Apparently, Democrats and liberals are going to have to go back to the drawing board

on much of our rhetoric and some positions as well.

As far as I can tell we've been bullshitting the American people for as long as I've been alive.

We've been pushing Israel to settle down to serious conversations with the Palestinians and other Arab neighbors to make peace and give everyone a place at the table. However, the Palestinians and most of Israel's neighbors don't even respect their right to exist. Clearly, we will no longer be able to ask them to negotiate with their neighbors and support them or at least turn a blind eye to them taking steps to remove the threat to their very existence. How do you ask people to negotiate with people that not only think you are evil, corrupt, and less than human but with people that blatantly and publicly claim you don't even have right to exist?

We've been claiming that criminals can be rehabilitated but it is clear that people can't, don't or won't change and apparently if you have a bad egg you may as well toss it out because all it can be is rotten. How can thieves, murderers, and like be made into decent and productive people? How stupid it is to claim that people can change, DU says that once people start down a path that apparently there is no redemption and if it is possible the effort is certainly a waste of time.

Many of us have lied and claimed that education can overcome ignorance but DU has shown me the past couple of weeks that not only is that bogus but rather the opposite is true that the ignorant should be shunned, disregarded, and if at all possible be put out of the picture. Apparently, only processes and multiplication tables can be learned. Things like philosophies, socialization, and insights into misunderstandings cannot be passed along. If you're ignorant on a subject or a people and have a false impression it is too bad, that is yours for life, and if you figure it out then shame on you for not knowing inherently and for being slow on the uptake.


What I see in thread after thread are calls for the Democratic party to rethink and reposition in much of our entire approach to people and problems. I just don't see how we can possibly square fuck 'em, discredit 'em, ignore 'em, and get rid of them with the entire undercurrent of our belief system.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

We used to try to change hearts and minds. We used to lead by example. We used to believe that ignorance is our enemy not people. We used to believe in rehabilitation and redemption. We do not dehumanize and demonize.

I totally understand the disgust and anger with Warren but what I don't get is the tone of some of the response. Clearly, the gay community must and should make their needs and case clearly and prominently. Of course, ALL of our citizens are entitled to equal protection under the law. However, the witchhunts, bans, neo-McCarthyism, ignores, name calling, and shutting down of dialog along with the utter disinterest in educating the ignorant are directly contrary to who and what we say we are about here. What I see in many cases are efforts of coercion rather than attempts to educate, believe what and how you are told or face the consequences and prepare to be outcast. It is wrong, at least in my opinion.
We have for at least all my days worked for, demanded, and insisted on a world view that I see as conflicting with the response to Warren, those he represents, and even those who are misinformed, deluded, or just disagree (in any way from tactics to understanding of historical precedent) "amongst friends" here.

The lack of any semblance of civility is appalling, maybe not as disturbing as Warren's hate and distortion but I see it as a growing area of concern. The tact will destroy the moral high ground, not in the sense of who is right and who is wrong but in the superficial ways that vitriol is measured by the less involved, fence sitters, or the general public.

This is not the 50's and 60's the courts are stacked with conservatives and worse. The struggle will not be won like the Civil Rights battles of the 60's was, at least not any time soon. The rights being sought will have to come on the back of a change in public sentiment because it should be fairly clear that positive rulings are unlikely from the bench. This will not happen by calling the majority of Americans that disagree with marriage rights bigots and ostracizing them. No, this battle will be won with Job like patience, the wisdom of a Solomon, and the nature of Christ from it's advocates. In fact, if you have paid attention to recent civil rights gains like America in the 60's, Ghandi's India, or Mandella's South Africa then you'll realize the tact being taken is the path to success. Getting as many people as you can on your side is key, as is just increased presence. Gays cannot afford to not assimilate as much as possible. It is terribly hard to dehumanize those you know to be human.

Call me what ever you like because I know my own heart and my own actions, accuse me of whatever you please but don't accuse me of telling you to shut up and be quiet because I am advocating the opposite. What I am calling for is a return to the rhetoric and tactics that are fitting of people that are supposed to be more sensible and aware than the average. A return to the belief systems that mean the ignorant can become knowledgeable and the wrongheaded can be rehabilitated.

How do you face hatred with love? You come to the table with the love and let it conquer hate. If this is too much to ask then don't be surprised when your hate loses to those that are more practiced at it. If you have the energy to go to war with people that are to whatever degree on your side then you'd best gather the strength to see how rights have been gained in the past. You've got a couple of options martial strength and superiority or follow the examples of people like Christ, King, Mandella, and Ghandi. Looking at numbers and resources, it is my guess that a smashmouth, hardassed route won't get too much mileage but it isn't my fight beyond the knowledge that an unequal society is likely to fall under it's own weight and my own personal discomfort with falling short of strides during my time towards a more perfect Union.

In my opinion, the war is being won despite heart breaking set backs like we saw with prop 8. Gays have rapidly moved from widespread pretense that the Village People are straight as Wilt Chamberlin and Rock Hudson is a lady's man to the sitcom stage. It won't be too terribly long until gays enter their "Cosby Show" stage of acceptance.

Overcoming ignorance and just general "getting used to" is key here and you aren't going to accomplish that by turning inward, blasting with hate, and having an us versus them attitude. Don't just be better and smarter than Warren DEMONSTRATE IT. DEMONSTRATE IT EVERY SINGLE DAY.

More friends, even "soft" friends means less enemies.
If some will only go as far as Civil Unions, then ride that horse until the shoes fall off and then see if it can be coaxed into going a little further. You're going to shun and ostracize support because it doesn't go far enough? That's counter productive if I've ever heard. Blacks didn't say "fuck you Abe" because he didn't go far enough, even though share cropping and Jim Crow weren't night and day from slavery. Women didn't shun those that helped them to get the vote because they failed to sign up for equal pay.

Sorry, but believe it or not winning isn't any easier than losing. In fact, if you have to earn it winning is way more difficult in my experience. It means you have to not only be better but prove it.

I fear that in our efforts to fight the Republicans and conservatives, many have lost themselves and become like them.

"He who fights monsters must take care lest he become a monster. When you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche

Until I was educated otherwise by a few DUers (namely FreeStare and BookLover). If they had decided to shout me down and hurl insults, I probably would not have learned that Marriage is a civil right and denying to to any one of any sexual orientation is wrong. I'm glad they and some others have chose that tact, and I am using what I learned to try and convince others in my community that marriage must be for all.

It is much easier to insult and condescend and hate than it is to teach and convince. Your OP is excellent.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=7302269#7302760

I have said inasmuch, or tried to anyway.....in the last few hard days
But then I stopped talking.

Perhaps I will get brave again.

as opposed to in the 60s, when courts decided....

Don't you think that makes a difference?

In the 60s, the courts desegregated the schools, and sent in the National Guard.
These days, the court legalizes Gay Marriage, and then a proposition is put to the ballot box.

It's quite a difference.

The idea that opinions can't change is so wrong I really don't know where to begin. I am relatively young right now and a few years ago I had a much more "bigoted" as you would say view on Homosexuals and same sex marriage. Just the process of meeting people and getting to know them not to mention some of the well reasoned opinions I've read on this sight have helped me change that view. And you know what if we can't change all those bigots there is at least hope that through a positive dialog and just being exposed to the fact that homosexuals are just like every one else we might get to the next generation.

Every generation has been less prejudiced than the one that proceeds it.

(fyi I am not in support of Warren and am now 100% in support of Marriage Equality)

call it what you want.

gays will not get their rights as long as straight people get to vote on them.

It's hard not to be cynical when that has been historically proven true (that the minority won't get rights from the voting majority)

I may have been misinformed, but didn't a miniority guy just win the Presidency? And yeah, I know he didn't win the majority of the majority, but he won enough of the majority that together with the majority of the minority he was able to make it over the top in a rather impressive fashion.

I am middle-aged, straight, have always thought that gays should be able to marry, but am totally turned off by the shrill tone used here, as well as the apparent banning of any opinion not in agreement with this position. While I'm certainly not going to change my mind about gay marriage because some of its spokespeople annoy me, and, in fact, employ many of the tactics I have always hated in the right, I must say that the discourse here and elsewhere has made me less than willing to be associated with this particular battle. Kinda like the way feminists went a bit overboard a couple of decades ago and ended up with a whole generation who would not call themselves feminists because of the associations the word conjured up. When people who agree with you start wishing you would just shut up, you probaly aren't winning the battle for hearts and minds of those who don't.

It may not be fair, but screaming your opinion, figuratively or otherwise, no matter how right it may be, is not a tactic for changing minds.

