Should homophobic "Change my ideal to win" people leave the Dem party?

I thnk so

They should also leave DU

You know - so we can win.

Or not even vote or something.

The things you learn here.

Not you. Unless you are a log cabin type.

Your sexuality is NOT more important than our collective Democracy. And I think the Democrats need to get VERY serious about muzzling gay-marriage and gay adoption advocates.

Yes, Bush DID steal the election. But you HAVE to realize that his ability to steal the NEXT election will be even greater. We DO NOT need to be fighting this gay marriage issue.

Look, all you're doing is empowering people who want to put you in jail for gay sex. The more power Democrats loose, the closer you'll come to being forcefully institutionalized and medicated for a "disease". The more right wing judges they appoint, the more likely that hate mongers will kill and harass homosexuals and get away with it!!!!

There is a POWER in silence when your viewpoint is radically unpopular!!! Learn from the Republicans who have silenced their agenda to end abortion rights, but have nonetheless pursued it!!!!

In the end, I'll vote FOR a homosexual marriage ban BEFORE I give up our collective Democracy!!! The rights for self determination is more important than ANY concern I might have personally!!! If it means attacking porn and Howard Stern, I'll do it and bide my time for a more favorable political climate!!! And if maintaining Democracy means foresaking partner benefits for a homosexual spouse, you should close your trap and TAKE IT!!!

You need to realize that the Republicans are now playing FOR KEEPS!!!! They're trying to undermine the very foundation of our Democratic system in favor of a blend of facism and theocracy!!! All the while they'll maintain the illusion of Democracy!!! There WILL NOT be another chance if the left keeps losing this way. Democracy will be gone and the ONLY thing that will restore it is a SECOND civil war fought between right wing militant gun nuts and a community of gentle peace loving leftists!!!! I personally DO NOT like those odds!!!!

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

You are not FORSAKING a right!!!

The constitution may have SAID blacks had equal rights, but the FACTS were they didn't in a matter of judicial ruling!!!!

We criticize the right for being faith based instead of reality based. Well guess what, you have faith in something that DOES NOT EXIST!!! Only ONE court in this nation has granted this right. Gay marriage is a right ONLY in Massachussetts!!!! That ruling was based on the STATE constitution, not the FEDERAL constitution. It DOES NOT APPLY to other states until you get a ruling to that effect!!!!

THOSE are the facts!!!!! There are no rights to give up. You DO NOT have them!!!! We can fight for MORE RIGHTS. We can preserve an avenue towards domestic partnerships. But this election has effectively OBLITERATED the possibility for gay marriage across the other 49 states. And it's likely that Massachusetts will amend away the only one that exists in this nation!!!

Time to face REALITY!!!! Politics is NOT an act of voting for WHAT YOU WANT. Politics is like a fast food menu. If it's NOT on the menu, you can't get it. You have to pick the best meal available!!!

Your refusal to accept these fundamental rights will only turn the clock BACK on gay rights. Your refusal to keep a low profile will only get you targeted and put your allies in a difficult position of pursuing a greater good or abandoning you altogether!!!

Choose what you wish. But your continued agitations and baseless accusations of homophobia against friends will ultimately disempower your issues!!! I warned you folks about this last year. You didn't listen, and you didn't learn. This gay marriage shit helped rile up the religious conservatives. It has been DISASTEROUS. And it is no wonder to me that a REPUBLICAN court in a Democratic state voted for an issue that hurt Democrats so badly!!!

Next time you want to beat on a hornets nest, don't do it in the middle of a crowd of Democrats. We don't need the stings!!!

"Agitation" for civil rights? Just imagine!

Dude, I think when Strom Thurmond left the democratic party he forgot to take you with him.

But I'm having trouble tolerating this selfishness!!!!

Is it any wonder that people who aren't quite as tolerant???

With this attitude, you shouldn't be surprised when people who are liberal to moderate on most issues vote Republican. And here you are telling me that I should go vote Republican.

Check the voting rolls!!! You need EVERY fucking vote you can get just to keep the possibilty of gay partnerships on the table!!!!

