Is the GLBT movement a civil rights movement?

[ruggerson]

I realize this is stepping into a minefield, but until some of this is addressed and discussed honestly and openly, we will continue to be at loggerheads over these cultural issues. This subject rears its head in almost every public thread about marriage equality here, and angry people end up talking at each other, not to each other. And, unfortunately, we hear the exact same words and phrases from people who claim to be in our court, as we do from those who publicly seek to maintain and further the institutional oppression of the GLBT community.

I am interested in hearing thoughts from gay people from every ethnic, racial or religious group.

This piece is a few weeks old, but it details what GLBT people of color, and our community as a whole, is up against. From a widely read upstate New York newspaper.

http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/674748.html">"Black clergy opposing gay marriage resent civil rights"[br />
"Black clergy have long opposed the march toward legal same-sex marriages. Now, they’re also challenging the growing efforts of gay-marriage supporters to frame the issue as a civil rights cause.

The Rev. William Gillison, pastor of Mount Olive Baptist Church, a large African-American congregation on East Delevan Avenue, said he is insulted by the comparison.

“We know what we have gone through as an ethnic group. We feel the terminology, the definition itself, has really been hijacked,” he said. “Unfortunately, it’s just another ploy to garner more support from people who may not understand what the civil rights struggle was all about.”

Bishop Michael A. Badger, pastor of Bethesda World Harvest International Church on Main Street, said that he doesn’t doubt there is discrimination against gay people but that it is hardly on the order of what African-Americans have encountered and still face.

“As an African-American, I don’t have a choice in the color of my skin. I have a choice in whether I’m abstinent or not,” Badger said. “I don’t think you can compare the two.”

FULL ARTICLE

[MADem]

1. I think it's closer to "Equal Rights."

Of course, they've been trying to pass an "Equal Rights Amendment" for what, eighty six years?

If women can't get equal rights in the USA, and they're the frigging majority..... what hope does anyone have?

[noamnety]

2. Odd statement here:

"I have a choice in whether I’m abstinent or not"

He seems to have confused "being gay" with "being sexually active."

[QC]

4. Well, you know, the bashers will immediately back off, put away their clubs,

and apologize if you explain that you do not actually have sex.

[ThomCat]

14. Exactly, becuase the bashers aren't bashing us because we're gay

but because we had gay sex within the last week. :eyes:

[NMMNG]

17. It is, you know

If you stop having sex you stop being a "practicing homosexual" which means you're no longer detestable in their book. You can even be declared "ex-gay" if you remain abstinent long enough and become self-loathing through the power of RRRW Jesus.

[Mythsaje]

3. "I have a choice whether I'm abstinent or not..."

Yes, and see how that's working so well for the Priesthood, eh?

The first real civil rights movement in this country was suffrage. To pretend that the African Americans invented the civil rights movement in its entirety is a bit arrogant. Women had to fight for their equality--in fact, they're STILL fighting for it. People of color had to fight for equality--in fact, they're STILL fighting for it. Gay Rights MIGHT be different, but it's more similar than not. Telling them they can be "abstinent" is like telling a woman "well, you can pretend to be a man," or telling an African American "well, you can bleach your skin."

In effect, "Don't be who you are because it makes us uncomfortable."

Of course, this is coming from a child of Irish/Scottish/Native decent. I do not know first-hand what it is to be a woman, a person of color, nor gay. But I support equal rights and treatment for everyone before the law. My Celtic ancestors weren't exactly welcomed when they got here either. My native ancestors--well, we all know what happened to THEM. I'm pro-civil rights. For everyone.

[xultar]

5. As a black woman, I say it is. HELL YEAH!

[ruggerson]

21. ...

:thumbsup: :hug:

[QC]

50. Careful...there are some here who will try to take away your membership card. n/t

[xultar]

53. Fuck'em.

[QC]

54. I have missed you. How the hell have you been? n/t

[Autumn]

6. Straight old woman here but yes

any time a select group of people are denied the same rights enjoyed by the rest of the country then we have a civil rights cause. And it affects us all.

[Libertas1776]

7. Apparently

these pastors feel they own the rights to civil rights movements of any kind. I think fighting for gay rights is one of the greatest civil rights efforts ever. Being gay is something that transcends all ethnic and gender barriers. Gays come from all races, genders, nationalities, and faiths. When you persecute gays, you are basically persecuting humanity as a whole. It is sad that these people are willing to persecute their own because they are gay. We want brotherhood amongst all our people,...unless of course they are gay. And I am in no way singling out African Americans, for this can be said of any and all races.

[TankLV]

8. Goddamm right it is!!!

[Starry Messenger]

9. Rev. Byron Williams says yes, it is.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/byron-williams/african-american-communit_b_177790.html

Whenever there is a discussion about gay rights and the African-American community, someone can be depended upon to offer the juvenile critique that the cause of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community is not the same as the historical Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and '60s. It's not uncommon to hear African-American pastors suggest "my skin cannot be compared with their sin" as a way to poetically justify their homophobia. This argument assumes a collective understanding of what the Civil Rights Movement is and what the LGBT movement is not.

If one views the civil rights movement and the current LGBT struggle through the linear paradigm of race and sex, I would agree there is little that connects the two.

