You can heal DU by answering this simple question

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

If anyone can provide a satisfactory answer to this really simple question it would do a great service to harmony on DU.

Imagine a generic Dem candidate. He/she schedules a fund-raiser featuring a singer who has a track record of preaching, "the extent of the holocaust is exaggerated." When it came out, that person would be off the schedule in less than ten minutes.

Imagine a generic Dem candidate. He/she schedules a fund-raiser featuring a singer who has a track record of preaching, "blacks are, on average, less intelligent than whites." When it came out, that person would be off the schedule in less than ten minutes.

Imagine a generic Dem candidate. He/she schedules a fund-raiser featuring a singer who has a track record of preaching, "gays are killing our children."

When it came out, that person remains on the schedule. Why? Would any campaign say in the first two instances that it's okay because the person is only there to sing, doesn't represent the candidate's views, or that we need to reach out to every viewpoint? Would anyone say the singer's views are irrelevant because the candidate has pro-rights views?

It is unimaginable that any Dem campaign would offer such a defense in the first two examples. In fact, few republican campaigns would try to defend the first two examples.

But when gay people are the target, it's a different standard. Why? What accounts for the difference?

[ruggerson]

1. because we are ungodly

there is the "faith" community and then there is the "gay" community. Two separate entities, according to the dynamic reinforced by the Obama campaign.

[MethuenProgressive]

23. Because there's gain to be had by pandering to the evangelicals.

And appearing to support their God Hates The Gays gospel will bring in donations and votes.

[rodeodance]

2. its over my head.

[avrdream]

32. Over mine, too.

Baffling.....and troubling.

[Buzz Clik]

3. Harmony on DU? Is that desirable?

It was my impression that most people post here to air their complaints about being ignored and downtrodden. If DU was a harmonious place to be, everyone would leave.

[Glorfindel]

4. Do you really think they don't despise us?

Even at best, we're "tolerated," maybe "accepted." We'll never be real people to straights, despite whatever protestations to the contrary may be forthcoming. Comparing us to Jews and blacks won't work. We're in an entirely different category of existence, and, in their heart of hearts, straight people really think we CHOOSE to be the way we are. Equality may come some day - I doubt it, but anything can happen, I guess - but it will be granted grudgingly and enforced sporadically. In the meantime, politicians go fishing for votes. There are more fundamentalist evangelicals than there are gays. That's the difference.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

7. I should have specified the answer should be healing. Your answer is merely correct.

[5X]

10. It is not helpful to lump all "straight" people any more than it is for

any other group.

[truedelphi]

21. I'll stand in solidarity with you on that.

[rox63]

5. I don't think this post is at all connected to "healing" DU

Quite the opposite, from what I can tell...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

8. So "healing" would mean not asking questions like this. Probably right, in a way...

But if a straight up question about gay rights are inherently divisive or just beyond the pale on a far left-of-center progressive forum, then where should such things be discussed?

[rox63]

28. It was clearly a swipe at Obama, probably meant to rile up Obama supporters

I am still undecided in the primaries (not all that impressed with any of the front-runners), so I don't count myself among them. It's a good line of discussion, perhaps. But healing? Not so much. For the record, I also think Obama should have dropped the anti-gay fundie guy from his events.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

30. But if there was a GOOD answer it would be healing

If someone comes up with a good answer that doesn't involve GLBT being properly considered under-beings with the Democratic party I would shut up about the topic. And so would everyone else.

And if no good answer exists, then maybe the Obama supporters will recognize that they are, in fact, promoting bigotry, even if they have what they think are good intentions and hadn't really understood this issue before, whether out of ignorance or us vs. them campaign madness. People do learn. And then maybe they would stop attacking gay Duers as drama queens getting worked up over nothing.

Either of those would be more healing than the status quo.

[Fredda Weinberg]

6. Welcome to abomination

It ain't just open homosexuality, but that's what's left. We flaunt convention and pay the price. We have our own values and institutions and don't expect acceptance from those who condemn us without reason.

[IndianaJones]

9. In trying to formulate a PC answer to your question...

I can only say that this place reflects society at large. Gays are second class citizens. Their issues are not real. Their concerns are not a priority. Their outrage is not genuine.

Nothing I have seen has surprised me. I am sorry to see so many naive people shocked by the reaction to this situation. It is a real and discernible pattern here.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

12. Count me as naive

As a straight, white-male with some moderate views, I always assumed that everyone on DU must be to my left on these matters. It was understood that everyone was cool with the gay, at least on basic questions like the propriety of re-education or whether GLBT people chose their orientation out of sheer perversity.

I thought this shit was settled, at least within the context of a community where Kucinich wins every straw poll.

I had no idea.

I am naive.

[IndianaJones]

15. DU talks about being to the left. When issues like this arise....the truth surfaces. nt.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

27. The rage is what really gets me.

It's not even like clueless limousine liberals who can't understand why the inferiors don't appreciate their favors more. Some of these people seem downright enraged at the temerity of any gay self-assertion of humanity.

[jonnyblitz]

11. It was interesting to see folks who have been poo pooing this

mess all week long,claiming it was no big thing, all of a sudden go BATSHIT INSANE when somebody posts a RACIST thread over at Daily KOS. sort of proves your point.