If you folks keep up this foolishness, you will FORCE Democrats to vote FOR those stupid amendments to ban not only gay marriage, but gay civil unions!!! Then you'll be alone!!!!

Who will you blame THEN????

Why should human rights rely on you being 'tolerant'.
I accept human rights. I cherish them. I do not 'tolerate' them.

Blacks have no rights to giveup! They DO NOT have them! We can preserve the right to let them vote later, but this election has shown blacks should not be given the right to vote!

Your refusal to admit this will turn the clocks back on black rights!



What if the blacks in our country had actually bought into this bullshit? They would still be sitting in the back of the bus and having to pass tests to vote.

One question --

Was Barney Frank being homophobic when he warned early in the election cycle that the "gay marriage" issue should not have been pressed by the left because it would only create a wedge issue that the Republicans would exploit?

Enjoy President Bush.

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

of others. If you can't back rights for all you don't deserve them for yourself.

I am especially troubled by blacks who fail to see the connection btwn their rights and those of gays.

Except there's no need for a homosexual marriage ban. This needs to be framed in terms of rights, instead of values. Both gays and straights need to have civil unions. "Marriages" for everyone can take place in church.

And you're right about the GOP taking no prisoners. While we're playing "applause-o-meter" with the left agenda, they're going to be taking apart the Constitution.

There are things more important than identity politics. This is not to say that identity politics are not important or worthy. There are just things that are more important.

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

It's about having the same rights and affirmation that straight couples do when they love one another. Sex can be bought and sold or picked up in a bar-anyone can get that and it doesn't need the government to dictate that. Same sex couples who love one another deserve that. It's a goddamn human right.

Our dummed down public THINKS it does. Thats ALL that matters!!!

I'm advocating the DELIVERY of rights by a different name. You're bitching because you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Well fuck, welcome to the real world of politics. The right wingers have gotten their way by changing their rhetoric. You need to be a little flexible and realize that a rose by another name smells just as sweet!!!!

My time will be used exclusively to further my own true values, and pandering to homophobes no matter how many there may be will not be on my list of things to work on.

You are arming their ammo chest and helping to create a scare.

This is NOT the same thing as the civil rights movement. At that time we had CLEAR majority!!!! Embracing the civil rights movement cost the Democrats the South!!! It was worth it because it was about EFFECT rather than a name.

Fighting for gay "marriage" is NOT worth losing every OTHER state besides California, Vermont and Massachussetts!!!!! Fighting for partnership rights IS worth that risk!!!

A rose by any other name is JUST as sweet!!!! Burning down the rose garden because someone called them posies is JUST PLAIN FUCKING STUPID!!!!

If I'm a homophobe, than the nation is dominated 70% by homophobes!!! And those homophobes will exercise their Democratic right to amend contitutions and blank out what you call a "right"!!!

THAT is reality!!!!

I'm just expressing my opinion.

But do not assume that a bunch of hillbillies with assault rifles would get out of my neighborhood alive.

Second, no one ever won respect by refusing to demand it.
Ask the log cabin republican what it feels like to be plastered into the closet like a bad story by Poe.

Third, no one ever saved democracy by backing down. They want a culture war they are stealing elections to win a culture war. I cannot understand how declaring neutrality in a war that is being waged on you is prudent.

Respectfully, there is not much compelling in your arguments.
I am a straight male, and I cannot endorse this approach.

and a 'vacant' sign in the white house for the next 35 years.


And I'm not 'homophobic' either. I'm pragmatic.

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

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

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

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

Frankly, you should be ashamed.

with the 1960's civil rights era struggles is telling me to be ashamed. Yikes.

Sounds like you are.

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

Because apparently you think there's something shameful about homosexuality.

In my opinion, it's bigotry like yours that's shameful.

... because black folk oppose homosexual marriage even more than white people!!!! Black folk KNOW oppression. And I would think they'd recognize it when they see it!!!!

There's no difference.

see how they respond.

The thing about interracial marriage or laws against it is that it applied to all races.

And would Coretta Scott King count as black?

How about Julian Bond?

