Marriage, Gays, and Atheists

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Asher
Stop pretending like gays everywhere are burning mormon temples. I assure you, far more heterosexuals have murdered homosexuals than homosexuals have burned churches.

Based on the evidence so far, an example of one heterosexual killing a homosexual would beat out the examples of gay people burning churches.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20051129/tribunal_lesbiancouple_051129/20051129?hub=Canada

Right here. That's just one instance.

You are SUCH A ****ING LIAR.

That article PREDATES SAME-SEX MARRIAGE IN CANADA. It is a BC-specific example about a provincial policy, not Canada's federal law. It also says CLEARLY:

However, the tribunal also ruled Tuesday that the Knights of Columbus could have refused to host the party if it was in a manner contrary to its "core religious beliefs."

In summary, you are SUCH A ****ING LIAR. The tribunal re-affirmed it is well within the rights of the church to decline to marry gay couples, but they must do it in a respectful way. Why do you hate respect?

When did we get to have a free vote on this matter like the folks in the US? Never.

December 26, 2006, YOU ****ING LIAR.

On December 6, 2006, the government brought in a motion asking if the issue of same-sex marriage should be re-opened to support the traditional definition of marriage. This motion was defeated the next day in a vote of 175 (nays) to 123 (yeas). Prime Minister Stephen Harper afterwards told reporters that he "[didn't] see reopening this question in the future"

The leader of the CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA, fresh off an ELECTION where GAY MARRIAGE was an ELECTION ISSUE called a FREE VOTE (which meant people could vote outside of party lines) on the issue, and it was overwhelmingly voted down. Canada -- through their freshly elected representatives -- affirmed gay marriage in Canada. Note that this was AFTER your link above which you claim was a result of gay marriage in Canada.

My ****ing GOD YOU ARE SO STUPID.

Thank you. Two gay people have admitted that gay marriage follows right behind with K-12 education about homosexuality. I rest my case.

Teaching love and tolerance for your fellow man is never wrong, Ben.

You're the worst Christian I have ever known. I genuinely mean that. You are going straight to hell for being a man of no integrity and manipulation of your religion for your own personal bigotry.

[Naked Gents Rut]

He had the nerve to claim that LGBT people haven't faced violence like blacks did decades ago.

Seriously.

They don't. I haven't seen the police using fire hoses and dogs to break up the annoying gay protests yet.

Seriously, comparing the push for gay rights today with the push for civil rights in the 60's is just idiotic and offensive to anyone with half a brain.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut


They don't. I haven't seen the police using fire hoses and dogs to break up the annoying gay protests yet.

Seriously, comparing the push for gay rights today with the push for civil rights in the 60's is just idiotic and offensive to anyone with half a brain.

He wasn't referring to the use of force to break up protests (many of which are not gay anyway).

He's referring to societal violence. On a scale of size and numbers, of course blacks got it worse. Part of the reason is it's not immediately clear to most people when someone is gay. But still, gays are regularly assaulted and killed in the US just because they are gay. In that sense, they are comparable. In a lot of areas, like in high schools, the intolerance is just like it was in high schools in the 60s for black students.

So I think it's not really fair to compare them, because there were more black people and they went up against more institutional abuse from authorities, etc, if you compare what an openly gay high school student today in, say, the southern US has to go through versus your average black student in the 60s, you'll see a lot of similarities.

Instead of writing ****** on the locker, they write ******.

[Naked Gents Rut]

But still, gays are regularly assaulted and killed in the US just because they are gay.

I'd like to see the numbers on this.

In a lot of areas, like in high schools, the intolerance is just like it was in high schools in the 60s for black students.

They don't need to use the Army to protects gays in schools.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut
They don't. I haven't seen the police using fire hoses and dogs to break up the annoying gay protests yet.

Seriously, comparing the push for gay rights today with the push for civil rights in the 60's is just idiotic and offensive to anyone with half a brain.

You have got some real f*cking nerve saying that. Nevermind all the lgbts that have been brutally attacked, even murdered, for being lgbt over the years and in many countries including the US. Even Coretta Scott King thinks you're full of sh*t.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coretta_Scott_King#LGBT_equality

LGBT equality

On April 1, 1998 at The Palmer House Hilton in Chicago, King called on the civil rights community to join in the struggle against homophobia and anti-gay bias. "Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood", King stated. "This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group."

In a speech in November 2003 at the opening session of the 13th annual Creating Change Conference, organized by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, King made her now famous appeal linking the Civil Rights Movement to the LGBT agenda: "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people. ... But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.' I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream, to make room at the table of brotherhood and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people."

King's support of LGBT rights was strongly criticized by some black pastors. She called her critics "misinformed" and said that Martin Luther King's message to the world was one of equality and inclusion.

In 2003, she invited the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force to take part in observances of the 40th anniversary of the March on Washington and Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech. It was the first time that an LGBT rights group had been invited to a major event of the African American community.

On March 23, 2004, she told an audience at Richard Stockton University in Pomona, N.J, that same-sex marriage is a civil rights issue. King denounced a proposed amendment advanced by President George W. Bush to the United States Constitution that would ban equal marriage rights for same-sex couples. In her speech King also criticized a group of black pastors in her home state of Georgia for backing a bill to amend that state's constitution to block gay and lesbian couples from marrying. King is quoted as saying "Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union. A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriage."

[Naked Gents Rut]

You have got some real f*cking nerve saying that.

I didn't know it took nerve to state the obvious.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut


I'd like to see the numbers on this.

There's tons online.

http://www.nasponline.org/resources/crisis_safety/neat_vulnerability.aspx

Studies of GLB youth in school settings reveal that they experience a significantly higher frequency of verbal harassment and physical assault than their heterosexual peers. Nearly half of the GLB youth in these studies have experienced property damage by other youth. Approximately one third of GLB youth were involved in physical fights with classmates or threatened or injured with a weapon on school grounds. Fourteen percent of the GLB youth involved in fights required medical treatment. Other reports of physical violence included GLB youth being spit on, urinated on, having their clothes pulled up or down or off, and gangrapes. Interviews with students who are abusers reveal their motivations to include statements of "defending" themselves from queers, thrill-seeking, peer dynamics of meeting friends' expectations and proving that they themselves are not gay.

Physical acts of violence against GLB youth in school are almost always part of an ongoing pattern of abuse. The more violent acts generally include multiple perpetrators. These offenders will often target the same youth for years. GLB youth report that among their verbal abusers, the vast majority are other students; however, teachers are also reported to make derogatory comments or hateful statements. Approximately one fourth of the GLB youth in one study shared that they were very afraid of being physically abused on their way to and from school, in hallways and in locker rooms. In response to the threats and attacks they experienced, some GLB youth reported carrying a weapon to school for defense.

GLB youth often skip school due to their fears of safety. Some drop out of school all together, unable to face the continuing verbal and physical attacks and social rejection of their peers.With few or no marketable skills, these GLB youth become socially and economically marginalized and increasingly at risk to become victims of violence in their communities. GLB youth who have disclosed their sexual orientation to their parents or have otherwise been "found out" are often thrown out of their homes onto the streets or are physically or sexually attacked by family members. GLB youth on the streets often turn to prostitution in return for food, shelter or drugs, and therefore expose themselves to a higher level of victimization.

http://www.lambda.org/Gay_student_facts.htm

# 97% of students in public high schools report regularly hearing homophobic remarks from their peers. [4]
# The typical high school student hears anti-gay slurs 25.5 times a day. [5]
# 80% of gay and lesbian youth report severe social isolation. [6]
# 53% of students report hearing homophobic comments made by school staff. [7]
# 80% of prospective teachers report negative attitudes toward gay and lesbian people. [8]
# 1/3 of prospective teachers can be classified as "high-grade homophobes." [9]
# 52% of prospective teachers report that they would feel uncomfortable working with an openly lesbian or gay colleague. [10]
# 77% of prospective teachers would not encourage a class discussion on homosexuality; 85% oppose integrating gay/lesbian themes into their existing curricula. [11]
# Two-thirds of guidance counselors harbor negative feelings toward gay and lesbian people. [12]
# Less than 20% of guidance counselors have received any training on serving gay and lesbian students. [13]
# Only 25% of guidance counselors consider themselves "highly competent" in serving gay and lesbian youth. [14]
# Teachers fail to intervene in 97% of incidents involving anti-gay slurs at school. [15]
# "Homosexuals are probably the most frequent victims [of hate crimes]" in the U.S. [22]
# 45% of gay males and 20% of lesbians report having experienced verbal harassment and/or physical violence as a result of their sexual orientation during high school. [23]
# 19% of gay/lesbian youth report suffering physical attacks based on their sexual orientation. [24]
# 15% of LGB youth have been injured so badly in a physical attack at school that they have had to seek the services of a doctor or nurse. [25]
# 20% of LGB youth report skipping school at least once a month because of feeling unsafe while there. [22]
# 42% of adolescent lesbians and 34% of adolescent gay males who have suffered physical attack also attempt suicide. [21]