Your other post in this thread? Not so much...

It may not be fair, but screaming your opinion, figuratively or otherwise, no matter how right it may be, is not a tactic for changing minds.

:toast:

In a lot of cases it does work.

because someone else reached out to those bigots.

FOUGHT, in this case, in a court of law, not public opinion.

Its an act of complete cowardice in my opinion, but that is where the battle will be fought. I don't think 50% of the country is changeably bigoted.

Think of the United States today being like the United States of the 1960s, but on civil rights for gays rather than for African Americans. Back then, the Civil Rights that were fought over were not wholly accepted by the white establishment, indeed, it took over a generation for it to be accepted, and even now, the transition hasn't been complete. But, in that time period, African Americans, at the very least on paper, were given equal rights and opportunity, I'm not saying that inequalities were eliminated, its obvious they weren't, but at the very least, they had legal outlets, the court system, voting, etc. to push to make sure the laws are enforced equitably.

GLBT people, at this juncture, only have these types of outlets in limited parts of the country. True equality will come, but far too slowly in my opinion, and yes it will have to come through the courts, if GLBT people don't want to wait for their civil rights to be handed to them. The courts are forcing people's hands in this, like they did in the past.

We can appeal to everyone in the country to hand GLBT people their rights, but frankly, how long are they supposed to wait?

did not always support your parents' right to marry. It's kind of a case of public opinion AND the court of law drag each other into the future at various times.

Spare me the bullshit buddy. Civil rights legislation was passed because a bigot stood up for it and strong armed the Senate. The Virginia courts were also full of bigots that fortunately ruled the right way. Don't even try coming at me with this crap. Next time research the person that you are bashing before you go starting threads. I have given more to the cause of gay rights than anyone on this site and literally have the scares to prove it.

The 'Great man' theory of history in all its silliness.

Honestly, why would Johnson have even stood up if there was not a movement that fought for those rights in the first place? Giving all the credit to a single leader (even a civil rights leader) or politician or general or CEO has always been one of the greatest absurdities in studying history.

So if you would spare me a bit of the BS with regards to the personage lionization please I would appreciate it.

who want to work at gaining the acceptance of their bigoted family members?
Do you tell them it is impossible, and will never happen, and that they shouldn't even try?

on a liberal message board.

If bigots changed there would not have been a Civil War and the need for Civil Rights Acts. If bigots changed there would not be more young black men in jail than there are in college. I understand the gay struggle because I have seen bigots my entire life.

Gays will not gain civil rights with straight people voting on them. Ever. Quite simple.

there wouldn't have been a civil war cause the north would have never outlawed slavery. We may never be rid of bigotry but we can diminish it we can fight it we can make PEOPLE change..

while some act like we need each and everyone.

There are persuadables out there.....I think.

Forgive me if I forget the exact math but gay marriage support is up somewhere around 10 points since 2004. The young people are supporting more each year so eventually the population will shift past the majority I think within Obama's first term.

It's very far from perfected, but it's a heck of a lot better than the 50's.

Why is it that young evangelicals are not as likely to respond to the demonization of gays?

and there can be only one...I am the Highlander...Queen Music.

:rofl:

In the midst of all the insults and condescension, this kind of thoughtfulness is very much appreciated.

The RNC and the right didn't make the gains they have made on social or economic policy by playing nice with us.

voted in by the people.

not caring what got broken along the way, playing on people greed and ignorance, and by breaking the law.

Which of peoples "baser instincts" will you be using to further civil rights, and which parts of society will you be tossing to the dogs, and which laws will you be breaking that will HELP achieve civil rights?

Somehow, those strategies seem singularly un-useful in achieving civil rights for all.

for your reasoned, and well crafted post. I deeply appreciate that you wrote what I've been thinking, but poorly communicating to one of my family members. He went ballistic with the Warren choice, and couldn't hear me anymore. Refused to let anything get past his wall of anger.

I've printed out your post for him. Maybe he will hear you.

Reaching out to others who have polar opposite views is difficult. I was thinking of historical examples of people being able to reconcile after years of animus, injury, destruction, and death. The post Civil War years, and South Africa come to mind. Some efforts met with much better success than others. Not an easy process to say the least, but worth the effort.

I'm thinking that at least those between the 28% and the 46% are reachable in some or in many areas. That's 18% of the electorate. If we can change some of those minds on the obstacles we face as a country then I say its more than worth the frustration.

