"Black support for Prop. 8 called exaggeration"

[AntiFascist]

Reports of overwhelming African American support for Proposition 8's ban on same-sex marriage were exaggerated in exit polls, a new look at the November election results has found.

"Party identification, age, religiosity and political view had much bigger effects than race, gender or having gay and lesbian family and friends," said Patrick Egan of New York University, who wrote the report with Kenneth Sherrill of Hunter College of New York for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

Exit polls found that 70 percent of black voters backed Prop. 8 on Nov. 4, even as they overwhelmingly supported Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, who opposed the same-sex marriage ban.

But an analysis of precinct-level voting data on Prop. 8 from Alameda, Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Diego and San Francisco counties, which are home to nearly two-thirds of California's black voters, suggested that African American support for Prop. 8 was more likely about 58 percent.

That support among blacks is still well above the 52 percent Prop. 8 received from all voters in the Nov. 4 election. Much of that can be attributed to the strong religious tradition in the black community, where 57 percent of African American voters attend church at least once a week, compared with 42 percent of Californians overall.

"The study debunks the myth that African Americans overwhelmingly and disproportionately supported Proposition 8," Andrea Shorter, director of And Marriage for All, said in a statement. "But we clearly have work to do with, within and for African American communities, particularly the black church."

More at link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/0...

Cross-posted from an original post in GD by marimour

[mitchtv]

1. Well 58 IS better than 70%

But it is nothing to write home about. I blame so called Christians.
( 58% is plenty to worry about especially when you consider that this is Calif. Cleveland is now coming up and 3 out of four the chief haters are AA and OH is much more conservative regarding Gays than CA.)Meet the players
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x111724

[AntiFascist]

2. I think Obama himself should share some blame...

the words he spoke at the Saddleback debate expressing his religious beliefs on marriage undoubtedly affected many mainstream Christians on an issue that is normally only a hotbutton issue with the Religious Right.

[mitchtv]

4. I am still hoping he will make some

good judicial appointments. But He has lost me as having any interest in our problems except where it may benefit him.

[EFerrari]

12. Obama opposed H8 in a whisper and for *that*, he serves some blame.

Frank Schaeffer told us in his DU interview that the fundie nutcases do not have the heat against gay marriage that they have against abortion. Obama could have done differently and I don't care who roasts me for saying that straight up.

[AntiFascist]

15. I agree, Obama carefully targeted the conflicting messages that he gave...

his No on 8 message was mainly broadcast through liberal blogs and GLBT news media, whereas his pro-heterosexual marriage message was broadcast to the entire audience of the Saddleback debate and via Yes on 8 ads and robocalls in California.

[EFerrari]

16. Precisely. n/t

[Jamastiene]

45. Obama was ambiguous enough that they used his own words

in ads FOR Prop H8. You are right. He should have been clearer that he opposed Prop H8. He was not.

[The Brethren]

41. I agree with you that Obama shares some of the blame

and the more information that comes out of who voted for Prop. 8, the more blame it appears to go around. As I'm trying to look closely at the stats on Prop. 8, the one that thing that just amazes me is that it passed at all. Of all places it passes in CA and it passes during a dramatic turning of the guard election. I really didn't think it would pass, despite the fundies, given the political climate this election.

Maybe it was a coincidence, but I'm not one to believe in coincidences. I'm so sick of organized religious leaders having such an influence on many of our Presidents. I really thought Obama would be different. I don't think that any more. And I had hoped we would see a "change" with voters regarding bigoted marriage laws.

[yardwork]

7. It's not that much better, really. 58% is still a large majority.

12 point spread between 58 and 70 - and we knew that 70% was exaggerated because the exit polls were skewed.

None of this news is new.

[CreekDog]

21. I'm a Christian who voted against 8

thanks for blaming an entire group.

[LostinVA]

37. So you consider yourself a "so called Christian"?

Who is, as you know, the group the poster was condemning.

[CreekDog]

38. okay maybe i shouldn't have taken that personally

:hi:

[LostinVA]

47. So-called Christians aren't Christians -- that was his point

REAL Christians would never vote to pass a law that hurts people.

[mitchtv]

53. and thnk you for allowing the XiAN WRONG

to take over the pupits and the dialogue while so called good Christians sat meekly by and allowed Hate to become the dogma of an entire quarter of humanity's faith. Evil thrives when good men to nothing. which is what so called real Christians have to live with, they have not stood up.

[CreekDog]

60. Allowing? What am I, a dictator who can decree that other Christians will vote as I do?

I can only try to change minds and that I have done.

And at my church there was no involvement with Prop. 8, so it's not like I was in the pews listening to them tell me how to vote.

[yardwork]

3. That sounds more likely. The exit polls for African Americans were very small.

When we saw the sample size for the African American exit polls on Prop 8, it was clear that there was a good chance that the results were skewed. The numbers were based on AA women, for one thing, because there were too few AA men polled for any results. That was a clue right there.

This analysis - putting support for Prop 8 among African Americans at around 58% - is closer to the results of many other studies. As a group, more African Americans are uncomfortable with homosexuality than the general U.S. public.

Until we can talk about this without being called racists, we aren't going to know how to approach this issue within African American communities.

I think that non-African American gay activists need to actively solicit the advice and input of black GLBTQ. That's the way that other community outreach projects are planned. It's common sense to learn how to approach a community from members of that community.

edit - typo

[donco6]

5. I have a gay AA friend in San Francisco.

He lays it squarely on the churches. He says folks like his mother (who is anti-gay herself) tended to vote against gays.

[yardwork]

6. That's what I've heard and experienced myself.

I've never met anyone who was anti-gay who was not influenced by fundy religion. Never.

Churches have been very important to African Americans, as they are to many oppressed groups. Unfortunately, the African American churches have a bee in their bonnets about gay folk.

[LostinVA]

8. And, even non-Churchgoers are affected, because churches are a big part of the culture

In many groups, including AAs, although they are far and away not the only ones affected like this.

[yardwork]

9. By the way, I just posted on the thread in GD. 58% is still a large majority.

I'm not sure I understand the calls for apologies from people who earlier pointed out that a majority of African Americans supported Proposition 8. This later analysis confirms that observation.

What am I missing here?

[LostinVA]

10. I don't think you're missing anything

It's still an unhealthy majority, and close to a supermajority.

[AntiFascist]

11. I think some people were taking it too far...

blaming Prop 8 solely on the black community. You may have noticed, one of the Yes on 8 ads that got a lot of airplay toward the end seemed to be targeting (Catholic) Latino families. Eventhough the margin of support in this community was smaller, the overall impact based on the size of the community may have been larger. Of course, the caucasion Fundie and Catholic base probably had the biggest impact.

[yardwork]

13. I certainly never blamed it solely or even mainly on the black community.

If anyone did, they were mistaken, in my opinion.

What I saw was a lot of expression of deep disappointment that a majority of one minority group would vote to take rights from another minority. That still appears to be the case. Whether it is 58% or 70% is rather immaterial. Very few people believed that the 70% figure was exactly accurate. But 58% is still a significant majority.

I expected bigotry from Republicans. I was sad to see the large number of Californians and Floridians who voted for Obama and simultaneously cast a ballot denying rights to a minority. Not very Democratic behavior.

[AntiFascist]

14. Also...

the Yes on 8 strategy was to target rural communities with demonstrators and yard signs. As we saw in Iowa, even rural whites favored Obama in more moderate to liberal areas. The black community is mostly concentrated in urban or certain suburban cities.

[EFerrari]

17. Most probable black voters are in Los Angeles County.

We lost that county (we think, because the NO on 8 people didn't even follow through with the vote counting when L.A. County has had voting counting problems since Time Immemorial).

How did we let that happen? L.A. County decides most things around here. :shrug:

[AntiFascist]

18. That's true, thanks for pointing that out!

There's the vote flipping security problem in the tabulators which could also easily explain the difference between the election results and the prior polling (52% vs 48% in the election results and something like 48% vs 52% in the previous polling).

[EFerrari]

19. I know there are people in this forum that are still mad at me

and maybe I deserve that. But, I sat here and went over numbers starting on 11/4 and for days after trying to figure out how the hell this happened until I couldn't even focus any more.

You could say, this was a result of older voters and the Catholic Church and you'd be right. But, if you had to pinpoint where it happened, it happened in L.A. County.

Remember that in the primary, L.A. County took WEEKS to correct? No one gave Prop 8 weeks to resolve even though the counties in CA have 29 days or something to get their totals in. Hopefully, the courts will do the right thing and we will never put civil rights up for a vote again. But if we ever have to face these mofos again on a ballot, half of us need to go work and mind L.A. County. Until the votes are counted, every last one. "Trust but verify".