If, however, one understands the civil rights movement as something that helped America get closer to the democratic values to which it committed itself in 1776, along with the preamble of the Constitution that reads: "We the people of the United States in order form a more perfect union," then I would suggest the LGBT struggle is very much an extension in the ongoing civil rights struggle...


...But far too many segments of the black church today prefer to hide behind the same rationale that justified Jim Crow segregation than to welcome their LGBT brothers and sisters. When will we learn the door to equality does not remain cracked selectively?

Rev. Byron Williams is the pastor of Resurrection Community Church, Oakland, CA

[ruggerson]

10. thanks for posting that SM - especially the analogy he makes to Jim Crow

of particular interest is his last line:

"...But far too many segments of the black church today prefer to hide behind the same rationale that justified Jim Crow segregation than to welcome their LGBT brothers and sisters. When will we learn the door to equality does not remain cracked selectively?"

So, we have a renowned African American pastor ( pastor of the Resurrection Community Church Oakland, CA) who is making the exact same analogy that many of us have made here at DU, only when we make it, we are jumped on and met with not-too-thinly disguised hostility.

[Starry Messenger]

12. That is interesting.

Rev Williams addresses that in this recent article on the CA Supreme Court ruling on Prop 8:

I marvel at those who take umbrage with any comparisons between the present gay rights struggle and the historical Civil Rights Movement, as if they own the copyright to the movement's originality. I can only conclude they forgot that the movement led by King appropriated its strategy from Gandhi and the Indian independence movement.

It seems as though he finds it to be an apt metaphor. I'm not sure why it would be met with hostility.

[QC]

22. "I'm not sure why it would be met with hostility."

Oh, I think we can figure that one out.

[Starry Messenger]

24. Seems like retrograde thinking to me.

Here's Dr. Sylvia LaRue from the National Black Justice Coalition:



http://www.nbjcoalition.org/news/civil-rights-belong-to-every.html

When Jay Tokasz quoted black ministers in his May 27 article, “Black clergy opposing gay marriage resent civil rights comparison,” I resonated with the sentiment that the horrors of slavery are unparalleled.

But that does not mean that African- Americans are the only people who have suffered or fought for civil and human rights.

Today, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people of all races suffer discrimination, abuse and sometimes brutal death because of their identity.

Black civil rights work was a profound movement in history, emerging from the bottomless depths of suffering. The movement for black civil rights is not the same as the movement of gay civil rights, but it is based on the same Constitution.

Civil rights must belong to all groups, or no group is safe. Civil rights give each person the ability to participate freely in the political, economic and social life of the community.

Lots of good articles there, too.

[kwassa]

48. An analogy to Jim Crow is a terrible analogy.

and this pastor isn't making it, YOU are.

He is comparing the rationale, not Jim Crow itself.

It simply demonstrates to me that those who make this analogy don't even know what Jim Crow is and was. 4700 African-Americans were LYNCHED during the Jim Crow era; generations of African-Americans were segregated, forced into low-paying occupations, deprived of all but the most menial job occupations, and had little-to-no opportunity for education. They were also denied the right to vote through terroristic practices and/or discriminatory rules and regulations.

I don't believe that this happened to gay people.

The PRINCIPLE of inequality is the same, but nothing else is.

[QC]

52. How do you, as an African American, feel that we can best draw useful parallels

without being offensive?

I think it is important to be rooted in history, but at the same time one should not offend others, especially those whose struggles set the stage for those who came after them.

[kwassa]

55. Stick to the universal principles ....

It is a civil rights struggle, it is about seperate-but-equal .... and it is completely about equality and justice. Talk about that and the individual struggles that gay people have had to go through, and you have a powerful story, and strong argument. It isn't necessary to keep comparing it to the black civil rights struggle. I think it works against the GLBT community in the long run; they need to make their own unique story known better to the wider American public that does not know it.

Comparing not being able to get married to being enslaved or lynched is both wrong and offensive to most African-Americans. The scale of injury is completely different, both in numbers of people affected, and the years affected, and the type of discrimination involved. African-Americans went through centuries of this.

I am not African-American, but my wife and daughter are, and I know lots of black people very, very well, and am very aware of their general feelings on things, thought there are always individual differences of opinion, of course. The analogy can be drawn if one sticks to the principles involved, rather than making a direct comparison of the actual history. The history of these two groups is very different.

[QC]

60. I think that's an excellent answer, and I think it's what people are at least trying to do.

Thanks to earlier movements, there are some principles on which decent people agree, like separate is not equal, people should not be singled out for disparate treatment simply because other people do not like them, etc.

No one with more than two functioning neurons would seriously argue that being gay is in every way identical to being black, that being black is identical in every way to being Jewish, etc. No two things are identical in every way. Obviously, there are major differences in the historical experiences of different groups.

What I have seen people try to do is draw parallels between the experiences of those groups and, more important, the means by which they have been oppressed.

You know, the Left in this country does many counterproductive things, but without any doubt the worst of them is the bit about trying to create a hierarchy of oppression. Was the Holocaust worse than the slave trade? Was Jim Crow worse than the treatment of Native Americans? How about the treatment of Chinese immigrants in 19th century California? Exactly where do women fit into the pecking order? Gays? Lesbians? Black lesbians? It's like those old diagrams of the Great Chain of Being, with every creature assigned a fixed place in the hierarchy.