Both races were against interracial marriage! Of course! It's got nothing to do with white racists hating black people! Dear oh dear oh me! What WAS I thinking?

:eyes:

You did seem to forget THAT.

:smoke:

I've been making the same argument you have - that Loving v Virginia is relevant. That laws against interracial marriage are equivalent to laws against same sex marriage.

Sorry!

*blushes*

:-)

nt

Because some black people are bigots, gay rights cannot equate with civil rights? What fucked-up sense does that make?

It is one of the worst cases of failing to see the connection btwn your rights and the rights of others. I am a white male with a great job and a US rep in my family. Why should I care about the rights of blacks I might ask, since of course I am not a victim of that racism?


If you want your own rights protected you better be willing to fight for the rights of others.

Interracial marriage has a tremendous history as a way of bringing different tribes together by creating strong family bonds where none existed before. It was NOT interracial marriage that the KKK opposed. It was inter-COLOR marriage!!!

The marriage between swedes, anglos, scots, irish, germans, french, russians, spanish, etc... was 100% accepted even though the difference between these ethnic groups was just as strong as that between a nigerian and morrocan.

The black peoples of the South came to America with vastly different language and cultural identities. Those joinings were 100% fine with the KKK. It was crossings between European and Africans/Asians/Natives/Mexicans that was so vocierously opposed because it would naturally create the family bonds that I spoke about before!!!

Why did the authority structure of the South oppose that joining. They opposed it because they had kept control by playing poor white people and poor black people at odds against each other. A joining of the two groups naturally threatened their control on the South.

THAT is what the opposition to inter-COLOR marriage composed of!!!

(whatever that is), then not only do you have a problem with gays, but they quite legitimately have a problem with you.

Your pragmatism on this issue might be applied to a half-dozen or more other issues. It simply doesn't make sense to try and save the Democratic Party by dismantling the platform on which it stands.

I support equal rights for gays to join together in whatever you want to call it, and enjoy the same protections and rights as others. I don't believe that pushing this agenda to prominence in the democratic platform is going to achieve this, though. Based on the ballot question results, this issue is not going to help anyone get elected, and will even hurt their chances. I would say this...

If this issue is one of the the most important issues to you, you should do everything you can to make it happen. If you believe that your canidate (local, state, national) should push this issue, let him know. If you think that your canidate will lose the election because of it, will you make any progress toward your goal? If there are no other issues (health care, social security, the environment) that are more important to you then by all means fervently support this one.

You just need to realize that there are other people for whom this is not the biggest issue of our time. There are millions of people without health coverage, jobs are being shipped overseas, the environment is being damaged day by day. Some people just think that taking care of these issues are more important, and that canidates who want to fix these issues are not helped by promoting gay marriage. They are not bigots for thinking this, they are just realists. The time for gay marriage will come, some of us are just not sure the time is now.

and, in the name of pragmatism, would even understand downplaying it a little. But human rights is an inalienable part of your Democratic Party, is it not? And gays, being humans, are woven into that fabric whether everybody likes it or not.

There's a balance to be found. Probably the best way to proceed is to let me decide everything.

I'm not for abandoning it, I'm certainly not for taking the fundie's side to take the issue off the table, but I just think it's an issue that America isn't ready for yet. I hope that someday (soon) that changes, but at the moment that's not the case. I don't think many would find issue with a candidate who doesn't think you should amend the constitution to put discrimination into it. I think that this is one point Kerry didn't articulate as clearly as he could have. IMHO, in the end, the *'s constitutional amendment will never see the light of day, it was simply a wedge issue. States will be left to decide this issue for themselves, eventually enough states will allow it, that it will become accepted nationally. People will say something like "Vermont allows it, and society hasn't crumbled there, perhaps all the demagoguing was just a lot of BS" (which it is). At that point, I don't think the fundies will be able to stop it.

I think it's inevitable too. I mean, if Saskatchewan is going for it...

are blowin' through Saskatoon!

And I don't think I'm wrong in thinking that the gay marriage issue STRONGLY affected our loss of Ohio AND the presidency!!!

Personally I don't think that gay partnership is the same thing as a traditional marriage. You're trying to fundamentally change an institution that has LONG been defined as a union between man and woman. When a majority of Americans CONSIDER a homosexual union as the same thing, that's when it becomes marriage!!!!

I too am sick of being accused of homophobia for supporting gay partnerships but not supporting the redefinition of marriage. And I'm 100% positive that the citizens of Ohio are offended by such rhetoric as well!!!!

You both think minorities are expendable if it suits you politically.

I think the gay marriage issue IS!!!!! And guess what ... Ohio AGREES with me!!!!

What seems selfish to me is that Democracy and the greater good (including your own) seems expendable in your eyes for the principle of gay marriage!!!!

"I fear the Jewish banks with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America. And use it to systematically corrupt modern civilization. The Jews will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos that the earth should become their inheritance." (Bismarck)

Replace jews with gays.

"I fear the Jewish banks with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America. And use it to systematically corrupt modern civilization. The Jews will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos that the earth should become their inheritance." (Bismarck)

Replace jews with gays.


"I fear the gay activists with their seflishness and naive politics will entirely destroy the Democratic party of America. And use the principle of gay marriage to systematically punish moderates. The gay activists will not hesitate to plunge the whole of America into despotism and The Fourth Reich should become their inheritance." (lanparty)

just because they respectfully disagree with the idea of same-sex marraige. Too many people, not just the hardcore bigots, think it's too radical because it became an issue just a couple of years ago.

You think gays just jumped out of a cake? And on the outside world, people do not "respectfully" disagree with same-sex marriage as a rule.

just because they support the nazi party.

:eyes:

What are you AFRAID will happen if you take a stand for it? What do you FEAR will become of the country if it is accepted? What are you AFRAID will happpen to straight marriages if gays are allowed the same rights?

ho·mo·pho·bi·a     P   Pronunciation Key  (hm-fb-)
n.
1, Fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay men.

2, Behavior based on such a feeling.

Get the hint?

Oh' yeah, this has been pushed by the religious bigots for 5 years, not a couple. You've had plenty of time to prepare.

The left criticizes the right's inability to live and let live!!! But they manifest the SAME problems amongst themselves!!!

If we wish to fix a nation's hypocrisy, we must overcome our own!!!!

These are the same people who did not want my parents to marry because they were an inter-racial couple.

If the Democrats start adopting anti-human rights positions, they have lost their moral compass.

It's a civil union, people..no one is mandating that you have to become gay. Like they would want you anyways......

that it just became an issue a couple years ago.

Maybe they just respectfully disagree with the idea of races co mingling.

That has to be the worst thread in DU history.

And some the reponses here make this one a close second.

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

i hear ya. these ideologues will be the death of our party- and are destroying the only resistance to the new republican reich.

I will hide gays in my closets, attics and crawlspace despite their stupidity.

They are dead wieght.

out of our own end-zone. we have just been sacked trying to go deep, and now find ourselves with 2nd and 20 from our own 1 yardline. it is time to run a few ground plays. we can go for the touchdowns later (gay marriage, gun control,etc..), but we have got to get some first downs before we can do anything else. some of our more divisive issues have GOT to be put on the back burner for a while. it is time to just get some fucking yardage. just win ANYTHING. we can be ideological purists when we are in power. NOT now.

This line of reasoning is making me sick,

If this is where the party is going not only am I leaving but I will work against it til my last breath.

Just take a look around at the bigotry, hate, and pro-Republicanism that we are seeing.

Let's call them the "surrender Democrats."

you cant very well protect gay rights WHEN WE LOSE EVERY SINGLE FUCKING RACE!! you have to be in power to promote an agenda. we ARE GETTING OUR ASS KICKED RIGHT OUT OF EXISTANCE. if we don't start winning elections soon, the democratic party will be extinct. you can then go beg the one-party ruling republicans to support your agenda, and the fundies will tell you to go burn in hell.

In fact males in the US are being conditioned to look at politics as a sport. If you watch the RW talk shows they are the spitting image of ESPN. Just thought I would point that out.

i am a male, and a big football fan, so the analogy comes easily to me. but until we start to view politics the way they do, and realize that we are here to WIN, not be purists, we will continue to be dominated at every turn by the ever adaptable and cunning republican party. our goal should be to be every bit as liberal as we can be-AND STILL WIN NATIONAL ELECTIONS. if we cannot learn to compromise some things to WIN, we will always be the party of intelligence, benevolence and idealism. but we will also be perpetual LOSERS, and will never be able to change this country for the better. our ideals will forever remain only in our heads.

honestly many of them had those ideals long before the newer "lets support gay marriage" people came out (no pun intended).

They have been democrats longer the pro-gay marriage people have been.

They are trolls. Alert on them.

I am shocked at the pathetic people who get their asses kicked by bigoted republicans and immediately think "gee, we should be more like them".

Very well said.

And they are thinking of getting more "values." Hell, we have not even used the ones we have in the party of the people.

We are too busy running from Dean or gays or any issue that might offend the Republicans.

"I'll give up on civil rights, on anything, just don't hit me again!"

And then people wonder how Nazi germany ended the way it did.

in our party.

It's not only against our party, it's unAmerican.

I want to be in the same party with gays and lesbians. I don't care what the homophobic reich-wingers want. If we have to sell our friends downstream, we don't deserve to call ourselves the party of compassion.

All you homophobes can go Cheney yourselves as far as I'm concerned. I'm ashamed of the lot of you! And you should be ashamed of yourselves!

Agreeing with the fascists on this issue isn't going to buy us votes. They'll always come up with more and more wedge issues. I know this because I was a religious reicher. It's never quite holy enough. It's never quite "good" enough.

"First they came for the homosexuals, but I was not a homosexual..."

Don't you get it???? First it will be the homosexuals, then maybe retarded people or people with disabilities, then maybe political dissidents of any stripe. Fascists keep changing the rules. You can't give in. It only puts you in worse shape.

Shame on you homophobic bastards!!! You disgust me as much as the Bushies do. Collaborators! Sell-outs! Leave us and leave DU and don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you.

Are you saying that those of us that support civil unions and think that the gay marriage issue should be put on the back burner for the sake of the survival of this party are homophobic? Please tell me you're not suggesting this.

Gays didn't cost us the election. And if you're saying wedge issues are costing us elections, the pubbies have PLENTY MORE where that one came from. I'm not selling out the homosexuals in order to ingratiate myself to the fascists.

My belief is that the election was stolen from us. Nothing we did or didn't do made a bit of difference. The fight now is against voter fraud, voting machines and the RW media...NOT against our brothers and sisters.

Come on!

For Christ's sake...why would I sugges we tell gay people to fuck oof?


To use the norwegian term

Man I just got on line and to be reading this Bull Shit is just so sad.
I guess the Right Wing and Karl Rove have won! HOW SAD HOW SAD

Right now, this very moment, gays no longer have any legislative protection except for one tiny weapon - the filibuster. That's it.

There is a large contigent of people who hate gays with a passion - think of that disgusting pastor from Kansas and his followers. These are the people who are in control of everything federal right now. And there is no one who can stop them legislatively.

These people, these gay people, who we want so dearly to defend have never been more vulnerable. This is about more than gay marriage - that was just the issue that pushed the evengelicals too far. Now they may - I'm afraid to even say it - enact Nuremberg laws against them. I think this is a real possibility.

So we can try to protect them two ways - one, pander to the Reds by keeping gay issues low profile. This is what the people who are being labeled as homophobic are advocating.

Two, keep on pushing for the right to gay marriage, even though it's so provoking, and defend gays by force and protest when/if the time comes. That's what the others are advocating.

I think this is the right way to describe this argument.

That's my take.

I didn't read the threads so maybe I'm off the mark...

I truly hate to hear people labeled "homophobic" when it's not that they hate gays but that they are just willing to leave them on a leaky ship out of convenience. It sort of cheapens the word "homophobic."

As a woman, if people said "We are going to give up on the idea of fighting for the abortion issue because it's a losing proposition I might call them "insensitive" or "selfish" or say that they didn't really care about women - but I would not call them a misogynist (woman hater).

inflammatory