[yardwork]

20. Did you ever read the thread I started the Friday after Election Day?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4404675&mesg_id=4404675

This is what I wrote. It was locked, I don't know why. You were calling me a racist all over DU that entire week but you didn't post in this thread. You have continued to call me, by name, a racist whenever you have the chance.

I am gay. I am legally discriminated against in the United States and especially in my state. On top of that, you stirred up racial hatred against me on DU that continues to this day.

And I don't think that you ever read this thread:

yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Nov-07-08 10:17 AM
Original message
The Exit Poll Might be Wrong

There has been a lot of discussion here about the exit poll showing that 70% if African American voters supported the California ban on gay marriage, as opposed to 53% of Latina/o voters and fewer than 50% of white voters. Now that the mainstream media is headlining this issue I expect that discussion will become even more heated.

Some of us are genuinely interested in learning why such a high percentage of African Americans in California voted to this way. Others have raised strong concerns about seeming to blame one segment of the population. There have been good discussions but also some overreactions. There is also pervasive misunderstanding of the meaning of the data.

One really important point has been mentioned several times but seems to be overlooked - THE EXIT POLL MIGHT NOT BE ACCURATE.

For one thing, the 70% figure is based on a very small sample size. In fact, the sample size is so small, the pollsters were unable to give a figure for African American men. Remember that exit polls are only a small sample of the actual number of people who cast their votes. Please keep this in mind.

The other thing to keep in mind is that exit polls don't reflect actual votes. They reflect what people say to pollsters. Sometimes people don't report the truth to pollsters, especially when their friends and family are right next to them. We don't know for sure that a majority of African Americans voted to ban civil rights of others just because a small sample of people polled while leaving the voting booths said they did. Likewise, we can't say for sure that fewer than half of the white people voted the way they said they voted. Exit polls aren't necessarily reliable.

Finally, we need to be wary of the use that mainstream media and others are making of this data. The Establishment is always trying to divide minorities against one another. It's no accident that the hate-filled Proposition 8 and similar measures in three other states were pushed during the same election that showed an African American Democrat likely to win the White House. These people fight dirty. Remember that.

Let's work together - not separately. They want to divide us. Don't let them.

[Creideiki]

43. It's the "New Democrats"

They're allowed to be prejudiced on people based off of ignorance, distaste, or brain malfunction.

[Zenlitened]

63. Well said.

:thumbsup:

"...What I saw was a lot of expression of deep disappointment that a majority of one minority group would vote to take rights from another minority.

It just plain hurts to see so many Obama supporters of ANY ethnicity cast a vote for injustice.

But the support of Prop H8 among black voters carries an extra sting, IMO. This is a community that, as a whole, ought to have a crystal-clear insight into what it means to declare a group of people less worthy of basic rights.

Like others in this post, I think a great deal of the blame lies with the churches. I've seen it first-hand in Massachusetts, where prominent black ministers -- men who've done good things for our communities, things that benefit EVERY citizen of Mass. because they make the state a better place -- well... these same men were some of the most vocal, vicious opponents of marriage fairness.

It's hard to understand. Just as it's hard to understand how Irish priests and bishops were so vocal and vicious as well. Have they no memories at all? It wasn't long ago that "No Irish Need Apply" signs were common in store windows. Or simply "No Irish." Not welcome anywhere.

Religion, man. It will mess your head up. :(

[bluedawg12]

22. 58% sounds more positive than 70%, but there are other issues.

Even among gay people there has been evidence that we do not see this issue at all the same politically between AA and white gays.

I don't want to re-open old wounds after weeks of debating this, but, it is important to note as far as gays, or as some AA gays self-refer same gender loving, we are not monolithic either.

Still, I would rather think we were up against a 58% voting group than 70%.

[sui generis]

52. if 58% of gays had voted against black marriage, then what.

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

56. What is being missed here is that with the margin of error

the difference between the black vote and white vote sort of collapses.

Eta: I may be wrong about that. It may be more accurate to say that with the MOE, the difference between the black vote and the state's vote does. Sorry.

[sui generis]

62. yeah - not criticizing the "black vote" specifically

by any means. I'm criticizing the opposition vote with extreme prejudice. Those humans are flawed and if I were king of the universe I'd load them all in a clown cannon and shoot them into the middle of Afghanistan where they could all wear burkas and beat each other to death for not being moral or judgemental enough.

I believe grouchy Sui may require a peanut butter nanner sammich and some coffee to get the morning back into focus :P

[EFerrari]

78. Save one for me!

:)

[FreeState]

23. This report, while welcome, has some issues

See: http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/01/07/7857

I hope this study and the conclusions drawn from it do not further divide us - we need to come together and I dont see that happening when we place blame on anyone - be it religious or racial.

One thing for certain IMO is that we as a gay community need to work to overcome our own racism.

[EFerrari]

24. Did you fact check that article?

[FreeState]

27. Boxturtlebulletin - the site that has the article - is a a site dedicated to just that

The blog usually just post articles dissecting anti-gay "facts" - generally they are a good source IMO - is there something in the authors words that sounds untrue to you?

[EFerrari]

32. Well, yes. For example, these are not facts even if they were made bullet points:

* The Black Church is for the most part hugely homophobic
* Even non-religious African-Americans are disproportionately politically anti-gay

If I were going to rely on it, I'd check it up one side and down the other as I do any article from any source.

[FreeState]

49. Im checking on those and have found some studies...

studies that show that both are true - however all of the studies I have found are not peer reviewed... so Im still looking. If I find them I will let you know (there is one from Yale that says both are true but it is not reviewed.) However those to points dont change the authors assertion that the study is flawed.


Those points aside - the main premise of the article is that the study is flawed because the numbers do not add up. To me it does not matter - my main point was that when we try to blame or exonerate whole segments of people we lose. We must reach out regardless if the support is 10% or 90%. I fear studies like this, while possibly informative, discourage people from reaching out IMO.

[EFerrari]

50. When we look at this data with blame or exoneration in mind,

we miss an opportunity to use the information productively and that's a shame.

:)

[AntiFascist]

25. I agree...

and the best way to overcome differences is to reach out to AA gays and lesbians in order to build more solid bridges to the AA community in general. The LGBT community cuts across virtually all cultural boundaries, so there are plenty of opportunities for this type of bridge building.

On edit: As far as "the Black Church" is concerned, I think there may be instances where gays and lesbians actually may feel more welcome in a black church than one of their own. The key is 'liberation theology', and I recall some bloggers noting Obama alignment with this philosophy, at least in the past.

[FreeState]

28. I think the first step in bridge building is overcoming our own bias/racism/etc

While we may feel more welcome in a Black Chruch - I know I would - very few white GLBT folks attend such a church unfortunately. I think the main reason for this is two fold - our own up brings being failed by church's and our own societies racism. The GLBT community here is so segmented by race, gender and economic class its frightening. There are literally no "mixed" bars. There are bars that have "Chocolate" night or Latino night etc - we as a community, at least here in San Diego, have done to minorities among us the exact segregation that straight society did to us. We have a lot to do and learn yet.

But there is hope :)

[AntiFascist]

29. LA, San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland? may differ...

just saying.

[FreeState]

31. Oh yeah I agree each place is different - however most are not

LA is very segmented (from my experience) San Francisco is unique in many ways... one of which is that its diverse - at least at the bars - I have never lived there. But yes the larger cities are different in that regard. As far as prop 8 goes the only cities where prop 8 lost were the cities I see diversity in (san fran/oakland etc... LA was almost a tie and SD was yes on 8 by a larger margin).

[Jamastiene]

46. San Diego is a bit more conservative than LA or San Francisco too.

That's another factor to think about.

[mitchtv]

57. I don't know what bars you go to

But having been around over 60 years I can say that the Gay bars were always integrated and minority gays were always a part of the scene. I refuse to acccept that our loss in PH*8 was due to Gay racism. It has always been the most accepting of communities hence the dismay at the election results. also tiny Palm Springs rejected H8 while Riverside Co was very , very high (over 60)approving of this abomination.

[yardwork]

39. I agree with you about liberation theology. That's been such an important movement for good.

The Catholic Church and many Evangelical churches have also had strong liberation theology components over the years, and those groups have been leaders for civil rights and humanistic endeavors, both in the U.S. and in other countries.

We don't hear enough about them. I think that Obama's UU church was involved in this, but lately he seems to be aligning himself with Rick Warren and the dreadful prosperity theology approach. This is really disappointing to me.

[Smarmie Doofus]

26. Ahem. I never believed it was as high as 70%.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=96645&mesg_id=97002

[AntiFascist]

30. Hmmm, why would CNN, based in Atlanta,....

want to stir up differences between AA and LGBT?