While we argue over all this, of course, the people who shit on all of us are able to do their wickedness at their leisure.

[bluedawg12]

61. Rev. Williams would know what he is saying

and I am certain he would not say it lightly and without thought, as an African American pastor.

The struggles are not identical, but, the notion of legislating and codifying inequality is parallel.

The term parallel civil rights struggle and not identical civil rights struggle was the term also used by then Sen. Obama and I think he got it just right.

If we look at the definition of Jim Crow Laws and read Rev. Williams comments side by side, they make sense.

Also, as friend reminded me recently, we recall that thousands of kids each year who are bullied and ridiculed into committing suicide. Or the thousands who lose everything at the death of their SO because of hateful laws that block them from inheritance rights. Or the thousands who have been fired from their jobs, losing all benefits, just because they were gay. Then there is the entire category of continued hate crimes against minorities, racial, sexual, ethnic, people with disabilities, etc.
........

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2007/incidents.htm
Single-bias incidents
An analysis of the 7,621 single-bias incidents reported in 2007 revealed the following:

50.8 percent were racially motivated.
18.4 percent were motivated by religious bias.
16.6 percent resulted from sexual-orientation bias.
13.2 percent stemmed from ethnicity/national origin bias.
1.0 percent were prompted by disability bias. (Based on Table 1.)
Offenses by bias motivation within incidents
Of the 8,999 single-bias hate crime offenses reported in the above incidents:

52.5 percent stemmed from racial bias.
16.4 percent resulted from religious bias.
16.2 percent were motivated by sexual-orientation bias.
14.0 percent were prompted by ethnicity/national origin bias.
0.9 percent resulted from biases against disabilities. (Based on Table 1.)

Sexual-orientation bias
In 2007, law enforcement agencies reported 1,460 hate crime offenses based on sexual-orientation bias. Of these offenses:

59.2 percent were classified as anti-male homosexual bias.
24.8 percent were reported as anti-homosexual bias.
12.6 percent were prompted by an anti-female homosexual bias.
1.8 percent were the result of an anti-heterosexual bias.
1.6 percent were classified as anti-bisexual bias. (Based on Table 1.)

Racial bias
In 2007, law enforcement agencies reported that 4,724 single-bias hate crime offenses were racially motivated. Of these offenses:

69.3 percent were motivated by anti-black bias.
18.4 percent stemmed from anti-white bias.
6.0 percent were a result of bias against groups of individuals consisting of more than one race (anti-multiple races, group).
4.6 percent resulted from anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias.
1.6 percent were motivated by anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native bias. (Based on Table 1.)

......

>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws

The Jim Crow laws were state and local laws in the United States enacted between 1876 and 1965. They mandated de jure segregation in all public facilities, with a supposedly "separate but equal" status for black Americans. In reality, this led to treatment and accommodations that were usually inferior to those provided for white Americans, systematizing a number of economic, educational and social disadvantages.

Some examples of Jim Crow laws are the segregation of public schools, public places and public transportation, and the segregation of restrooms and restaurants for whites and blacks. The U.S. military was also segregated. These Jim Crow Laws were separate from the 1800-66 Black Codes, which had also restricted the civil rights and civil liberties of African Americans. State-sponsored school segregation was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1954 in Brown v. Board of Education. Generally, the remaining Jim Crow laws were overruled by the Civil Rights Act of 1964<1> and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.<<

........

>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/byron-williams/african-am...
"Whenever there is a discussion about gay rights and the African-American community, someone can be depended upon to offer the juvenile critique that the cause of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community is not the same as the historical Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and '60s. It's not uncommon to hear African-American pastors suggest "my skin cannot be compared with their sin" as a way to poetically justify their homophobia. This argument assumes a collective understanding of what the Civil Rights Movement is and what the LGBT movement is not.

If one views the civil rights movement and the current LGBT struggle through the linear paradigm of race and sex, I would agree there is little that connects the two.

If, however, one understands the civil rights movement as something that helped America get closer to the democratic values to which it committed itself in 1776, along with the preamble of the Constitution that reads: "We the people of the United States in order form a more perfect union," then I would suggest the LGBT struggle is very much an extension in the ongoing civil rights struggle...


...But far too many segments of the black church today prefer to hide behind the same rationale that justified Jim Crow segregation than to welcome their LGBT brothers and sisters. When will we learn the door to equality does not remain cracked selectively?


Rev. Byron Williams is the pastor of Resurrection Community Church, Oakland, CA"<<

[bluedawg12]

62. Gay men and women are estimated to be at around 5% of the population.

Yet, we experience a relatively high number of hate based crime and it seems steady, at least from 2005, 2006 and 2007 FBI published data.

Sexual-orientation bias
In 2007, law enforcement agencies reported 1,460 hate crime offenses based on sexual-orientation bias. Of these offenses:

59.2 percent were classified as anti-male homosexual bias.
24.8 percent were reported as anti-homosexual bias.
12.6 percent were prompted by an anti-female homosexual bias.
1.8 percent were the result of an anti-heterosexual bias.
1.6 percent were classified as anti-bisexual bias. (Based on Table 1.)

