends a 5000+ member black church and who was told to vote YES on H8 at every service since it was placed on the ballot. Not one person in the congregation ever spoke on the other side. In a population of 5000 I would think, if statistics hold at least 100 up to 500 are gay...NOT ONE Spoke up.'

This friend even found me due to an admiration for a singer, we both feel is a closeted gay...just imagine if he CAME OUT!  AH well..that's for the future.

Be Careful Who you H8...it Could be Somebody you LOVE. 

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.

---

by: Orion45 @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:29:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The name calling doesn't need to happen,

  The 70% of African-American voted for prop 8 is repeated in the MSM over and over again.  I can't count how many times I have seen and heard it. And the MSM is wondering the same thing I am. Even Jon Stewart is questioning the same.

 I am aware that even though 70% of the African-American vote went for the yes on 8. and that the African-American vote was 10% of the total vote in California. So no need to flame me on that point.

 I have read many articles on this.  I have read many of the news articles from the Miami Herald, Sun Sentinel, Orlando Sentinel, LA Times, etc.

#1 I find is not only are the LGBT people upset, but our straight allies as well.

#2 The Latino/Hispanic vote leaned heavy towards the yes vote in Florida along with the African-American vote.  Both above 65% of the vote in Florida that voted yes.

#3 Most yes voters are religious. Older people voted yes.

So there are plenty of people to blame for the Hate 8 passing.  I do find blame on our side as well. But most of the blame can be placed on one major group of people. The Religious groups. (I know there are many religious groups that support our rights)

The demographics of the yes voters are being used to define the groups of people who voted yes and no on the propositions.  The exit polling data is all we have to go on.  The 70% of African-American vote being yes is being used to define the entire African-American population.  There is nothing out there in the MSM to dispute that claim.  

When an African-American sits on TV and tells the LGBT community to "SUCK IT UP" it is going to escalate the negative feelings. This does not justify the name calling.

But it does make many people wonder how the oppressed became the oppressor. And I am one of those who feels this way, and using the same weapon that was used against them, they are using against us.

Flame me if you like.  This is the problem I see with the African-American population, they are using religion for justifying denying people their rights.
But they are not the only Religious people to blame.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:11:33 PM CST

Karl Rovian tactics are working so well

And so many people fall for the okey doke sooooo easily. Everyone who wants the Marriage amendments to pass nationally be prepared to put it a minimum of 8 years of work into it. Boots to the ground. Helping other people with things that are of interest to them first then you've proven your worth as an ally. Work with non-LGBT who are friendly to the cause. One major change that has to happen is the people sitting at the table and behind the scenes with control and access need to be POC. Until then you are not going to convince other POC - esp non LGBT that you have any position of significant interest to them. Not with housing, health care, employment and empowerment struggles. No your enemies, seek out allies in unlikely places.  

---

by: heartsandflowers @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:25:09 PM CST

Bigots are bigots

And as such, there is no place in the movement for them. Blaming black people for that abominable proposition 8 passing is like the Bushies blaming Bill Clinton for the events of September 11, 2001.  The people who approved it had one thing in common that transcended race and to a lesser degree, age: Christianity and other fundie superstitions. That is the real monster here. Hatred, intolerence, fear and prejudice are merely symptoms. I dissassociated myself with all of the bigots who supported a non inclusive ENDA when it became clear what they were and believed and when I find that I have been associating with a racist, I would sever that relationship even faster. There's no room for this and it just makes the enemy stronger.  

---

by: Margaret @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:34:02 PM CST

Ok, I was wrong.

Ok, I was wrong. I had up until now largely resisted the argument that the frustration and anger being expressed by many people against the African-American community was inherent racist.

I have now changed my mind. Some of it most certainly is. Racism is playing a part in this. Although some criticism is valid it has escalated to unrealistic proportions and has entered into the territory of racism.

I want to express my heart felt regret to anyone hurt by my communities actions or statement regarding race in the past few days.

Sam

---

by: Sam.Lynn @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:36:53 PM CST

Apparently there were preachers of all colors

Don't let them sow this discontent among us. Don't you see? It's what they want. Organized religion collectively has several thousand years of experience in controlling populations. This is a classic case of playing one faction off against another. The fact is that we were all too focused on getting Obama elected and we trusted too much to the imaginary "goodness" in people. We fucked up as a community and a party. We will overcome this but not if we allow the bigots and fundies to pull our strings. Don't be a sheep. Don't let them start a fight among us.

---

by: Margaret @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:45:10 PM CST

Better examples, show the real people

The gay community, like most communities need to keep their extremists out of view.
 
On the TV you saw the hate/violence/anger segment of the gay community, no one watching the boob tube saw the normal people that have the same values as their neighbors that just happen to love someone of the same sex.
 
The same could be said about riots when only the worst examples of the black community are shown, or when only the extreme edge of the republican community gets press. During katrina, there were horrible incidents of violence, and they made the news. Without a doubt there were many more incidents of man helping their fellow man (or woman/children) but they never got the coverage.
 
As long as those in power can keep us hating and divided it is easier to control us. Instead of hating each other, we should hate the press for doing their job for the ruling class.

---

by: My Brand @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:46:18 PM CST

No real clue

All black people are not involved with organized religion. I don't know where you live but if it is true where you are your view makes more sense. All black people are not Christians and especially in CA- there are agnostics and nonbelievers as well. Maybe many of those people don't vote. I have no idea on that. But people keep referencing the Black church as the voice of Black people. I understand the historical significance of the church but it is not the voice of all of Black America.

This illustrates another manifestation of generations of oppression-a massive vacuum in leadership. Most of it has been bought off, killed off, destroyed one way or another and what is left standing? The Black church? That's all people see so it must be true. Ignorant people just run with this stuff.

---

by: cyntmac @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 20:46:21 PM CST

Mom just reminded me,

Don't forget that there were Robocalls of then Senator Obama expressing his view on szme sex marriage used by the yes on 8 bigots that targeted the African-American Communities.  The flier that came out that targeted the African-American Communities as well.

I am afraid that this racial rift is going to grow as time goes by. I admit I do hold Obama partly to blame for the 8 passage.  He needs to engage as well before this gets further blown up.

Religion can do great things when used properly, But it is also a dangerous weapon.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 21:15:10 PM CST

Proactive, not reactive

The flier that came out that targeted the African-American Communities as well.

And that's one of the things that I think illustrates both the outreach and the planning deficits. We all knew that Obama was trying to have it both ways, and we were all upset--justifiably so--about his constant repetition of "marriage is between a man and a woman."

But we knew that before those fliers came out. Why weren't there fliers back in September quoting him saying that he was opposed to Prop 8? Why did we let the other side get the jump on us, so that we were scrambling to rebut their arguments? And it's not just with Obama, either: the entire campaign seemed to be about reacting to the lies of the Yes side more than making a strong case for ourselves. Yes, it should have been obvious that Prop 8 was wrong on several levels--but obviously, there were people who disagreed, or it wouldn't have been on the ballot in the first place. Going forward, we need to work on proactive arguments for marriage equality, instead of being reactive.

(Please note: I am not blaming the No on 8 campaign--I'm talking about analyzing what went wrong so that the mistakes don't get repeated.)