[bluedawg12]

34. Gee, I wonder. I also had said back then that CNN should apologize

for their shoddy work, which created so much anger and hurt so soon after the passage of Hate8.

[bluedawg12]

33. I agreed, far too much time wasted and credence given

to a shitty poll, that had serious doubt cast about it by a blogger on DailyKos who worked the numbers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=96645&mesg_id=96662

[yardwork]

35. Many of us raised questions about that exit poll very soon after the election.

I think it is a shame - a literal shame - that a few DUers keep implying that gay people on DU are racist. It's divisive, not true, and is attacking the very people who are victims of discrimination.

[bluedawg12]

36. The reaction to that Poll was a "process" that took weeks

I was here the night that PropH8 passed and pretty much every night since.

I saw how we as a community worked through it with others. There were some very good threads as opinions were clarified and the importance of the CNN poll eventually waned after it was discredited.

Emotions ran pretty high on all sides. However, to perpetuate a notion that gay people on DU are racist is wrong and pointlessly divisive. I see such comments rear their head occassionally and chose to ignore them. It seems a little like projection after this much time, divisive, and possibly an idea that predates Hate8 and the CNN poll,for some.

[yardwork]

40. I agree that it was a good process, interrupted by some very ugly accusations.

Unfortunately, some of those doing the calling out (again) have followed this discussion back to our forum.

I posted a thread the Friday after election day in which I questioned the accuracy of the exit poll. I think that very few people saw it. You posted your thread about CNN a few days later. Many gay people posted calm, reasonable threads. Unfortunately, the angry words of a few posters - almost all of them trolls who were immediately banned - became in the eyes of DU a myth that "the gays are racist." This was perpetuated by a few DUers who repeat it over and over again. Most of their worst posts are deleted - like the meltdown from the stalker - but the meme is repeated and taken as convention wisdom. The lie goes like this - "The gays on DU are all racists who hate Obama and wanted Hillary to win." Never mind that this is totally false - it gets repeated over and over.

This is the thread I posted the Friday after election day:
------------------------------------------------------------------------

yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Nov-07-08 10:17 AM
Original message
The Exit Poll Might be Wrong

There has been a lot of discussion here about the exit poll showing that 70% if African American voters supported the California ban on gay marriage, as opposed to 53% of Latina/o voters and fewer than 50% of white voters. Now that the mainstream media is headlining this issue I expect that discussion will become even more heated.

Some of us are genuinely interested in learning why such a high percentage of African Americans in California voted to this way. Others have raised strong concerns about seeming to blame one segment of the population. There have been good discussions but also some overreactions. There is also pervasive misunderstanding of the meaning of the data.

One really important point has been mentioned several times but seems to be overlooked - THE EXIT POLL MIGHT NOT BE ACCURATE.

For one thing, the 70% figure is based on a very small sample size. In fact, the sample size is so small, the pollsters were unable to give a figure for African American men. Remember that exit polls are only a small sample of the actual number of people who cast their votes. Please keep this in mind.

The other thing to keep in mind is that exit polls don't reflect actual votes. They reflect what people say to pollsters. Sometimes people don't report the truth to pollsters, especially when their friends and family are right next to them. We don't know for sure that a majority of African Americans voted to ban civil rights of others just because a small sample of people polled while leaving the voting booths said they did. Likewise, we can't say for sure that fewer than half of the white people voted the way they said they voted. Exit polls aren't necessarily reliable.

Finally, we need to be wary of the use that mainstream media and others are making of this data. The Establishment is always trying to divide minorities against one another. It's no accident that the hate-filled Proposition 8 and similar measures in three other states were pushed during the same election that showed an African American Democrat likely to win the White House. These people fight dirty. Remember that.

Let's work together - not separately. They want to divide us. Don't let them.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[bluedawg12]

42. It was clear some people had already made up their minds about gays before H8.

I recall that some said so. That period of turmoil just brought it out in the open.

Some still cling to it.

These polls are only of interest if it ever gives us some idea on how to proceed to build a coalition. Or not.

There is only so much explaining people can do before it becomes apparent whether or not others are listening.

[yardwork]

44. You make very good points.

1. The posters accusing us of racism decided that long ago, had nothing to do with H8.
2. Forget exit polls and analyses. They're not telling us helpful information. Best way to form coalitions is to include members of all groups in the coalition.
3. Stop trying to explain to people who have their fingers in their ears and are hollering la-la-la or in this case "racist racist racist."