Sexual-orientation bias
In 2006, law enforcement agencies reported 1,415 hate crime offenses based on sexual- orientation bias. Of these offenses:

62.3 percent were classified as anti-male homosexual biased.
20.7 percent were classified as anti-homosexual biased.
13.6 percent were classified as anti-female homosexual biased.
2.0 percent were classified as anti-heterosexual biased.
1.5 percent were classified as anti-bisexual biased. (Based on Table 1.)

Sexual-Orientation Bias
In 2005, law enforcement agencies reported 1,171 hate crime offenses based on sexual- orientation bias.

60.9 percent were anti-male homosexual.
19.5 percent were anti-homosexual.
15.4 percent were anti-female homosexual.
2.3 percent were anti-bisexual.
2.0 percent were anti-heterosexual.
(Based on Table 1.)
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2005/incidentsoffenses.htm

[kwassa]

77. I think it best not to use the term "Jim Crow" at all.

I agree with Rev. Williams, too, though I think the phrase "Jim Crow" is too emotionally loaded to even use the phrase "Jim Crow laws", because it denotes a specific historical period, rather than a legal principle. Jim Crow is specific to the African-American experience, and is not applicable to other periods or subjects of discrimination. It really isn't, if it is used accurately.

It is far better to use "separate-but-equal", and referring to the principle itself will get far less negative reaction and may work well as a bridge to the black community.

[bluedawg12]

84. Agreed. Separate but equal is never equal, is the principle. n/t

[plantwomyn]

90. Oppression and discrimination against gays didn't start yesterday either.

Please look at the history of the pink triangle. Why is fagot a slur used to describe a gay man? Mass murder, burning at the stake.
If only 5% of the African American population were enslaved or lynched would the "number of people affected" be few enough to justify their fate? Lynching was used to terrorize the population. This is what you get if you get too uppity! This same type of terrorism have been perpetrated against gay people since the dawn of time. How dare you expect us to accept that you should have the right to be the way you are out in the open! Get back in your closet like a good queer!
Suffrage didn't discriminate according to race. Black women gained rights because of that fight and today are on the front lines of equality for women. Gay civil rights are not discriminatory either. Look at You Tube videos of Gay Pride Parades. Our black brothers and sisters walk hand in hand with their caucasian, asian, latino partners. Our families are as interracial as your family. What is good for one is good for all.
My African American partner of 14 years and her family never had a problem equating the treatment they endured in segregated Alabama with the discrimination their daughter dealt with every day. Some friends and family would even say " What isn't not hard enough in the world for you to be Black and Female, you had to add Gay?" They said this LOL because they expect her the be her mom and pops daughter. No way she was going to accept discrimination of any kind. Her parents and ancestors had paid the price so she could be a true citizen on the United States of America.

[ruggerson]

69. The thing is

I haven't seen anyone compare the experiences of the gay community to the African American history of lynchings and murder and slavery and alll the other horrible things that black people endured in our country, and say that the two groups' experiences were the same. If someone has said that, I missed it.

When people use the phrase "Jim Crow" as a metaphor, I think they're referring strictly to the legal status of "separate bug equal" which, in my mind, is an appropriate analogy. Type in Jim Crow in Wikipedia and you come up with: "The Jim Crow laws were state and local laws in the United States enacted between 1876 and 1965. They mandated de jure segregation in all public facilities, with a supposedly "separate but equal" status for black Americans. In reality, this led to treatment and accommodations that were usually inferior to those provided for white Americans, systematizing a number of economic, educational and social disadvantages."

We all know that the black experience is very different from the gay experience which is different from the Jewish experience and the Italian experience. But, when we talk about the commonalities we use the cultural touchstones we're all familiar with, "separate but equal" being one of many.

I would think African Americans would be pleased by another group of human being's civil rights fight that takes solace, inspiration and courage from the amazing stories of black Americans.

I know that were another, future hypothetical group to call a seminal event their "Stonewall," I would not immediately denounce them for demeaning our history because they can't possibly know how it feels to suffer from police beatings and harrassment and centuries of humiliation and violence in precisely the way gay people have. I would actually be kind of honored that they were using our movement as a cultural reference with which they identified.

To be honest, the people I have seen being the loudest about complaining that the black movement and the gay rights struggle should never be compared are people that seem to have, despite their protestations to the opposite, real problems with who we are as human beings. They feel somehow degraded being compared to us, and I don't think many of them are being honest about the real deep seated homophobia that lies behind their objections.

It's pointless to compare victimhood. It would be ridiculous to say that because black people didn't experience being thrown in the ovens by the Nazis, like gays and Jews were, they can't possibly relate to the human suffering that went on in Germany in the 30's and the 40's. Of course they can. They have experienced similar horrors and degradation right here in the U.S. Not THE SAME experiences, but ones that would make their hearts instantly recognize both the human capacity for evil and the inner strengths that enables people to rise far above their tormentors.

[kwassa]

76. Then you are using the phrase "Jim Crow" differently than African-Americans

The lynchings were part of the Jim Crow era, because it is a time frame, not just a set of laws. If you wish to refer to separate-but-equal, do that and be more precise. You can continue to use it as you have been, but you will be misunderstood and resented by most African-Americans.

I entered Jim Crow in Wikipedia and only came up with Jim Crow laws, not Jim Crow itself. The limitations of Wikipedia.

Here is a much better explanation, and if you would really like to understand, read this entire essay, and the others at this site.

http://www.jimcrowhistory.org/history/creating2.htm

Although "Jim Crow Cars" on some northern railroad lines--meaning segregated cars--pre-dated the Civil War, in general the Jim Crow era in American history dates from the late 1890s, when southern states began systematically to codify (or strengthen) in law and state constitutional provisions the subordinate position of African Americans in society. Most of these legal steps were aimed at separating the races in public spaces (public schools, parks, accommodations, and transportation) and preventing adult black males from exercising the right to vote. In every state of the former Confederacy, the system of legalized segregation and disfranchisement was fully in place by 1910. This system of white supremacy cut across class boundaries and re-enforced a cult of "whiteness" that predated the Civil War.

Segregation and disfranchisement laws were often supported, moreover, by brutal acts of ceremonial and ritualized mob violence (lynchings) against southern blacks. Indeed, from 1889 to 1930, over 3,700 men and women were reported lynched in the United States--most of whom were southern blacks. Hundreds of other lynchings and acts of mob terror aimed at brutalizing blacks occurred throughout the era but went unreported in the press. Numerous race riots erupted in the Jim Crow era, usually in towns and cities and almost always in defense of segregation and white supremacy. These riots engulfed the nation from Wilmington, North Carolina, to Houston, Texas; from East St. Louis and Chicago to Tulsa, Oklahoma, in the years from 1865 to 1955. The riots usually erupted in urban areas to which southern, rural blacks had recently migrated. In the single year of 1919, at least twenty-five incidents were recorded, with numerous deaths and hundreds of people injured. So bloody was this summer of that year that it is known as the Red Summer of 1919.

[ruggerson]

80. Well, rest assured

that I don't think anyone who has used the analogy has meant that the experiences were the same. They were not and they are not. Any time I have used the phrase Jim Crow, it is in the legal sense of separate but equal, because it has always been in the context of laws which are applied very differently to gays and straights. I certainly understand people's sensitivities to the unique experience that African Americans have had in our country, and what kind of legacy of testament to that experience that has been handed down from generation to generation.

Remember, gays and lesbians have had their own unique history in mankind as well. Their long, worldwide march towards freedom is a story filled with much pain and much courage, and much disparity - as the personal journey of a lesbian migrant farm worker in Cambodia is vastly different, and at the same time remarkably similar, to the journey of a gay European bourgeousie.

I think we have to respect each other's differences and also understand that we are on the same path to freedom. The only thing that divides us is that which we choose to divide us.

[kwassa]

91. I agree.

[Veruca Salt]

92. Wow that is powerful,

what a great read, thank you!

[bluedawg12]

11. Yes. The ACLU has been fighting for LGBT rights for over 50 years.

http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/index.html

The LGBT Project fights discrimination and moves public opinion on LGBT rights through the courts, legislatures and public education across five issue areas:

RELATIONSHIPS – Since the first marriage lawsuit for same-sex couples in 1972, the ACLU has been at the forefront of both legal and public education efforts to secure marriage for same-sex couples and win legal recognition for LGBT relationships.

SCHOOLS & YOUTH – The LGBT Project’s Schools & Youth program defends free expression in public schools, demands that learning environments do not encourage bullying and violence, and helps educators create an atmosphere respectful of students’ sexual orientation and gender identity.


PARENTING – The ACLU is committed to defending the rights of LGBT parents, not only in custody and visitation arrangements but also by challenging discriminatory laws that restrict the rights of LGBT people to parent.


TRANSGENDER – The ACLU works to include gender identity in nondiscrimination laws, raises awareness of the types of harms that transgender people face, and brings impact lawsuits to change biased laws against transgender people in employment, schools, and public accommodations.


DISCRIMINATION – Since the 1950s, the ACLU has been defending LGBT people from discrimination. Over the years, the ACLU has fought LGBT discrimination on several fronts—from challenging “sodomy” laws to advocating for civil rights that protect LGBT people.

No wonder the Talibangelicals hate the ACLU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5847235&mesg_id=5847235

[LostinVA]

13. Of course it is

[IndianaGreen]

15. Gays marched in Selma for racial equality

The bigots are the bible thumping preachers, regardless of the colour of their skin.

LGTB rights are human rights!

[NMMNG]

16. Have you ever noticed?

The only people who get offended when we call the fight for LGBT rights a "civil rights" struggle are the same ones who make proclamations like:


"I don’t have a choice in the color of my skin. I have a choice in whether I’m abstinent or not,”
"I can't hide my skin color. You can hide the fact that you're gay."
"I've never seen an ex-black but I've seen plenty of ex-gays."
"You haven't gone through the same things we have (insert laundry list here) so you don't have the right--call your fight something else."



IOW, people who want to boil being gay down to a sex act, claim that if we only stayed in the closet we'd be safe and have all our rights, support the "ex-gay" notion, and one-up us on suffering. None of the people who are offended by us calling our fight "civil rights" are people who see us as human beings worthy of the same legal rights and protections everybody else has and takes for granted.