---

by: Darkrose @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 21:40:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I agree fully, Analyze, not blame,

  This is why one of the first suggestion I mentioned was right a book, make a small video, a movie.  Everything that went right needs to be documented as well as what went wrong.  

 Note I was not in California, Florida or Arizona, So I do not know everything that was happening.

 I got most of my information on what was happening from blogs. Here in Colorado there wasn't much of a peep about what was going on.  My sister and a few friends kept me up on what was happening in Florida.

 I agree with many that we were late to the game. Many poster on various blogs were wondering where the materials are.  I recall many posts here wondering what is going on, there is nothing on TV, No signs or bumper stickers.  

 From what I saw of the ads, gay men seemed not to exist.  I believe, Fritz made a statement about this.  We did not show why we desrve the right to be married.  As stupid as it sounds, and the difficulty it takes to swallow, we do have to prove we deserve the right to marry the person we love.

 The fact that none of the national candidates brought up the issue failed us. LGBT rights never became part of the national debate.  IMHO, LGBT rights is a winning issue, it isn't an issue to runaway from. As I said in many posts, our issues need to brought up and honestly debated.  If there is no open discussion we will lose.

 The lies that were told about the LGBT community won. The yes on 8 crowd used the "save the children" bull shit and we failed mount a defence against it.  As you stated, we were reactive, and that is always a losing strategy.

 But the LGBT community needs to stop pointing fingers now, lick our wounds,
and prepare for the next battle.  We all know it will be coming, we just don't know where the battle field will be.  We need to get a united structure that includes every LGBT organization so we can work together to defeat the likes of the mormon church, fotf, frc and adf.   We in the LGBT need to quit fighting within our own ranks.  

 I plan on writing a post regarding the uniting of all groups later.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 23:00:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Playing their game

The Rev. Amos Brown, former city supervisor and minister of the Third Baptist Church, has gone on record supporting same-sex marriage, but he says that hasn't stopped white evangelical ministers from suggesting the city's black churches are persuading their congregants to support Proposition 8 through church phone banks, prayer meetings, and even a 40-day fast. "They've done this for the last two months," Brown says. "They are the ones who are fostering hostility at all levels."

What is happening is exactly what the creators and backers of Prop 8 want us to do- infight, tear each other down, and never achieve equality as a result.  They purposely sowed this division and we're just playing their game.
For anyone who has ever participated in or benefitted from any civil rights struggle, to oppose another civil rights struggle or tear down its members is hypocrisy.  Because it is hypocrisy it is immoral.  It doesn't matter whether one feels affinity for the other, and it doesn't matter if one has a problem with the other in any way- hypocrisy is immoral and shameful.  I hope some consciences are pretty sore after all this.

Yes we can!

---

by: bluegirlbb @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 21:28:33 PM CST

Channeling Corretta Scott King

Yes, I have heard the voting statistics and the reason why people are lashing out is because they are deeply hurt.  The reason why the black community is being singled out here is because we are all aware of the discrimination that they endured so it is very difficult to understand why they themselves want to support unequal civil rights and to take away marriage rights.

So let us speed the word that not all blacks feel this way, inside and outside of the black community.  

Unfortunately, when Obama won, there was an interview of the loathsome anti gay bigot Rev. Bernice King who is totally against everything her mother or father stood for.  This is the type of person we are fighting against here, no matter what the colour of their skin is. It is unfortunate that people like Bernice King are so powerful and influential in their respective community. We need to discredit people like her by reminding her followers of what her mother and father were really all about.  

To further illustrate my point let us be reminded of the wise words of her mother:

Coretta Scott King Quote:

"I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people. ... But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.' I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream, to make room at the table of brotherhood and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people."

We need to find the courage and wisdom of the late Coretta Scott King and her husband and continue to learn from their steady march ageist injustice.  We can all learn much from them.

The lessons they taught us can be used to influence any community that is ageist us.....so let's get the focus off of the black community and focus on the community at large that needs to be influenced and taught better ways of thinking about civil rights for all, including us, the GLBT community. Let's once again unite, instead of splintering.

Love to all in this time of sadness.  

Paul

vanhattan

---

by: vanhattan @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 22:14:52 PM CST

Dismissals waste the opportunity to learn

When I heard the analysis reporting that people of color had overwhelmingly supported Prop 8, the first thing that came to mind was all the times over the last two years someone had demanded of GLBTQ people that we ignore Obama's race - stating that his race should not matter.

That reminded me of being told in opinion pieces and editorials and such, that GLBTQ people had to vote for Willie Brown, or we would be racists.  And opinion pieces in the BAR, castigating all gays and lesbians, because a novelty store in the Castro carried some racially offensive cards, making us all racists.

If we were ever anything less that completely committed to the AA candidate of the day, constantly on guard to prevent slightest trace of racial insensitivity in ourselves, it meant we were racist and we didn't deserve equal rights.  We're told we have to fight racism at every opportunity, and an awful lot of us took it to heart and tried to live it.

But, we were/are told to be understanding when AA ministers preached anti-gay hate from the pulpit, when Obama met with AA advocates of ex-gay ministries.  We were/are told to be patient and forgiving when people of color used anti-gay hate speech, that they were just "defending their masculinity in a society that oppresses them".

We were/are told that all prejudice is the same disease, only the target changes.

The issue really isn't with the people who are angry; they'll get over their shock and hurt, feel bad that anger made them use words and phrases they would never say otherwise.

The issue lies with people of any minority group who think that they can support or tolerate one flavor of prejudice without it nurturing prejudice against them as well.  Someone wrote above that fundies will use the expression of racism in response to Prop 8's passage as further fuel to criticize GLBTQ people, but, I've seen propoganda from racial supremacist groups using past AA support for anti-gay legislation, to say essentially "it is ok to discriminate against - - - they discriminate too".

And all in all, GLBTQ people are better at being color blind, at excising from ourselves racism when it crops into our thoughts and lives - as this blog entry and its comments prove, than mainstream America.  Not perfect, still lots of work to do, but better than the mainstream.  Rarely is that ever acknowledged.  Instead, over and over again, the AA demographic keeps sending us the message: race can not matter ever, but sexuality still does, get over it.

That double standard, the sense of betrayal and of being used and abused, p*ssed off a lot of GLBTQ people, and if we continue to ignore it, things won't change for the better anytime soon.

---

by: FriendOfJonathan @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 22:22:48 PM CST

You're correct

The vast majority of Black Voters are homophobic.

We have to deal with that problem, and that means acknowledging it first.

However... obviously some GLBTs are racist, and probably more now than there were a week ago.

We have to deal with that problem too, and that means acknowledging it first as well.

The use of the word "Nigger" may have been an attempt at teaching, trying to show that Nigger, Faggot, and for that matter, Wetback, Mick, Sheenie, Yid, all of those words are equally unacceptable.

But it's likely to have been perceived as just more of the same racism. Counter-productive. Also cruel, unjust, and just plain wrong.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 05:36:32 AM CST

[ Parent ]

No on 8 Campaign: perspective from a California libertarian

Going way back up in the comments, I'd say that, yes, the No on 8 Campaign was a gigantic fuckup.

I never knew that TV commercials could be closeted before, but now I know they can.  Where were the gay couples?  Where was the warmth?  The human touch?