[terrya]

17. That was sort of telling.

Eh, I guess some forms of bigotry are more important than others.

[ruggerson]

13. Hobamaphobia

Main Entry: ho·ba·ma·pho·bia
Pronunciation: \ˌhō-bə-məˈfō-bē-ə\
Function: noun
Date: 2007
: irrational fear of, aversion to taking a moral stand opposing bigotry against homosexuality or homosexuals when it might cost votes
— ho·ba·ma·pho·bic \-ˈfō-bik\ adjective

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

14. OUCH!

[NMMNG]

29. And the hits keep on coming

:applause:

[cuke]

38. How do I recommend that for a DUzy

and who do I have to blow to make sure it happens?

[goodgd_yall]

16. They might ALL stay on the schedule.

All you need is for that generic Dem candidate to, up to that time, give speeches that seem to suggest he or she is liberal and an advocate of civil rights. That candidate then attracts loyal supporters. By then, even with a singer denying the holocaust appearing at a fund-raiser, supporters have so committed themselves to the candidate that they don't want to believe anything that sullies their candidate. They've invested so much hope and trust in their candidate that anything negative is either diminished or denied.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

19. Sharp analysis. The "sunk costs" concept.

[Trillo]

18. Sexual repression and domination of others' sexuality inflamed by

fallacious reasoning. That's it in a nutshell.

[Mass]

20. You will find people on DU ready to defend any of the three situations you describe.

Racism, homophobia, and anti-semitism are as prevalent on DU as in the rest of the society.

So, the real issue is why Obama still has McClurkin on his schedule, and I cannot answer this question. However, remember what happened to a recent debate among Democratic candidates. When asked if 2nd graders should be introduced to gay marriage, nearly every candidate answered: "NO". None of them took the 30 secs necessary to explain what the story was really about. They had no hesitation whatsoever.

So, my best guess is that candidates consider that being gay is still something that is not accepted by a majority of people and that fighting for that will not gain votes, on the contrary. Expect no leadership on this issue from any candidate. (and, for Obama, once the mistake was made, undoing it was making a statement that gay people were more important than those who are wary of them).

[cuke]

39. Sad, but true

We even have DUers defending right-wingers like Andrew Sullivan, Krouathammer, WSJ, Susan Bedell Smith, etc

[truedelphi]

22. I for one, am a straight person who is outraged about

McClurkin being on the schedule, on Obama not taking him off the schedule,
and in general any of the punishments that this society has doled out to members of the GLBT community.

[Ian David]

24. I'm with you on this 95%

I'm withholding 5% of Obama from being thrown under the bus because if he becomes the Democratic nominee, he's 195% better than anyone the Republickers have to offer.

I'd much prefer Dennis Kucinich.

[hisownpetard]

25. Good post. Until people realize that they can have unlimited compassion for others

without it costing them a dime, I think that the GLBT community will be considered to be the most expendable.
This is really a shame, but some people seem to think that accepting others is not a moral imperative but rather
a side-order on the menu of morality which they can or cannot order up, depending on how 'tolerant' they feel at the moment
and how obsequious the waiter/waitress/server is.

[AntiFascist]

26. Popular opinion...

but this is in the process of changing.

[GeorgeGist]

31. Some human beings think it's best to ignore insanity ...

for no apparent reason.

[sampsonblk]

33. Numbers and perception, I'd guess

According to CNN, only 4% of voters identified themselves as gay in the 2004 election.

That means the number of voters who think gay sex is unacceptable is several times larger than the number of self-identified gay voters.

So while people at DU are fuming about this mess, there are legions of people nodding their heads in agreement with this preacher. I would say there's your problem. What he says is very popular among the electorate, and what you say is not.

This type of problem isn't going to go away until those numbers change.

[donsu]

34. DU doesn't need healing, it's just fine

nt

[flvegan]

35. Because there haven't been enough ass-kickings on behalf of GLBT interests.

Figuratively speaking, that is.

Put down Jews? Nope, got past that one some time ago. It's now hate speak.

Put down blacks? That's political suicide. Vast majority of folks have come to learn why that's wrong. It's now hate speak.

Put down gays? Hell, folks are brought up to think that being gay is wrong. "You fag" is a common juvenile put down. Religion tells people that being gay is wrong, but it doesn't come up for race. As more folks stand up for GLBT rights and that movement grows, I think it will change. Wish it was overnight. Ask the question again in 2012. Well, I don't think you'll have the opportunity, as I think the '12 "Obama" candidate would dump this fool like a hot tater. Why? Because it's now seen for what it is...hate speak.

[cobalt1999]

36. I don't agree with you often, but...

you nailed it. Good post.

[CyberPieHole]

37. Enough with YOUR histrionics!!!

This is not about YOUR issue! This issue is about an anti-religious group who want the Dem candidate to give them preferential treatment. Besides, the Dem candidate's record on YOUR issues is flawless (except for this little teeny-weeny itsy-bitsy mistake thingy). So, please stop trying to destroy the Dem candidate and cease drawing undue attention to YOUR issue. But don't forget to give the Dem candidate YOUR money and YOUR vote.:sarcasm: