• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Marriage Equality

EatLeadCommie said:
Oh please. So have the Micks and Wops. Gimme a break.
Click to expand...

So exactly what arbitrary amount of discrimination would you need to witness, or believe to have happened, for you to believe that the homosexual civil rights movement is comparable to that of the black civil rights movement? Just know, before you answer, that it doesn't fucking matter. The comparison of the two civil rights movements is purely a republican political maneuver to turn the issue into a segregational pissing contest so that religious conservative african americans will latch onto the issue in a state election. How deserving a person is of due protection isn't dependent upon the amount of discrimination they've faced.
 
Last edited:
Deadbolt said:
Gays have been abused, bullied, and killed just for being gay. That sounds awfully similar to the plight of blacks in pre-civil rights southern states.
Click to expand...

I think you need to read up a little on the plight of blacks in the Jim Crow era. The mis-treatment of homosexuals in this country is an embarrassing travesty, but it doesn't hold a candle to the way blacks were treated. The two just aren't comparable at all.
 
Junebug said:
I think you need to read up a little on the plight of blacks in the Jim Crow era. The mis-treatment of homosexuals in this country is an embarrassing travesty, but it doesn't hold a candle to the way blacks were treated. The two just aren't comparable at all.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it's apples and oranges...maybe I should have been more clear on that. But as MDMH said above, the amounts don't have to be comparable. Bullied, beaten, and killed for being who you are (black, homosexual, female, Justin Bieber) should illicit the same kind of protections for everyone.
 
Deadbolt said:
I'm not saying it's apples and oranges...maybe I should have been more clear on that. But as MDMH said above, the amounts don't have to be comparable. Bullied, beaten, and killed for being who you are (black, homosexual, female, Justin Bieber) should illicit the same kind of protections for everyone.
Click to expand...

Right. If present protection from harm must be proportional to amount of discrimination faced in the past, it should be open season on old rich white men, correct?
 
Deadbolt said:
I'm not saying it's apples and oranges...maybe I should have been more clear on that. But as MDMH said above, the amounts don't have to be comparable. Bullied, beaten, and killed for being who you are (black, homosexual, female, Justin Bieber) should illicit the same kind of protections for everyone.
Click to expand...

You're missing the fundamental distinction that one was de facto and the other de jure. By virtue of their number, blacks were unable to mobilize and effect change through the political process. Homosexuals are a minority, to be sure, but they haven't faced the same legislative difficulty blacks in the Jim Crow south did. That's likely because, though a minority, society doesn't segregate homosexuals the same way it did blacks. In any event, because of their demonstrable legislative success, homosexuals don't need the courts.
 
Junebug said:
You're missing the fundamental distinction that one was de facto and the other de jure. By virtue of their number, blacks were unable to mobilize and effect change through the political process. Homosexuals are a minority, to be sure, but they haven't faced the same legislative difficulty blacks in the Jim Crow south did. That's likely because, though a minority, society doesn't segregate homosexuals the same way it did blacks. In any event, because of their demonstrable legislative success, homosexuals don't need the courts.
Click to expand...

There was no Jim Crow in states outside the old Confederacy, either. So if "legislative success" is the marker, why did black people need the courts? Or were you talking about crayons?
 
Junebug said:
You're missing the fundamental distinction that one was de facto and the other de jure. By virtue of their number, blacks were unable to mobilize and effect change through the political process. Homosexuals are a minority, to be sure, but they haven't faced the same legislative difficulty blacks in the Jim Crow south did. That's likely because, though a minority, society doesn't segregate homosexuals the same way it did blacks. In any event, because of their demonstrable legislative success, homosexuals don't need the courts.
Click to expand...
Homosexuality was illegal and criminalized relatively recently, sodomy even more recently. There are American Christian missionaries in Africa right now who are major proponents of the death penalty for homosexuality in multiple African countries. Were it not for the advances made during the Black Civil Rights movement, the current culture of acceptance and freedom for homosexuals in America would be much different.
 
Junebug said:
You're missing the fundamental distinction that one was de facto and the other de jure. By virtue of their number, blacks were unable to mobilize and effect change through the political process. Homosexuals are a minority, to be sure, but they haven't faced the same legislative difficulty blacks in the Jim Crow south did. That's likely because, though a minority, society doesn't segregate homosexuals the same way it did blacks. In any event, because of their demonstrable legislative success, homosexuals don't need the courts.
Click to expand...

The highlighted is total bullshit. As I stated earlier, it has been legislated in over two dozen states that a person can be fired just for being gay. It's also legislated that you can deny housing to people because they are LBGT. It's absolutely no different.

No matter how you look at being LBGT they deserve either the same protection as women and people of color (born with it) or the same protections as Christians, Jews, et al ( a choice).

You can't get around the fact that in many states they have Jim Crowesque anti-gay laws.
 
Deacon923 said:
There was no Jim Crow in states outside the old Confederacy, either. So if "legislative success" is the marker, why did black people need the courts? Or were you talking about crayons?
Click to expand...

The 19 states that recognize marriage equality only represent 44% of the US population. There are still 30+ states where you can be fired for being gay. There's still a long way to go. Ending racial marriage bans came after the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act.

Still amazes me that George Wallace, Lester Maddox, etc...fought segregation long after all of America had seen Freedom Rider buses being bombed, four little girls blown up in in a church, and protesters being attacked by dogs and beaten by cops. The handwriting's on the wall on gay rights and 291 votes in the House, 67 votes in the Senate, and 38 ratifying states will never be there for a constitutional amendment. Nobody knows the names of the most virulent anti-Black pols in the early years of Jim Crow, but everyone knows the names of the last holdouts. Huckabee and Frothy are competing to be the best-known anti-gay voices in American history and I'm amazed that others still haven't backed off yet.
 
Junebug said:
I think you need to read up a little on the plight of blacks in the Jim Crow era. The mis-treatment of homosexuals in this country is an embarrassing travesty, but it doesn't hold a candle to the way blacks were treated. The two just aren't comparable at all.
Click to expand...

well geez, when you put it that way... we should start a new thing for gay youth: instead if "it gets better!" so they have hope that the pressure and bullying and shit they put up with tends to become less as they get older, we should go with "it could be worse!" to make them feel guilty about feeling bad for being bullied over something they can't do anything about.
 
I like how we all just moved past JuneBug's assertion that the state has a vested interest in fertility. Like it was unquestioned fact. I would love to hear these arguments.
 
TownieDeac said:
I like how we all just moved past JuneBug's assertion that the state has a vested interest in fertility. Like it was unquestioned fact. I would love to hear these arguments.
Click to expand...

Who else is going to pay Social Security??!?!?
 
TownieDeac said:
I like how we all just moved past JuneBug's assertion that the state has a vested interest in fertility. Like it was unquestioned fact. I would love to hear these arguments.
Click to expand...

We haven't. we dismissed it as ludicrous. I even showed that gay couples have natural children. He didn't respond whether gay couples with kids have "earned" being called "married".
 
TownieDeac said:
I like how we all just moved past JuneBug's assertion that the state has a vested interest in fertility. Like it was unquestioned fact. I would love to hear these arguments.
Click to expand...

I kind of would too, but as RJ mentioned (wow I've never agreed with him so much) I kind of dismissed it as ludicrous.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
So exactly what arbitrary amount of discrimination would you need to witness, or believe to have happened, for you to believe that the homosexual civil rights movement is comparable to that of the black civil rights movement? Just know, before you answer, that it doesn't fucking matter. The comparison of the two civil rights movements is purely a republican political maneuver to turn the issue into a segregational pissing contest so that religious conservative african americans will latch onto the issue in a state election. How deserving a person is of due protection isn't dependent upon the amount of discrimination they've faced.
Click to expand...

Say what? The comparison of the two movements did not stem from Republicans. It stemmed from gay activists making the comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top