Dark commercials with abstract text about "equality"?  Come on!  Everybody has seen that before.  If you want to persuade people that opening marriage to gay couples is not a threat to them, SHOW that.  That's the issue here: some people see same-sex marriage as a threat to them.  The only way to win in an election is to show them that it's not.

And Diane Feinstein?!?  I don't think that many Californians who aren't self-identified liberals like her, and most anyone to the right of center can't STAND her.  News flash: there was no point in aiming No on 8 commercials at self-identified liberals in California.  That was a lot of really expensive preaching to the choir.

I don't know if you could get him, but if I were running the campaign, and I could get him, I'd get Dick Cheney.  Stir some things up!  Create cognitive dissonance that works in FAVOR of the objective.  If you're going to use divisive individuals in ads, then turn the tables.  Don't use Diane Feinstein, for the love of Pete.

Whoever did those commercials should have been fired months ago.

---

by: BarryD @ Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 22:53:22 PM CST

You have some good points

Re: Diane Feinstein - actually she isn't the liberal you seem to think she is (for being a former mayor of SF, she's actually pretty conservative), but I agree pretty much all of the commercials generated by the No campaign were preaching to the choir so to speak.

Never try to train a pig. It's a waste of time and it annoys the pig.

---

by: cali_techie @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 01:07:06 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Feinstein

Re: Diane Feinstein - actually she isn't the liberal you seem to think she is

Actually, last I checked, I think she falls somewhere around "authoritarian corporatist" with some token "liberal" social views to bring in some voters.  That combo works great around Silicon Valley these days, it seems.

But that doesn't matter.  

I don't think Dick Cheney is actually Satan, either.  But with Californians right of center, Feinstein resonates with really negative reactions, just as Cheney does with those left of center.  

The point of a No on 8 commercial, though, is to WIN THE ELECTION and defeat Prop 8, not to try and sell the opposition on Diane Feinstein.

---

by: BarryD @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 08:29:18 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You get more bees with honey than vinegar

This is an interesting blog which I've never visited before. I should tell you all, to start, that I'm a Republican, straight, white, voted for McCain, and also voted against Prop 8. That means, here in California, that I was on the minority side in both elections. Frankly, I was a bit appalled by the demonstration that marched on the Mormon church the other day. You're not going to convince anyone of anything by "marching" on their church and yelling at them words like "bigot" and "hater", never mind racial epithets aimed at minorities. The problem always has been that the Gay community's publicity almost always preaches to the choir. If you're going to convince people to vote with you, you need to talk to them on common ground, respect their point of view (even when it contradicts yours), and convince them that their point of view is bad, not for you, but for them, too.

Let me start what I'm putting forward by asking everyone a question. If, somewhere in the near future, there was some sort of court decision putting church practices in jeopardy. Suppose, then, that the churches ran ads attacking the decision, and those ads announced that those who supported the church decision were "anti-Christian fascists". Would that convince anyone to support the churches? I seriously doubt it. Similarly, calling the supporters of Prop. 8 bigots is counterproductive. They don't think they're bigots; they feel they're defending their institution against the courts.

Court decisions are a bad vehicle for this sort of thing. Roe vs. Wade happened almost 40 years ago, and there's still controversy about it. Among religious conservatives, it's often the topic of conversation, how anti-Christian the courts are, and how unfair it is that they can win elections, and still lose the issue in the courts. There's a sense of alienation and disgust with the whole system, combined with despair, that's pretty strong. The court ruling legalizing gay marriage was a mistake, in terms of gay marriage being made legal, indefinitely: legalization should have happened via an election, not a court decision.

I imagine everyone saying that the gay community can't win an election. Frankly, this is one of those things that just annoys me about the gay community. Everyone seems willing to believe the worst of anyone who's not their complete supporter. Just because someone isn't completely in support of gay marriage doesn't mean they can't be persuaded to vote against a Prop 8, or later in favor of another Constitutional amendment that overturns it. The chief trick here is to convince the conservative, Republican, anti-gay activist that he should vote to let gay people get married. Calling him a bigot won't work, of course, as I've already mentioned. How about pointing out that if he votes to restrict whether a particular church can perform a particular marriage ceremony (regardless of who is participating, their gender, etc.) then he's establishing the precedent that the government should have jurisdiction over his church, and what else can happen there? The whole point is to get him on your side by convincing him that it's his side, too.

Would this have worked last week? I don't know. I do know that what you guys tried didn't work well enough. I also know that unless you get smarter about how you conduct these campaigns, you'll continue to lose. I can figure out that you don't threaten my marriage, but much of the rest of conservative America will have to be persuaded, and so far you folks aren't doing a very good job.

---

by: DavidsHat @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 00:49:58 AM CST

Bigotry in any form

from anyone should not be tolerated. I don't care if you're gay, straight, black, white, or any other color of the rainbow. Bigotry and hate towards the "other" hurts our society and makes the world worse for all of us.

Lest we forget: We do not win people over to our side by shouting racial epithets at them. We win them to our side by putting a human face on the issue and showing them how allowing us to have the same rights as heterosexuals benefits them and society.

Never try to train a pig. It's a waste of time and it annoys the pig.

---

by: cali_techie @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 01:02:57 AM CST

As angry as I am over Yes on Prop 8, and make no mistake this rivals my anger after 911

An anger I can't and won't control....not yet.
The discussions of 7 of 10 African Americans and the 22 million dumped into the issue by Mormons...the vast majority of the people who have a problem with same sex marriage are a much bigger group...old folks.
There is a simple answer to this group...wait until they die off.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 01:03:03 AM CST

LOL

Yeah, most older people are a hamper to progression. My generation overwhelmingly voted No. We have progress and we must cultivate this. We need to keep pushing forward. I'm mean really, in two years (if the lawsuits fail) we can overturn the prop 8. Those protestor who use the N word should be ashamed of themselves! Ugh, we need to do damage control quickly cuz I know the yessers are going to use this in the next fight. Shoot, we need to exploit the yessers and their problems among themselves!

---

by: Vanster @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 01:34:28 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Shred the Mormon-Catholic-Evangelical alliance

Do that, and we've just stopped the three richest religious groups.

I'm willing to adopt a Mormon identity (I grew up in that hateful cult), and troll boards and sow discontent while my mom, who is NOW AN ALLY, will work it from the inside.

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi

---

by: Keori @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 02:22:46 AM CST

[ Parent ]

The amendment I suggest gets put on CA 2010 ballot

NO minority population's Human Rights can be diminished by an intiative vote of less than 75% of the number of registered voters.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 01:57:44 AM CST

Good idea

I would suggest to extend this to all human "civil" rights....and I guess you would also have to define human rights as the other side does not believe that they have denied us anything....

vanhattan

---

by: vanhattan @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 13:07:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Dialogue ( originally posted this on the wrong thread - sorry - new here)

I just want to say that many people who "oppose" gay marriage don't oppose gays living in a loving, legal relationship. I do think the stumbling block is the word "marriage."  This is such a deeply emotional issue. So hard. No one wants anyone to be without a loved one. I think we need to find a way to accomodate gay marriage along with ways to insure that churches will not have to compromise thier religious beliefs. Also, I think if parents could choose to remove their small children from class time that includes curriculum information which tends to teach about gay relations, some of the objection would be removed.  These are OBSERVATIONS only, gleaned from what I have read about the stumbling blocks. Massachusetts is incorporating gay lifestyle into the curriculum and  arrested a parent who wanted to remove his child from the class. This is unnecessary. Perhaps private school was not an option for this gentleman. So, you see, not only the gay perspective must be viewed. The Heterosexual angle must be considered as well. I am straight, am deeply sympathetic to gays, (Ellen convinced me), but, I understand the angst on the other side. Please do not misread what I have said and yell at me. I am deeply concerned and want to reach out to help solve this deeply troubling situation. I do believe that as the population ages, you will achieve your goals. I hope we can engage in a positive dialogue!!!

---

by: djl130 @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 06:09:20 AM CST

I understand wanting to understand the other side ...

... but much of what you are saying is rooted in the deliberate untruths the other side tells.

We already have a way to ensure that no churches will have to compromise their religious beliefs.  It is called the first amendment to the U.S. constitution.  The idea that somehow churches will be forced to marry people that they do not wish to marry is a scare tactic that has absolutely no basis in fact.  The CA Supreme Court even went to the trouble of noting this in its decision.

California law already has very strong opt-out provisions, but that's not the point.  Parents should not be permitted to opt their children out of tolerance training, which is what the MA incident you are referring to is about.  If some parent made a stink, occupied an educator's office and refused to leave - which is what the gentleman in MA did (and thus why it was necessary to arrest him) - because his kid was being taught (gasp) that it is okay to be, say, Jewish, you'd have a very different reaction.  The other side deliberately brings children into the conversation because people lose all rationality when discussing kids.  Rather than getting to the matter of whether the instruction is a good thing or not, the mere mention of harm to children - and note that the "harm" is never shown or argued, just assumed - causes people to freak out.  That's the result of an unfortunate combination of biological programming and deep-seated prejudice.  We can't do anything about the former, but we can and should do something about the latter.  Allowing bigots to put bubbles around their children so that nobody ever introduces a counterexample to their children is not the answer.

I thank you for trying to start a dialogue, but for any dialogue to begin, we have to move beyond the deliberate untruths and spin put out by the other side.  I suggest that you read the Re: Marriage Cases decision, which covers the churches angle, and think a bit more about how children are being used as a scare tactic and what the real issue there is.

---

by: pgraydon @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 07:35:48 AM CST

[ Parent ]

One more thing... please do not use 'lifestyle'

The terms 'gay lifestyle' and 'homosexual lifestyle' are generally regarded by the queer community as insulting for two reasons.

First, the imply that attraction to the same-sex is a choice (and thus that an individual can be morally faulted for making that choice)  despite the fact that nearly no-one, whether heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual, experiences a sense of choice about sexual orientation.

Second, they reduce all people in a group to a particular behavior, ignoring the vast diversity of that group.  Homosexual people - people attracted exclusively or primarily to other people of the same sex - live a vary wide variety of lives: some are celibate; some force themselves into heterosexual relationships that they don't really want; some have happy lives in stable long-term relationships with a partner; some gay men practice anal sex and some don't; some have a great many sexual partners, and some stick to long-term monogamous relationships; etc.  There is as much diversity in the gay community as there is everywhere else, but this term implies that the only thing that matters at all is a behavior - generally left unsaid - that not everyone so-labeled actually engages in.

I'm assuming that you have used one of these terms because you weren't aware that I and others reading this blog would find it insulting.  I ask that you refrain from doing so again.

---

by: pgraydon @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 10:14:11 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I apologize for offending you

I am going to leave the discussion now. I did not mean to offend.  

---

by: djl130 @ Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 15:46:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No, not offended

I understood you to have been approaching this from a spirit of inquiry, and I did not think that you meant to cause offense.  I did think that you might be unaware about how the term you used might be perceived.  The point of my pointing that out was not to scold you, but to make you aware of it, so that you would not cause offense unless you actually wanted to.

I also understand how difficult it can be to have dialogue with someone who doesn't already share your worldview, and so I thank you for making the effort to try.

---

by: pgraydon @ Tue Nov 11, 2008 at 08:45:04 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I have ZERO desire for dialog with these hateful f*cks

Other LGBTs are welcome to chat with their oppressors, I;m not going to be here when they make the shocking discover queers are people....F*CK IT!

This is another reason I choose to live as seperate from straight people as possible.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 22:02:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

As for you

I am sorry I offended you. Obviously, I hit some buttons when I tried to discuss this. I will not comment again. I think you should modify your attitude - It is part of the problem

---

by: djl130 @ Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 15:48:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I thank you for trying to start a dialogue, but for any dialogue to begin, we have to move beyond the deliberate untruths and spin put out by the other side.

True enough.

However, one also has to move beyond the deliberate untruths and spin put out by one's own side.

In part, the No on 8 campaign was blindsided because of its own political correctness.

There's a left-wing paradigm, taught in most universities as well, that excuses African Americans from any sort of judgment, as if they're not people, just pawns in a great game.  High rates of violent crime, pop culture that glorifies violence, misogyny and hate, etc. in some parts of the African American community are all excused, even defended.  The roles of individuals in these things are ignored, as if some nebulous monster, "Racism", is acting on its own.

So now it's come to bite a group of left-wing activists in the butt, and they're shocked and angry.  However, it was easy to see this coming, if one wasn't blinded by a set of assumptions.

African Americans are PEOPLE.  Don't be surprised when African Americans act like people.

People have fears, people can hate, people can hurt other people.  They can also love, tolerate, and give to others.

However, this is done by individuals, by their own choices.

Maybe we can stop talking about "the gay community" or "the black community" now?  Anyone here want to be implicated in the racism in West Hollywood the other night?  Nobody here seems like that kind of person -- if anything, some posters here choose to be sensitive to a fault when it comes to saying nothing offensive.

To win freedom, we must approach individuals as individuals, not treat real-live African Americans as if they are some nebulous, but faceless metaphor.

---

by: BarryD @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 08:42:13 AM CST

However, one also has to move beyond the deliberate untruths and spin put out by one's own side.

Which were those, exactly?

I don't agree with everything that the various No on 8 supporters said, and certainly both sides engaged in the sound-bite game.  But you seem to be saying that the notions of institutional racism and such are a lie put out by the No side and its supporters, and this belief led to its downfall.

If that is indeed what you are saying, I couldn't disagree with you more.  Sure, there are a lot of problems facing people who identify themselves as black, and certainly some individuals who identify that way do stupid and/or evil things, just as some individuals who identify as white do.   But to suggest that there is no such thing as racism left in this country is beyond naive.  Such a claim leaves no source for the problems as a group as a whole but some kind of racial trait, and such eugenicist explanations are rightly decried, in universities and elsewhere, as a load of bigoted crap.

As to how that "blindsided" us, I don't get it.  See the above posts about vote counts and how, even if not a single black person had voted, prop. 8 would still have passed.

---

by: pgraydon @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 10:26:20 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You are demonstrating the problem...

It doesn't seem that you even read my post before replying to it, because you have a bunch of set ideas about group identity, race, etc.  I certainly never said there's no such thing as racism, nor any of the stuff you "responded" to.  You're so quick on the trigger, you don't even look at who you're shooting at -- because you think you know everything about anyone who dares write anything other than the standard groupthink.

Sure, there are a lot of problems facing people who identify themselves as black, and certainly some individuals who identify that way do stupid and/or evil things, just as some individuals who identify as white do.

That's half the story.

The other half is this: real live African-American individuals may see themselves as members of an oppressed minority.  But the same individuals don't necessarily see themselves as having some sort of solidarity with any other minority group.  That's something that sociology professors might tell their students, but many black Californian voters evidently haven't gotten the memo -- and they're not interested in getting the memo.

The expectation that one group that considers itself an oppressed minority will automatically support every other group that does is naive.  This naivete led to blindness.  The blindness led No on 8 to ignore the constituencies that it needed to address..

Can you tell me what that has to do with eugenics?

Furthermore, someone may not be yelling the N-word in the streets, but he/she can still be a racist.  It's racism that assumes that African-American individuals all think a certain way because they're supposed to.  Sure, assuming that they'll all support you is sort of a "positive" form of racism, and it sure doesn't hurt the "other" as much as, say, a whites-only drinking fountain.  

But it isn't particularly productive, especially when one wants to win at the ballot box, to believe falsely in an angelic other, any more than a threatening one.

---

by: BarryD @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 12:45:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Some responses to your responses

First, I did read your post in its entirely before responding.  I'm sorry you think otherwise, but I can only point out that it takes clarity in the writing and diligence in the reading to communicate something.

Second, claiming that I "think you know everything about anyone who dares write anything other than the standard groupthink" is untrue, insulting, and does not further the conversation.  Unless you can remain civil, this conversation is over.

I read the paragraph that begins "there is a left-wing" as suggesting that "high rates of violent crime, pop culture that glorifies violence, misogyny and hate, etc. in some parts of the African American community" should be seen as the primarily the fault of individuals.  It appeared to me that you were discounting any effect that racism past and present has on AAs, and using a variant of the standard overt racist line about racial behavior characteristics (hence the eugenics bit) to suggest that these were to blame for the way many AAs voted on Prop. 8.  If that wasn't your intention, then I apologize for the misunderstanding.

The other half is this: real live African-American individuals may see themselves as members of an oppressed minority.  But the same individuals don't necessarily see themselves as having some sort of solidarity with any other minority group.  That's something that sociology professors might tell their students, but many black Californian voters evidently haven't gotten the memo -- and they're not interested in getting the memo.

The expectation that one group that considers itself an oppressed minority will automatically support every other group that does is naive.  This naivete led to blindness.  The blindness led No on 8 to ignore the constituencies that it needed to address.

I wish you had written this in your earlier post, it would have made your position a lot clearer to me.

I agree that many people from oppressed groups don't necessarily identify with other oppressed groups.  (I also agree that it's <insert_group_here>-ist to assume that they would.)   I'm not sure that I agree or disagree as to whether assuming that they would was the primary reason why the No on 8 campaign was not effective amongst AAs.  I don't see any particularly good reason to think that this was the primary reason, as opposed to, for example, ignorance about how the advertising message would play in some communities.  Do you have a particular reason for claiming this?

As to "they're not interested in getting the memo," (emphasis mine) I'm not sure how you would support this claim.  Tuesday's activities might be construed as supporting the position a claim that some people haven't got the memo, in your parlance, but not a claim that they are not interested in getting it?  Have you, personally, tried to build that bridge?  Is it possible that your anger is coloring your judgment?

---

by: pgraydon @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 13:45:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Rise above bigotry!

My brothers and sisters: We know better than to answer bigotry on its own terms!

Yes, we are disappointed and angry. I know I am. I expected this to be a watershed moment in our history--the day that a majority of voters rose up and stood against the religious right's constant efforts to relegate us to second-class, to invalidate our relationships, our families, our value as contributing, taxpaying American citizens.

That didn't happen.

Instead, a very narrow majority--so small that a pollster would consider it "statistically insignificant"--once again judged our marriages and our families to be less "valid" than their own. And this in California, which we have long looked to as our likeliest ally, the most tolerant state, the Golden State.

It is unacceptable, even intolerable. We are pissed off; we want to lash out, make them pay; we want to smash things and make them sorry they ever dared show their faces at the polls Tuesday. We want to see the look of shame on their faces as they realize the evil, the injustice of what they have done. How dare they?

The worst thing is that the Proposition 8 decision prevents us from fully celebrating the clear victory we've all been looking forward to--Obama's election is a decisive and powerful win that we helped create, and we rightfully should be celebrating with our friends and allies. After all, nobody celebrates like us! Obama even mentioned us in his acceptance speech. It should be party time!

But we can't even completely experience joy in this huge, important, transformational victory. We're confused and disillusioned, and we cast about for an explanation. Who could have done this?

We remembered some pollster somewhere saying that black voters, energized by the Obama campaign and showing up to the polls in greater numbers than ever before, might favor Proposition 8 to a slightly greater extent than the electorate as a whole. Hallelujah. Jesus on the main line--that sort of thing. It was a matter of a few percentage points--and, face it: It was also a matter of racist stereotypes. Hallelujah. Praise the Lord.

In our disheartened and embittered state, some of us lashed out at the wrong people. We used ugly words and epithets that are usually only heard on the lips of our enemy, the purveyors of hatred and bigotry. We know better. We can do better than this. We must expect more of ourselves. We have too much good in us to succumb to the evils of racism and hate speech.

Because, let's face it--very often, we're the ones who are targeted by hateful epithets. We know, just as well as anybody, how deeply those words truly hurt--even if we're good at pretending they don't.  

This is not the first setback we have experienced on the road to equality. Nor will it be the last. But there is a triumph in all this: Fifteen years ago, the biggest victories we were celebrating had mainly to do with the "right" kind of gay characters appearing in television sitcoms and commercials. These things seemed like big wins because, up till then, we had only ever been ridiculed or utterly ignored.

In those days, had you described a major national debate over our substantive legal rights as American citizens, married couples and families, I'd have said you were dreaming. And yet, here we are. And HERE WE ARE!

We're not going anywhere. We have dealt with bigotry and hatred for as long as any of us can remember. It has made us strong. And we have managed to make some valuable friends and allies along the way.

As we find ways to burn off our rage and anger--and it is a good, healthy and productive thing to target our real enemies, the religious right and the brainless bigots, with that rage--let's never let them make us forget our decency and the rightness of our cause.

The one thing our enemies would most love to take from us is not our marriage rights, or employment, or hospital-visitation rights, or any of the other equal rights we must constantly strive for. The thing they would most love to steal from us is our dignity.

We must not give it to them.  

---

by: Brandon Burt @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 09:56:11 AM CST

The More I re-read, the more I disagree with the overall premise

Recognizing the evidence that a significant, huge portion of AA voters supported prejudice against other people, is not racism.  It could become racism, if the correlation were treated as causation - i.e., they voted thusly because they are . . .

This is not the first time that a majority of people of color have voted for discrimination against GLBTQ people, and I use that term inclusively. And each time, when GLBTQ people make note of the fact, we are accused of being racist.  This is that very message I mentioned yesterday, the one that declares "race can not matter ever, but sexuality still does, get over it."

So folks, face the cold hard fact: as mean and nasty as using the N word can be, as uncalled for and malicious as the alleged incident in WeHo was - voting for Prop 8 is worse.  Every person who voted for Prop 8 did something orders of magnitude worse than using any hate speech or derogatory label.

I've argued elsewhere that support for Prop 8 boiled down to selfishness.  It was driven by "I want".  One writer admitted "I want the right to object to other people's marriages". People who supported it wanted to impose their values on everyone else, wanted to make the entire state, including public schools, adhere to their wants and wishes.  That is selfish, regardless of any other quality possessed by those who voted for Prop 8.

Frankly, the focus on the allegation of racism here, instead of the blatantly obvious homophobia that clearly dominates African American thinking about society, is also selfish.  It is a case of "We don't want to talk about what many, many, many of our peers did to you - we want to make this about us".

In CA, same-sex couples who are married, may lose their license.  Same-sex couples who want to marry, now cannot.  Single GLBTQ people who want to be a part of a couple and marry someday, cannot.  And yes, a huge number of people of color deliberately acted to harm GLBTQ people.  That needs to be talked about honestly, without diversionary tactics like accusations of racism.

So while some are so outraged that the N word was allegedly used, in the heat of anger apparently, it doesn't change the fact that a huge number of people of color calmly, deliberately, with intent, acted to harm GLBTQ people.

Casting a vote for Prop 8 is a far greater crime than using the N word.

---

by: FriendOfJonathan @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 13:00:49 PM CST

I thought I had it out of my system, but

Some more food for thought:

There is no shortage of African American ministers who teach anti-gay prejudice, even hate speech and death threats, from the pulpit.  If there are any GLBTQ clergy teaching racism, they are keeping a very, very low profile.

There is no shortage of people of color stating that sexuality is not equivalent to race, that comparing the struggle for equality of GLBTQ to the Civil rights movement, is insulting to people of color.  If any GLBTQ people are making the reverse claim, they are keeping a very, very low profile.

There is no shortage of people of color in the performing arts and sports and politics, who articulate anti-gay idealogies.  GLBTQ people in the same fields who make racist claims, are extremely rare.

As a group, the majority of people of color have consistently voted in support of discrimination against GLBTQ people, time after time.  GLBTQ people do not consistently vote in support of discrimination, as recent initiatives about unlicensed immigrants have shown.

So why point out the splinter in the eyes of some GLBTQ people, when there is a forest all around us: the logs in the eyes the many, many, many people of color who voted for Prop 8.

GLBTQ people are a lot farther along in ridding themselves of racism, than people of color are in ridding themselves of homophobia.  Match our progress, before offering criticism.

---

by: FriendOfJonathan @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 13:31:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Coretta Scott King

I'd like to offer a note of interest related to this topic.

Coretta Scott King (rest in peace) is the wife of Martin Luther King Jr. (rest in peace).

In 1998 four days before the 30th anniversary of her husband's assassination Coretta Scott King said:

"I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice. But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'"

"I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people".

"Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights in Montgomery (and) Selma (Alabama), in Albany, Georgia, and St. Augustine, Florida, and many other campaigns of the civil rights movement".

She said she saluted the contributions "of these courageous men and women" who fought "for my freedom at a time when we could find few voices for our own".

In 2004 at The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey she said;

"Constitutional amendments should be used to expand freedom, not restrict it".

"Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union".

"A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriages."

---

by: tomc @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 18:44:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It is racism

It could become racism, if the correlation were treated as causation - i.e., they voted thusly because they are . . .

In focusing on this particular chunk of the vote, aren't you coming dangerously close to suggesting exactly this?  You could be talking about people who voted Yes, as a group, but instead you are talking about the AA vote, as a group, lumping together AAs who voted yes with those who voted no.

---

by: pgraydon @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 13:55:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No.

"In focusing on this particular chunk of the vote, aren't you coming dangerously close to suggesting exactly this?"

No.  Focus does not indicate bias.  Further, the topic of this thread is specific, and I commented within that level of specificity.

Frankly, anyone with any sense expected conservative Christians, people with low levels of education, and older voters, to generally support Prop 8.  And, having seen this particular racial correlation before, I did expect that people of color would tend to vote in support of prop 8, as they have in the past.  Homophobia is very strong among Hispanics and African Americans, and falsely accusing GLBTQ people of being racist is not going to change that.

The data about the voting pattern for Prop 8 and race becomes racism when one concludes that it means something about the character, the innate qualities, of the people involved, that somehow their vote was the product of their race.

What you've provided is another example of people crying wolf, or racism, when neither have howled. To be blunt, the analysis going on here comes off as avoidance, and worse.  It reminds me of the man who beats the stuff out of his wife, and then has the nerve to scream at her 'look what you did, your jaw bruised my knuckles when I beat you'.

---

by: FriendOfJonathan @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 17:42:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Since an insinuation based on focus was made . . .

Looking at the demographic breakdown of the vote in terms of gender, race, religiousity, age - what strikes me is that the vote followed the degree to which the different demographic groups are both expected and pressured to be less prejudiced/free of prejudice.  

Those groups who are pressured the most to be or become free of prejudices, (women, whites, asians, liberal Christians, people with higher education, young people) voted no at a rates that correlation with the amount of pressure put on them to be prejudice-free, while those groups for whom excuses are routinely made (men, African Americans and Latino's, people  over 65, low income voters), or who are simply written off as unreachable (the religious right), voted strongly in favor of 8, correlating well to the degree to which their prejudice is excused or considered irreversible.

In other words, the groups whom society pressures the most to be unprejudiced toward anyone, voted no on 8 more, while the groups who are shown more leniency about their prejudice, voted yes more.

---

by: FriendOfJonathan @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 19:22:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yeah, well...

So folks, face the cold hard fact: as mean and nasty as using the N word can be, as uncalled for and malicious as the alleged incident in WeHo was - voting for Prop 8 is worse.  Every person who voted for Prop 8 did something orders of magnitude worse than using any hate speech or derogatory label.

I didn't vote for Prop 8.

I gave money I didn't really have to No on 8.

I registered my wedding with EqCA and encouraged our friends to give there in lieu of wedding presents (And that was another problem. Net-savvy people trying to donate money shouldn't find it so difficult because of the poor site design.)

I was devastated when I woke up on my 2-month anniversary to find out that my marriage is no longer recognized in my state.

And there's no way in hell I'm going to the rally in Sacramento tonight, because I'm afraid that some jackass white gay person will assume I voted yes and call me a nigger, and then I'll have to punch someone in the face and my (white) wife will have to bail me out, and it's just not fucking worth it to risk that.

At this point, I want nothing to do with any predominantly white GLBT organizations. Anything I do in the future will be with the National Black Justice Coalition.

So, congratulations. You've just alienated yet another queer black person. Let me know how that works out for you.

---

by: Darkrose @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 20:18:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Agreed

"Every person who voted for Prop 8 did something orders of magnitude worse than using any hate speech or derogatory label."

That party line is not going to endear anyone to your cause. Point blank. You can be mad all you want to, but you're going to have to go out and convince those same people you just alienated to join you, if we are to win this. Those white GLBT folks who are spewing epithets just shot themselves in the foot. Congratulations, now you (the general 'you') have MORE work to do.

---

by: laurynx @ Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 05:50:03 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Wow, racism comes out of the closet

Wow, racist cretins and home school trolls (get a teaching credential and then you're equal to a teacher)...

The people who tossed the epithets at the Black demonstrators are racist pieces of shit who deserve the punch in the face from Darkrose - and worse.

You're a racist piece of shit by definition if you're going to call someone out because of the color of their skin, which is exactly what was described at the demos.

How did they identify the people to abuse? By the color of their skin. What did they do? Abused them because of their group (see skin color). Gee, let's have a lynching because they're going to get the white women - no wait, in this case, vote against 8. But of course these Blacks weren't going to get the white women or vote against 8.

How is tossing racial epithets at Black opponents of 8 (at a demo no less, you dumb racist #$%^s) because OTHER Blacks opposed it not racist?

I was irritated with Jasmyne Cannick's op ed in the Times because I thought she was overreacting and simply harming herself and others.

After reading here, I understand Jasmyne and Darkrose much better and I am much more sympathetic to their reactions.

It's really irritating that the comments here don't reflect more outrage at attacking someone because of the color of their skin.  

---

by: beauford @ Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 22:22:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Prop 8, etc.

How about you folks just go all out for civil unions and call them whatever you want instead of tearing the country apart trying to shove same sex marriage down everybody's throats?

---

by: elHombre @ Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 21:28:50 PM CST

If you don't want same sex marriage, don't marry another guy

We aren't the ones interfering with the lives of other people.

If you want allies, you have to be an ally.

---

by: dale @ Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 01:15:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Civil Unions

The Supreme Court already struck down Separate But Equal.

If the country is being torn apart by Gay Marriage, then it probably needs to be.

There is FULL EQUALITY and then there is Less Equal.

Less Equal leads to Dehumanization.

Dehumanization leads to an atmosphere where violence against the less human is acceptable.

At the same time, when respected leaders quit spreading hate and instead promote tolerance, acceptance, and equality, the people will follow. That is why they are called leaders. It does no good to have the leaders follow the followers.

When I was in the 4th grade in 1980, and we were being taught history, it was impossible to understand how few years passed between the racial strife of the late 60's and then. It did not seem possible that things had changed so much in such a short amount of time.  

This is moral and immoral. The moral thing, the thing that everyone knows is right inside, though some are afraid to say, is EQUALITY. Inequality is immoral.

---

by: mickdansforth @ Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 06:21:46 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Separate but equal?

You're kidding, right? Did somebody in some talking points class tell you prohibitions against same sex marriage were the legal, logical or moral equivalent of racially segregating schools? Please!

I've got a friend who is regularly promiscuous, some might say a sex addict. It's a common practice. Some might even say a former president followed it. Does it violate the "separate but equal" doctrine to tell him he can't have a harem?

"Less equal leads to dehumanization. Dehumanization leads to an atmosphere where violence against the less human is acceptable."

Where do you get this shit? The bigots on the California Supreme Court recently upheld a law against home schooling effectively decreeing that in the matter of educating their own children, parents are not equal to teachers. Have the parents been dehumanized? Are you outraged? Is it acceptable to do violence against the parents? Or is it still against the law to do violence to others, even parents?

Oh yeah. And Dale, did the legislature "interfere with the lives of other people" when they prohibited home schooling?  

---

by: elHombre @ Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 18:34:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Civil Rights & Home Schooling

The Point of Home Schooling is to keep children dumb and more susceptible to the Hate their parents are passing down. See, children who are educated and are socialized, have a harder time accepting hatred. So not crying about your kids not getting to grow up to be as uneducated and bigoted as you.

Teachers generally go to school for at least 6 years. So parents dumb enough to think they can replace teachers are far less qualified.

Parents purposefully making their children stupid is the same thing as pedophilia. The children can not consent. Children are not property. Children have a right to a possible prosperous future.

If you don't think that Gay Marriage is a Civil Rights issue, find someone who is gay, hand them a bat, and the look them in the eyes and explain to them why they deserve less rights than you.

The Klan hates Gays as much as Blacks. Both have been beaten by cops. Both have lost jobs, or been denied jobs. Both groups have people who can Pass (for white or straight) and those who just can't. People have bled and died for both civil rights causes.

I went to school so I am able to, and do, write my own Talking Points.

Here is some more:

Every culture around the world and through out history has had some sort of ceremony, ritual, rights or procedure for the joining of two people. In English these all translate to the word marriage.

All the disparate tomes that were collected to form the bible were written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Marriage is an English word. So we can say definitively that the Bible, and therefore Christians do not own the word Marriage.

The talking points have at least 1000 rights granted to married couples by the federal government. So with the assumption that the word is listed at least 5-10 times for each right, and with the amount of times the tax code has been re-written, and with all the state, city, county and other local governments' laws and ordinances, I do not feel it would be hyperbole to say that the word Marriage appears in US law in excess of One Million times.

Pretty sure all of this means that the word Marriage is in the Public Domain.

As an aside, some say that Gay marriage is a States Rights Issue. Which is utter bullshit. If States had the right to refuse to recognize marriages ordained in other states, Johnny Carson and Eddie Murphy would have just moved to avoid having to pay their wives "HALF!?!".

This is moral and immoral. The moral thing, the thing that everyone knows is right inside, though some are afraid to say, is EQUALITY. Inequality is immoral.

---

by: mickdansforth @ Mon Nov 10, 2008 at 04:42:23 AM CST

[ Parent ]

He went to school

I went to school so I am able to, and do, write my own Talking Points.

You didn't learn the nonsense in your posts in school.

If you don't think that Gay Marriage is a Civil Rights issue, find someone who is gay, hand them a bat, and the look them in the eyes and explain to them why they deserve less rights than you.

Somehow I knew it would come down to something like this with you. Bat wielding is not among the better arguments for gay marriage and I really don't think gay people want to promote determining the outcome of this conflict by the use of force. You are the mirror image of a klansman.

---

by: elHombre @ Mon Nov 10, 2008 at 12:37:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Never went to Church so was not taught Nonsense.

My Point IS...

How can you look someone in the eye, and tell them they are less equal?

My other point is that those who oppose equality are generally cowards, who run their mouths when in safety, and are unwilling to stand by their words when confronted.


This is moral and immoral. The moral thing, the thing that everyone knows is right inside, though some are afraid to say, is EQUALITY. Inequality is immoral.

---

by: mickdansforth @ Mon Nov 10, 2008 at 17:28:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Full circle with Dansforth

I was never taught how to accept being less equal.

Evidently, neither you nor the racist protesters who were the original subject of this thread were taught to accept the outcome of the democratic process either.

When you speak of "confrontation," do you mean with bats, as you suggested, or with racial epithets like those used by the other gay activist neanderthals in Westwood described above?

Like I said: You are the mirror image of a klansman.

---

by: elHombre @ Tue Nov 11, 2008 at 00:04:27 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Prop 8 is UnConstitutional

Democracy is not a vile act that you do to someone.

The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution defines citizenship and then states that citizens can not be denied rights.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

So as Prop 8 and every other Gay Ban violates the 14th Amendment, how can any American who believes in the Constitution and Freedom not be sick to their very core that their country is not living up to the ideals we learned about in History and Government classes?

When I spoke of a bat, I was questioning your commitment to your words. I said YOU hand the other the Bat. But I no longer stand by this analogy, as I would not hand you a bat as I compare your wanting to make your children stupider to paedophilia. I would give you a wiffle-ball bat though.

Racial Epithets and Gay Slurs are undeniably wrong.

I have not driven around with a christian tied to my bumper. I have not shot and/or killed christians. I have not burned symbols in the front yards of christians. I have not defaced churches. I do not hate people because they are different, just because they are stupid and gullible. I did however make a joke 12 years ago about Robot Lions because christians might hurt the regular lions. With or with-out that joke, I have to say I am very unlike the Klu Klux Klan.

This is moral and immoral. The moral thing, the thing that everyone knows is right inside, though some are afraid to say, is EQUALITY. Inequality is immoral.

---

by: mickdansforth @ Tue Nov 11, 2008 at 03:18:58 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Dansforth's admirable tolerance

I do not hate people because they are different, just because they are stupid and gullible.

That's so admirable, Dude. Perceptive too. I'm not sure just anybody would conclude that people are "stupid and gullible" just because they are "different." Or did you mean you only hate people who are "stupid and gullible." And that would be because they think differently than you, I guess.  

... I compare your wanting to make your children stupider to paedophilia

I doubt that my children would have any difficulty running circles around you intellectually.

Having said that, I have to ask: Are you claiming pedophilia is a bad thing? By what standard? Don't you think their right to practice pedophilia is protected by the 14th Amendment? Don't they have a "right" to marry the kids of their choice?

Let's take a vote. By your rules, the minority wins, correct?

---

by: elHombre @ Tue Nov 11, 2008 at 19:47:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Consent is KEY - Noise

If someone is unable to consent, then anything you do to them is a violation of their rights.

But being Christian, you don't believe in individual rights. There is god's will, and those who carry it out, and any who stand in the way will be destroyed.

Elected Chumps from coast to coast have stated that our country was founded on Judea-Christian values. When they say this, they are talking about the 10 Commandments, and really just the big 2. Don't steal from us. Don't kill us. (Graven Images and False Idols just don't play. Slowly we are removing the women as property laws inherent in Coveted Wives.) The big two are the very basis of any society. With out those two you have no society, be it primitive village or futuristic utopia. Our country was founded on freedom, equality and democracy, found not in the bible, but in ancient Greece.

Christianity is incongruous with the American Values defined in the bill of rights, built into the constitution of our great country.

If you think that the bible is more important than the constitution, then you are Wrong. With the separation of church and state, the bible should hold no more sway than a Spider-Man comic book.

Do they teach Republican classes on how to argue online? If you have no argument, you just skim to find a single word with which to attack the messenger.

You have no arguable reason why gays should not have equality, so you call them whiners for complaining.

You have no argument against my assertion that the Word "Marriage" is in the public domain and not owned by any one group. So you attack me.

To an early point you made, sex addiction is a tool sitcom writers use to introduce their protagonist to loose women. As gays get harassed, beaten and killed, why would they choose that as a lifestyle if they could? For you to compare the two is vile.

In 2004 with nearly every Republican from the President on down saying that Gays are a threat, a bar in Government Camp, Oregon, took it upon themselves to defend marriage by attacking a gay couple visiting from Seattle. During the Vietnam war the soldiers referred to those they they would kill as gooks. In the club, when 2 frat boys decide its time to throw down, they start by calling each other fagot. Dehumanization leads to violence.

So do you have any substantive arguments, or are you just going to continue to distract with noise?

Why do gays not deserve equality?

How does Prop 8 not violate the 14th Amendment?

This is moral and immoral. The moral thing, the thing that everyone knows is right inside, though some are afraid to say, is EQUALITY. Inequality is immoral.

---

by: mickdansforth @ Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 18:42:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Need to Reach the Black Civil Rights Leaders

During the 2004 Democratic Presidential Debates, while front runners Kerry and Edwards pandered to avoid being the victim of Robo-calls, everyone who had no chance, including Al Sharpton and Dennis Kucinich endorsed Gay Marriage.

That same year though, a gaggle of Black Civil Rights Leaders gave a statement that they do not see Gay Marriage and Gay Rights as a civil rights issue.

So what you need is a the a bunch of Black Civil Right s Leaders (who tend to be clergy), a few excellent Gay Debaters, (who understand that a marriage license is a document from the government that declares that the holders are equal to everyone else and have the right to walk down the street with out getting their heads caved in) and a locked room. And no one gets to leave until everyone agrees that either a) Gay Marriage is a Civil Rights Issue, or b) Gays do not deserve equality.

Once the Black Churches stop preaching hate, respect should trickle down.

White Churches are the ones that Prop 8 on the Ballot.

Black Churches are kind of like Lieberman. No one sought Lieberman's endorsement, so he endorsed his Republican friend who was out of money and nearly out of the race.  

This is moral and immoral. The moral thing, the thing that everyone knows is right inside, though some are afraid to say, is EQUALITY. Inequality is immoral.

---

by: mickdansforth @ Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 06:07:00 AM CST

H8 aftermath

What OUR community needs is FOCUS, single minded laser like focus.
We will have our retribution nthe groups who took our hard fought for marriage right in CA. We won't be distracted by other events, and we won't be moved. LDS and UTAH and Marriot, you may hope this anger will burn itself off in a month...it won't, I F*CKIN WON'T LET IT.

While many Black voters supported this act as well as Latino/as, Whites...they weren't the driving force who masterminded this initiative, and funded it beyond all measure, that was the LDS Church. Utah residents have to be so badly hurt financialy, and despised by other Americans, that THEY turn on the Mormons, not LGBT groups.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 07:00:24 AM CST

Not for nothing, but

Many of us are Latina, AA, or nonwhite and lesbian or gay or bi.

And some of us are trans on top of it.

But I will say this much: It was African American religious leaders who stuck up for me when I needed it.
That was when I was being harassed by nontrans white gays and lesbians at my school.

It was a Latino family that picked my bleeding body up out of the road after I was beaten by a male homosexual for "flaming."

It was a group of Black women cheering me on when I did a hollaback against two gay guys taunting me in the street.

The white LB movement seriously needs to die. Being Latina, trans, a woman, and in a ltr with a woman, LGB does nothing but harm for me.

and on, and on, and on. Apparently, "respaldemos la familia" was totally lost on the LGBToken types.

***
Please remove my account here. I am done with anything having to do with LGB rights.

Because the LGB rights movement has flushed my kind down the shitter one too many times...

---

by: voz @ Mon Nov 10, 2008 at 13:19:29 PM CST

I'm sorry you are leaving, Lyssa

Your anger is justified, and I can't fault you for leaving. But Pam's House Blend isn't the usual LGBT blog. I see it as leading towards change.... change which is badly needed.  Your voice will be missed.

If you want allies, you have to be an ally.

---

by: dale @ Mon Nov 10, 2008 at 23:40:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

With all the passion here on this topic...

...I wondered what the late Representative Barbara Jordan [D-TX] would say to all this.  It's a somewhat odd I would think of her, considering that I did not follow her career that closely; but I do remember my heart stopped when I learned she had died.  

What would Rep. Jordan have said?  I think this is spot-on:

"One thing is clear to me: We, as human beings, must be willing to accept people who are different from ourselves."

or this:

"I felt somehow for many years that George Washington and Alexander Hamilton just left me out by mistake. But through the process of amendment, interpretation, and court decision, I have finally been included in "We, the people."

There's a whooooooooooollllllle bunch more here.

Oh... and she happened to be an AA Lesbian.

To have her cooler head on this issue would be priceless.

---

by: GraciesDaddy @ Tue Nov 11, 2008 at 09:19:33 AM CST