[ruggerson]

18. exactly

their arguments are quite often, word for word, the same tripe that comes from the religious rightwing. And then they add the addendum: but of course, they support marriage equality. When they really are bigots who are simply afraid to admit on a progressive site that they think gay Americans are "less than," or maybe can't even acknowledge to themselves that they actually feel that way.

[QC]

19. yes, the people who object are generally the ones who clearly don't like us anyway.

Like dear, departed NorthernSpy, tombstoned just yesterday.

I can accept that some people object to such comparisons because they value the uniqueness of their community's experience, but others just flat out don't like being compared to queers.

[gaspee]

30. EXACTLY (n/t)

[Hassin Bin Sober]

34. NorthernSpy was axed? Good! What did it do?

[QC]

35. I wish I knew the details, believe me. n/t

[Pacifist Patriot]

29. Fair point.

[sui generis]

39. the ironic thing is it's MUCH worse to be discriminated against

for an idea that you can't prove or disprove, that you can't see or do more than admit to or be accused of . . .

Hell yes, it's civil rights, until you can prove without a doubt that you aren't gay, whatever that is.

[NMMNG]

85. Sad that some people don't get that

In so many ways it's like a perpetual witch hunt, where mere suspicions or accusations of having Teh Gay can open you to so much abuse--from being socially ostracized to being brutally murdered.

[Sapphocrat]

20. Yes, but discussion is academic and futile.

Rather than ask if it is (a quick trip to the dictionary for the definition of the word "civil" will erase all doubt), one might better ask why some people refuse to accept that it is.

In short:

Call it a civil rights issue (which it is), and you're somehow "diminishing" the "real" civil rights struggle.

Call our marriages "marriages" (which they are), and you're somehow diminishing "real" marriages.

Everyone see the pattern? I'm sure you can think of many other examples.

It's all about territorialism, and manufactured persecution/martyrdom/perpetual victimhood (the latter an integral component to religious fundamentalism): If you have what I have, then I can't be better than you. People too weak in their own convictions, self esteem, and self worth always need to one-up somebody else, lest they suffer any loss of superiority and even their very identity.

People secure in their own identity do not perceive themselves as "diminished" by the "threat" of anyone else's equality, but rather welcome everyone to the same table.

None of this is hardwired, but the conditioning runs so deep, it may as well be. I do not see any solution, which is why "reaching out" to those firmly entrenched in the anti-gay camp (whether they use the "Your issues are not comparable to our civil rights!" canard, or something else) is a complete waste of time. You're never going to convince anyone already in that camp to have a rational discussion about this -- nor even inspire them to look up the word "civil" in the dictionary.

[LostinVA]

26. +1

[Pacifist Patriot]

28. Well said.

[foxfeet]

33. Brava!

:applause:

[Mark Twain Girl]

23. Absolutely, yes. Actually, I feel like repeating that: absolutely. Yes. nt

[Smarmie Doofus]

25. Complete nonsense, from beginning to end.

>>>>Black clergy have long opposed the march toward legal same-sex marriages. >>>>

So have white clergy. What's his point?





>>>>Now, they’re also challenging the growing efforts of gay-marriage supporters to frame the issue as a civil rights cause. >>>>>


The efforts to frame the issue as a civil rights issue are NOT growing. It's been framed that way since the birth of the GLBT movement , many decades ago.



>>>>>The Rev. William Gillison, pastor of Mount Olive Baptist Church, a large African-American congregation on East Delevan Avenue, said he is insulted by the comparison.

“We know what we have gone through as an ethnic group. We feel the terminology, the definition itself, has really been hijacked,” he said. “Unfortunately, it’s just another ploy to garner more support from people who may not understand what the civil rights struggle was all about.” >>>

"may not understand what the civil rights struggle was all about".

Look who's talking.

[Pacifist Patriot]

27. I'm just going to answer your headline question if you don't mind.

Is the GLBT movement a civil rights movement?

I would say yes.

It is a civil rights movement. But it's not "The Civil Rights" movement.

I don't think either group needs to look to one another for a standard of comparison, but there are some broad comparisons that can be made. In each case, a group of people are being treated differently under the law because of an aspect of the Self that is inherent and cannot be changed.

Their group histories are completely different. The discriminatory laws are different. The methods of seeking equal protection under the law are different. The justification for the discrimination is different, although it should be noted that in both cases, appalling interpretations of scripture are employed as part of the justification process.

In seeking equal protection under the law, a group of people is making a plea for civil rights. I don't see why an accurate use of language should be assumed to be a usurpation of a phrase everyone already associates with the African American community. Presumably we can tell the difference between a civil rights movement and The Civil Rights Movement.

[LostinVA]

32. +1

[DURHAM D]

31. This opposition/discussion is not new.

Perhaps you are not aware of what happened with the DNC under Dean. He basically accepted the notion that "its not a civil rights issue". All sorts of things happened to LGBT interests during his time. Among others, he removed the help desk while adding fundraisers to target the gay community. They wanted our money but not our issues. He was just trying to keep peace and perhaps his job. It worked.