In other words, stop trying to teach the pigs to sing! Thanks.

[bluedawg12]

48. This is a leader.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4787599&mesg_id=4787599

I am certain that gay rights groups and their allies would certainly prefer to be joining hands and hearts with the Obama administration and the King Center in the quest to re-vitalize the American economy, improve public education, save Social Security, provide universal health care, protect the environment and end the war in Iraq.

Instead, we must now deal with the sting of having been again slapped in the face by fellow fire fighters before we can even focus on putting out the fire which threatens to engulf everyone's house. These 'minor' insults are actually 'major' distractions that we should no longer allow. Lest we continue to be derailed from the common aim of "liberty and justice for all", the protests must proceed.

Dr. Kenneth L. Samuel is Senior Pastor of Victory for the World United Church of Christ in Stone Mountain, GA.
http://thedailyvoice.com/voice/2009/01/in-support-of-th...

[sui generis]

51. that they supported it at all in any percent is shameful

Period. Fucking period.

But it's not about assigning blame at this point; we're a little past that. Apologists take note, if 58% of the gay population thought black people shouldn't get married . . . . so just faw faw with the statistics. They ARE irrelevant. More than one percent would have been profoundly offensive.

There is no acceptable amount. The people who voted to dismantle our equal civil rights are deeply flawed and unAmerican, and ultimately that's all that number proves.

[AntiFascist]

55. The point is not to "apologize" for the black community....

just please acknowledge that there may be up to 42% (or more at this point) who are on our side.

[noiretextatique]

58. keep in mind that you are not *really* talking about 58%

of african americans in the united states or in california, for that matter. you are talking about 58% of african americans who voted on Prop 8 in california. african americans are roughly 8% of the population in california. when you make statements like this: "if 58% of the gay population thought black people shouldn't get married" you not only lie with statistics, you also dismiss my existence. i am black and gay...i did not support prop 8. i understand your sentiment, but it's still a false generalization.

[sui generis]

61. let me repeat: any number is unacceptable. Let's have some standards

that is all.

We are not required to "accept" any number or to explain or to agree that it should exist. Let me be the first person to say I am toxically intolerant of intolerance.

[noiretextatique]

66. right...how about all the non-black prop 8 supporters?

you didn't mention them in your posts.
we are abolutely required to accept the result of intolerance...prop 8 passed in california. as with the civil rights movement, our only hope is that the courts will protect us from a hateful majority.

[sui generis]

68. three days to evolve my answer - don't give a poop about skin color

and we are absolutely NOT required to "accept" intolerance. Really are not. At least I am not. You don't ask for rights. You take them and wait for the world to catch up.

Anybody who fucked when fucking was illegal knows that. Anyone who ever made their partner a designated beneficiary to the exclusion of their own flesh blood knows that.

We do NOT have to accept it, unless you want to be ruled by it.

If our fellow Americans use "the law" to make the protections of "the law" less meaningful to some of us, then that "law" no longer applies to any of us. They want anarchy, they get anarchy, and we are for the most part older, meaner and much more ready to fight dirty than they are if they think a "law" is going to tell us we can't manage our own American rights, American property, or American lives.

I'm willing to go to jail for my intolerance, so no, I don't "have to" accept them applying law unequally based on a presumption of my pinkpart-proclivities.

By extending all the way to absurdity, if we "accepted" the intolerance, truly, you would soon be forced to get married to someone of the opposite gender and squeeze out a couple of rugrodents because the law says you have to. Would you?

[TEmperorHasNoClothes]

54. that's because we didn't target the black community/churches

[MNBrewer]

59. LOL

[Lyric]

64. Well good.

That's encouraging to hear.

[AlCzervik]

65. gee it's almost like they're embarrassed that now people now they help fund taking

constitutional rights away from people. Boofuckinghoo prop hate supporters and please feel free to call me out when i donate to restrict your civil rights.

[HamdenRice]

67. But everyone knew this the day after Prop 8 was passed

Why all the angst now? "Out FM," Pacifica's GLBT radio show, reported this back in mid December.

I don't get it. Is there suddenly a revisionist re-interpretation of what happened?

[AntiFascist]

69. Uh, certainly not everyone knew this immediately....

and there still seems to be a lot of 'angst' being expressed against the GLBTQ community at DU for being racist. One purpose for posting this in the GLBT forum was to generate discussion and demonstrate that many of us do not have a builtin bias against blacks in general.