People can change or if you insist they cannot then you have to stop even asking others to behave in a way that is irrational. Tell the Israelis to roll their tanks and get their tactical nukes ready for Iran and Syria.

"How do you face hatred with love? You come to the table with the love and let it conquer hate. If this is too much to ask then don't be surprised when your hate loses to those that are more practiced at it."

i am extremely disappointed in this whole affair, but i agree with you completely. i think we absolutely must respond to people like warren, but how can we conquer with the same hate they spew? ghandi and king (and even malcolm before he was killed) saw that love is the way to win the battle for hearts and minds.

If there was a poster here saying openly "I don't think gays should have rights" or "gay people are sooo gross!!1!" then I could understand every single person on this web site jumping in their sh*t.

What I don't understand is the folks who start off saying "I am FOR gay rights/marriage equality" and still getting screamed at and called bigot. And in the last 7 days, I have seen about 3 posts where someone has questioned gay rights and been yelled at and about 6936 where someone has said "I'm for gay rights but the hysteria over this issue is ridiculous" and been called everything but a child of God.

There have been a half dozen threads "congratulating" DU'ers who have said "I didn't think Warren was a big deal and now I've changed my mind" and yet, every single thread where a person identified themselves as gay and said "I'm not happy with Warren but we have bigger fish to fry" that person has been called an "apologist," a "self-loather, an "Uncle Tom" (which just sounds so stupid to call someone who is not black) or other assorted insults. Apparently, the ONLY acceptable viewpoint in all of this is frothing rage. NO OTHER VIEWPOINT IS ACCEPTABLE. Skinner posted a thread saying he thought it was perfectly reasonable to be FOR gay rights and FOR gay marriage and still be able to see and understand Obama's strategic thinking and folks came as close as they were brave enough to do to criticize the administrator of this site for what could only be construed as a thoughtful, balanced, neutral statement. It's unreal.

I'm damn glad to see that folks are fighting back, though. The good thing about all of this is 1) it's not but a very small number of banshees doing all of the screaming. It may seem like alot but if you notice, it's the same 6 or 7 folks posting 12+ times per thread. And 2)the banshees on DU have made me that much more appreciative of every GLBT activist that I've known and every gay person that I've ever loved who realized that they didn't need to sound racist or rabid in order to get the rights that they deserve.

I hope that's who that is!

((singing softly)) "peeeek a boo..."

Would that I could write with such clarity.

For some reason, I don't see your point about Israel. Perhaps it is because my parents spent two years in a Palestinian refugee camp doing mission work. I don't see why we are supporting a country that blatantly supports one ethnic/religious group to the exclusion of all others. My parents were appalled to find out that all their letters home would be available to be read by the authorities before being delivered.

Where is the Israeli respect for the Palestinians, and whey are they going to give back the land they stole? I don't have a problem with the Palestinians wishing the Nation of Israel were gone. I personally think the middle east would be better off without them anyway.

This is a well written and deeply committed message, which I respect. The notion that we're some sort of beleaguered minority that has to bootstrap itself based on willing acceptance of hate filled demagogues like Warren is simply wrong. If you look at his vile comments - on Terri Sahivo (removing the feeding tubes worse than Nazism), those favoring legal abortion ("holocaust deniers"), and gays, you will see that he offends the majority of Americans. Sitting by and pretending he's the big bad wolf or that we're on thin ice is simply wrong.

Returning to roots of success means the union movement of the first half of the century and later successes, the civil rights movement, and the anti war movement of the 60's 70's. No more bull shit from nasty actors. They're not even supported by those they claim to represent.

Can't say I agree with the thrust of the argument, but I certainly share the frustration with both "liberals" and the Democratic Party.

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

Reversed: "We've been pushing Israel to settle down to serious conversations with the Palestinians and other Arab neighbors to make peace and give everyone a place at the table. However, the Israelis and most of Israel's allies don't even respect the right of Palestine to exist."

Israel doesn't want a I/P democracy established, where those people in and from the disputed areas can vote on the issue, because they (people who want a "Jewish nation") would lose the vote, and essentially re-establish the area as a secular, democratic, nation, or a democratic Muslim nation.

Personally, I find religion-based states to be a bit anachronistic, and can understand why other states might object to them... especially (sadly) other religion-based states.