Remember that Dean's appointed CEO of the DNC was an evangelical minister and Dean had to give a deposition (lawsuit by dismissed gay employee) in which he indicated that certain factions (read that Donna Brazile, Leah Daughtery, and others) asserted the need for a dominant and special minority interest. How to argue that position - make sure it is not seen as a civil rights issue.

And just for the record - of course its a civil and human rights issue.

[AntiFascist]

36. Fortunately not all black people, and not all black clergy, feel this way...

No less than Coretta Scott King was a staunch advocate for gay and lesbian rights and she had no problem relating the struggle for gay rights to the black struggle. The Reverend Jesse Jackson is another prime example of one who is solidly in our court.

[ruggerson]

37. and Al Sharpton

amongst many, many other great AA leaders.

[AntiFascist]

38. Indeed, there are too many for me to recall....

anyone attempting to relate President Obama's personal bias against gay marriage to the black community in general is flat out wrong.

[Fire1]

42. Ha! You'd be surprised. n/t

[QC]

51. What would he find surprising? n/t

[ruggerson]

70. how much twisted joy

she derives from feeling superior to us, I imagine.

[QC]

73. I suspect you are right. n/t

[LostinVA]

72. Whatever

:eyes:

[Pacifist Patriot]

86. It is quite possible you have something of value to discuss.

What a pity you don't seem to feel you are capable of actually doing just that.

In this case, I think you might be the one surprised. I am clergy and a member of both my county's interfaith coalition and inter-denjominational clergy support association. Both of these organizations include religious professionals from Christian, Jewish, Unitarian Univeralist, Unity, Hindu and Buddhist congregations. I am always disappointed at how well the clergy can get along, but their congregants just can't seem to make the leap as well.

Granted, the seriously fundy pastors in town don't participate, but that might be because of the mandate of the coalition. We've come together to network for social services in our community. They don't seem to be as interested in putting food on people's tables as spoon feeding doctrine.

At least one-quarter of our membership is African American. Only one AA minister is not in favor of equal rights for the GLBT community. Two have already performed symbolic commitment ceremonies for gays and will gladly marry them in their churches legally just as soon as state statute permits it. Oh, and perhaps it should be noted that the president of the Unitarian Universalist Association, is an African American. Whoops! There goes a biggie with the assertion that all AA clergy is opposed to equal rights for GLBT.

Not all denominations are united in their opposition to equal rights for GLBT and not all clergy within a single denomination are of the same mind. This may come as a tremendous surprise, but everybody is different. Shocking I know, but there you have it.

ETA: Pssst, I've known Jesse Jackson since 1988. If your "you might be surprised" comment references his feelings regarding GLBT rights, then I know you are way out of your depth.

[Bluenorthwest]

40. The article is racist. Ooops! But it is!

You know, black clergy is like all clergy, some are bigots and some are loving inclusive people. The Rev Gillson does not speak for the whole of African American clergy by any stretch of the imagination.
African American clergy were a vital part of much of my early AIDS/HIV activism, or to be more accurate, I was able to lend a hand to ministers, choirs, Gospel stars, and churches who took on huge and important leadership roles in that crisis. The Gillson types were not there then, nor now. They allow the status quo to remain, and thanks to them, HIV/AIDs is still a leading killer of African Americans, women in particular. That is true in the community of Badger, and of Gillson, but they have other priorities.

There are however many 'black clergy' that have been standing up like good people from day one. Day one, without hesitation.

In addition, Badger and Gillson carry opinions that are fully opposed to the opinions of such well known Civil Rights figures as Coretta Scott King, Mildred Loving, or Bayard Rustin. So frankly, the opinion of small time preachers in pursuit of the almighty dollar carry little weight next to the views of these heroic leaders.
So this newspaper that claims 'black clergy' is represented by these men, without a balancing voice of any kind, is in fact racist. I know better than to buy what they are selling. It is a racist article about racist, homophobic preachers with a vein to mine, looking for the mother load.

[Toasterlad]

44. The Article Is Referring to Black Clergy In a Specific Region.

Please read it again. If you can provide evidence that the vast majority of black clergymen in the Buffalo area consider the gay rights to be civil rights, please post it.

Ignoring the problem doesn't make it go away.

[Fire1]

41. No. It is a Equal Rights Issue. n/t

[LostinVA]

43. Right, equal civil rights

[Fire1]

56. No. you have your opinion and I have mine. Equal rights. Period.

n/t

[LostinVA]

63. Your opinion is misguided, but it is indeed yours -- we are asking for equal civil rights

I honestly have no idea why you have such a problem with that. I would like to understand your point of view -- could you explain?

[Pacifist Patriot]

66. Perhaps this person just enjoys being cryptic?

Or open to interpretation?

The more charitably-minded among us might assume the rationale is that the movement should not be limited in scope to civil rights and thinks such terminology isn't broad enough. Other than that, the responses just comes across as churlish and condescending.

[LostinVA]

68. I just sent you a pm -- your latter guess is correct

[ruggerson]

71. having read

some of the other things she's posted, I would agree with you.

[kwassa]

78. This is a highly emotional issue for many African-Americans.

I make no attempt to speak for Fire1, but you will find strong feelings on this subject of the history of discrimination against the black community.

Don't expect all responses to be carefully reasoned.

[donco6]

82. Who has time for sloppy reasoning?

I mean . . . really.