On edit: Case in point - just today someone posted the following:

" 'Contrary to DU mythology, very few DUers posted anything racist or hateful' - Wrong
Epic Fail"

Sound familiar?

[HamdenRice]

70. Are you saying that there were not racist posts?

If there were, the "mythology" wasn't mythology, but fact. Right now in GD, there are GLBT Forum posters admitting that there were racist posts. Are you calling them liars?

[AntiFascist]

71. Of course I can't speak for all GLBT posters....

but please pardon MY angst when I see the entire DU GLBT community being painted with a broad brush, as many of the posters in GD and GDP attempt to do.

[HamdenRice]

72. Epic Fail

Everyone knew, who had an open mind, right away that the polls were bogus. Everyone who was not a bigot also knew that it was wrong to tar an entire race with a vote in California.

Yet there was an enthusiastic hatefest under the banner of "blacks are now the enemy." No one in this forum protested at the time (except certain GLBT DUers of color). Now there is all this angst.

Go figure!

[Solon]

73. So basically you admit to painting with a broad brush?

That's fascinating.

[HamdenRice]

74. No, I'm saying that if several posters demand a return to slavery...

and no one in this forum agrees that's wrong, then many of us will draw the appropriate conclusions.

And no one said it was wrong until very, very recently.

That's called "revisionism."

[Solon]

76. OK, this is the point where I demand proof, because I think you are BSing me. n/t

[EFerrari]

77. There were posts that advocated in an angry way voting on slavery.

Those posts weren't helpful.

[bluedawg12]

79. You said we have archives, so what was the context of the "slavery" post(s)?

This is being carried from one board to another without proof.

I am not advocating name or link, but some context.

[EFerrari]

80. I didn't set out to keep those posts so I can't really help you.

My memory of the context is "how would they feel if we put slavery up for a vote"? I don't think you'd have too much trouble finding other posters who remember the same thing because this line of reasoning was forwarded more than once and on more than one thread. And, I repeat, this was a forum-wide response that happened. DU bought in to the mass media cr@p. It happens.

If you want proof, I don't know what to tell you. I don't think the posters of this idea will come forward and searching the archives is a pain. But, that's sort of the least of it. The real problem here is how quickly we allowed the spin to set us against each other when it was just the usual suspects -- people like Warren and like the archbishop here that make their living promoting bigotry and offloading their part in it. That's the most important take away, imo.

[bluedawg12]

83. That does not qaulify as: "several posters demand a return to slavery..."

This "slavery" libel against "some" gays, or a gay, or perhaps someone not gay at all, is being brought from forum to forum without any context or proof.

This is the second forum in which this appeared today.

[EFerrari]

85. Is that what HamdenRice posted? I recall an "if" there.

The post I read was conditional, in any case.

I'm going to let you two slug it out because that's what you seem to want to do. There was plenty of ugly, in any case. And fixing on proving or disproving one statement seems like a big waste of time and a big missing of the situation we're trying to resolve anyway. But, that's just me.

[bluedawg12]

88. Oh, it was a "hypothetical" "If's" that he's spewing about gays with no proof?

Or wait! It wasn't just gays? Perhaps, he's hypothetically asking a random question regarding any anonymous DU'ers about advocating slavery?

It is a big waste of time that he posted this.

[EFerrari]

91. You were among those that were pushing the blame on black homophobia

come to find out. You sort of blew it, bluedawg. I finally went back and read some of those threads and your posts to them. Like this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4405273

No, that whole "vote on slavery" thing was posted multiple times to DU and I hope to God it doesn't turn out that you posted it because that would really be embarrassing. Have a good one.

[bluedawg12]

98. I was among those that was trying to understand what had happened 3 days after Hate 8.

But I appreciate you rekindling the debate we had that day, perhaps this time you will be more open minded.

Unless of course we are not allowed to ever discuss homophobia.

I see you are nearly hurting yourself trying to tie me into your "vote on slavery."

Good luck with the smears. :evilgrin:

[EFerrari]

100. LOL

[bluedawg12]

104. For the record: I found the thread about "slavery" - I did not participate

the thread is locked, it's from Mon Nov-10-08. Also, I see very few people from the GLBT community who replied.

I note HamdenRice alerted on it. Appropriate.

I note you objected to it. Appropriate.

My handle is no where to be found in that OP.

So, do not imply that I was involved in any way with that thread again, please.