[Pacifist Patriot]

88. Some issues are highly emotional for me, but that doesn't mean...

I can productively participate in a discussion with combative one word answers, refusal to elaborate, and pithy dismissals of what others have to say. Nor should I be given carte blanche to do so simply because it has heightened emotional impact for me.

If this issue is too emotional to engage with some modicum of effort than the individual should steer clear of it. Otherwise, he or she should not be surprised if the conclusion is drawn that their participation is an intent to provoke.

[QC]

49. Could you please explain the disctinction you are drawing. n/t

[Fire1]

57. No.

[QC]

59. OK, so you are not here in good faith.

Thank you for making that clear.

[Pacifist Patriot]

64. Why did you even bother to contribute anything?

[LostinVA]

67. Check your PM

[LostinVA]

65. Then your opinion has nothing substantial to back it up?

Gotcha.

[donco6]

81. ? Well, that's just stupid. n/t

[Toasterlad]

45. Sadly, Bigotry Has Never Been Exclusively White

However, the real issue isn't race, the real issue is RELIGION. That's the rationale all these bigots (black AND white) are hiding behind.

[readmoreoften]

46. How is my partner supposed to hide that he's transsexual when the govt puts FEMALE on his docs?

Yeah, real easy to hide. It's all a big mystery to everyone walking down the street. That's why he gets escorted out of bathrooms (both men's and women's) by cops and that's why people yell stuff at him while he's walking down the street. Cuz "nobody knows"....

[Orsino]

47. Just another excuse from the homophobic right.

Of course marriage equality is about civil rights. Bishop Gillison has learned little, it seems, in the struggle.

[OneBlueSky]

58. it's a human rights movement . . .

except that some in the opposition don't consider us quite human . . .

[Starry Messenger]

74. I'm not sure if I ever saw this posted at DU: Julian Bond, Chairman of NAACP

http://www.queerty.com/naacps-julian-bond-delivers-the-gay-black-bond-weve-been-working-toward-20090317/

• "When someone asks me, 'Are gay rights civil rights?' My answer is always, 'Of course they are.' Civil rights are positive legal prerogatives. The right to equal treatment before the law. These are the rights shared by everyone. There is no one in the United States who does not or should not enjoy or share in enjoying these rights. Gay and lesbian rights are not special rights in any way. It isn't special to be free from discrimination. It is an ordinary universal entitlement of citizenship."

• "The fact that many had to struggle to gain these rights makes them precious; it does not make them special and it does not reserve them only for me or restrict them from others. Because when others gain these rights, my rights are not diminished in any way. My rights are not diluted when my neighbor enjoys protection from discrimination. He or she becomes my ally in defending the rights we all share. For some people, comparisons between the African-American civil rights movement, the movement for gay and lesbians rights seems to diminish the long black historical struggle with its suffering, sacrifices, and endless toil. However people of color ought to be flattered that our movement has provided so much inspiration for others. That our movement has been so widely imitated. That our tactics, our methods, our heroes, our heroines, and even our songs have been appropriated or served as models for others."

• And in a special message geared toward certain individuals: "Many gays and lesbians worked side-by-side with me in the 1960s civil rights movement. Am I now to tell them, Thanks for risking life and limb helping me win my rights, but they're excluded because of a condition of their birth, that they can't share now in the victories they helped me to win, that having accepted and embraced them as partners in a common struggle I can now turn my back on them, deny them the rights they helped me win, the rights I enjoy because of them? Not a chance. No."

[Duncan Grant]

79. Well obviously Julian Bond doesn't know a goddamn thing about civil rights.

:sarcasm:

[Starry Messenger]

83. Right, Or Coretta King or Dr. Sylvia Rhue, the new head of NBJC

:)


http://www.bilerico.com/2009/05/black_and_gay_--_and_reclaiming_civil_ri.php

Coretta King stood with us because she knew that the sustaining of the Beloved Community meant that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people must be included.

We who work for full LGBT rights stand as heirs of the Civil Rights Movement because it is based on justice, equality, fair play, equal rights and profoundly deep spiritual roots that plumb the depths of the Golden Rule. Those of us whose characters were forged in the fires of the Civil Rights Movement continue the fight of. We understand the words of James Baldwin, a Black gay man, who knew all of us were "snatching our humanity from the fires of human cruelty".

I stood with King in the 60's and he would stand with us now because challenging homophobia is a part of the unfinished business of Civil Rights Movement.

Those work so feverishly against LGBT rights are on the wrong side of justice, the wrong side of history, the wrong side of love, and the wrong end of the ever-bending moral arc of the universe.

Those who stand for LGBT equality understand the importance of our work when we hear the words of Dr. King: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere".

To paraphrase Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr: If we are wrong, then the Supreme Court of this nation is wrong. If we are wrong the Constitution of the United States is wrong. If we are wrong the Declaration of Independence is wrong. If we are wrong, Jesus of Nazareth was merely a Utopian dreamer and never came to earth. If we are wrong justice is a lie. And we are determined here and now to work and fight until justice runs down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.

[Pacifist Patriot]

87. That second paragraph is the epitome of eloquence.

[LostinVA]

89. Agreed

[Iggo]

75. Yes.

Duh.