I will be happy to share the title, or OP, or link, ONLY if a moderator gives me permission.

I also note that the OP posted it and ran and NEVER replied.

[HamdenRice]

81. I can't provide proof of all those ugly things, because if I do, the post will be deleted

I've given proof and links several times today.

What a clever tactic!

Demand proof. Get it. Alert. Delete. Rinse. Repeat.

[bluedawg12]

84. You can give context, without name or link.

You can give the full statement without calling someone out, you do not have to provide link or name. I already said that.

You have never given proof or link about this allegation of yours today.

[HamdenRice]

87. Poor attempt at ju jitsu

Your relentless revisionism is tiring.

:rofl:

[bluedawg12]

89. Translated meaning: no proof just hot air about DU racism and "slavery" comments ?

[Solon]

105. Ever heard of a PM?

Jeezus, its like pulling teeth with some people. :eyes:

[HamdenRice]

108. Why would I pm someone with data about his own post that he's seen three or four times

in the last day? I've posted it several times, but his own post was so vile that the mods delete it. He's just playing games.

[AntiFascist]

75. Epic Fail back at you....

You seem to be unable to distinguish between 'deep disappointment' with the black community versus racism. Please see yardwork's post #13 which explains it very well:

"What I saw was a lot of expression of deep disappointment that a majority of one minority group would vote to take rights from another minority."

[HamdenRice]

82. No, it was much more than that. See posts 77 & 81 nt

[AntiFascist]

92. It was much more than that with a few DUers who were likely trying to stir up shit....

but there were many more of us who decided to stay on the sidelines in those particular threads. I'll admit that I took the CNN exit polls seriously at first and that I felt disappointed with the results, but I (and others) never participated in those threads and I never felt the need to place blame with the black community in general. Those are the facts, and they are not revisionist.

[EFerrari]

86. If that's what yardwork posted, that is a revision.

And there have been enough thread links reposted to show that.

I don't agree with HamdenRice on many things including the way he is talking here. But while there was profound disappointment, there was also racist cr!p on DU for days. Denying that is like denying that GLBT DUers weren't told to shut up about Warren for days. It happened.

[bluedawg12]

90. Sorry,sfexpat, I fail to see yardwork linked to this current line of replies?

[EFerrari]

93. Maybe you also failed to see that I was responding to another poster?

[bluedawg12]

95. Oh, I do see where you were accusing yardwork of something.

I was just wondering.

[EFerrari]

97. LOL

[AntiFascist]

94. You seem to totally misunderstand my purpose in posting the OP....

I'm not denying that there was racist crap, some of it (apparently) from GLBT DU members. I'm not trying to revise anything.

The FACT is that we need to come to terms with the reality of the black community and not blame them, as a single group, for the results of Prop 8. Now you and HamdenRice come waltzing in making this look like an attempt at revisionist history? If you want to start another GLBT thread about what specific DUers said then best of luck, but please quit with the broad brush attempts to demonize our entire community.

[EFerrari]

96. No, I was just replying to that one post. I think the idea of this thread

was a very good one and I'm not dancing with anyone. I was responding very specifically to your reprising of yardwork's post as you recount it.

And, there is no broad brushing the GLBT community in saying that DU as a whole engaged in cr@p after the election. Unless I'm wrong, which happens, I've said over and over that the response to that Mitofsky poll does not belong to the DU gay community but has to be owned by all of us.

If you can get "demonize our entire community" out of that, you're a better stretcher than I am.

[bluedawg12]

99. So, "DU as a whole engaged" engaged in racism? Is that your premise?

[EFerrari]

101. Maybe again you missed that I was talking to someone else.

I'm so sorry you're spoiling for a brawl. I can't help you.

[bluedawg12]

103. I assumed this was an open forum .

My bad. :rofl:

[AntiFascist]

102. I would still agree with yardwork's statement...

perhaps it could be that I chose not to even read the more racist threads, but the threads that I did read were more about disappointment with the minority poll reults. The "demonization" comes about with HamdenRice's tendency toward black and white thinking where we were either being racist or disregarded the poll altogether.

[Creideiki]

107. Wow. My irony meter just broke.

Guess I'll have to get a new one now.

[readmoreoften]

106. What? The state media falsifying data to create a rift between two marginalized groups!

Pre-POST-erous :sarcasm:

[AntiFascist]

109. Excellent point...

and I wouldn't doubt for a second that there are "sponsored" DUers stirring shit as well.