There's tons more, but I have a feeling you'll have an excuse for 'em all anyway.

The don't need to use the National Guard to protects gays in schools.

As I said, it's not as systematic. At any given school, there's 1 or 2 openly gay students.

[Naked Gents Rut]

There's tons online.

Where are the regular killings? That's the part I really don't believe.

I can buy pervasive low-level harassment in schools.

[KrazyHorse]

My upstairs neighbour was beaten with a brick until he almost died (was in the hospital for 3 months with traumatic brain injuries). He never told me it was because he was gay (nor did he even tell me he was gay), but I'm about 80% sure it was.

[KrazyHorse]

The level of violence has not reached that against black civil rights activists in the US up to the 60s. Part of that is because society is less tolerant of violence toward all minority groups. But the two situations are not incomparable.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Naked Gents Rut


Where are the regular killings? That's the part I really don't believe. I can buy generally low-level harassment in schools.

I hear about them all the time on gay community websites. They don't get publicized nationally, or frequently even locally. It's a shame because it is a real issue, but the mainstream media by and large only reports the most gruesome and sensational attacks, like Matthew Shepherd. Unfortunately this makes a lot of people, like you, think it's not relatively widespread and is not a problem.

It's late so I'm not going to do your work for you. But it happens all the time, in Canada and in the USA. In Halifax and BC in Canada recently there have been murders of gay people classified as hate crimes. Last week in Toronto a lesbian couple was viciously assaulted outside of their child's school.

There is one article recently I'd found in my history for you:

http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/why-the-mainstream-mediadoesn%E2%80%99t-care-about-the-murder-of-gay-teens/

Why the mainstream media
doesn’t care about the murder of gay teens

By Tanene Allison

February 27, 2008

Lawrence “Larry” King was shot to death and the media thought that you didn’t need to know about it.

Larry, as you might have now learned, was fifteen and in his junior high school computer lab when Brandon McInerney, 14, followed through on a previously declared threat and shot King.

The mainstream media apparently didn’t think that you needed to know that King had recently come out as gay and had started to wear lipstick, mascara, earrings, and a pair of particularly fierce high heeled boots.

The first LA Times article on the shooting made no reference to Larry’s sexual orientation, or his manner of dress. When the mainstream media first reported the murder, it was stated that the violence stemmed from a “personal dispute” between the two boys. In contrast, ten years ago, the first AP story on Matthew Sheppard’s assault included information about his sexual orientation, a fact that had played a role in his victim status.

Youth groups across the country began holding marches in King’s honor. Details of his death was spread virally on youth-dominated, Facebook. Queer media outlets bubbled over with coverage of the story. The mainstream media remained silent.

Only now, two weeks after King’s murder, is the mainstream media providing coverage of the story. All of those who did not cover the story when it was, well, news, are now covering how it was a story no one else covered either.

Anderson Cooper, wrote in his blog:

“Tonight… we are focusing on a story that hasn’t received the attention it deserves…According to many accounts, he had been bullied repeatedly, and some parents have even claimed students knew of threats to Lawrence’s life. At this point it doesn’t seem clear how much school officials knew of the bullying, but a full investigation needs to be done. If this had been an African-American student bullied by a teenage skinhead, would it have received more attention?

“Would school officials have taken it more seriously if it had been a Christian campus leader attacked by another student because of his/her religious beliefs? I don’t have the answers to those questions, but I do think they are worth asking.”

All good questions, and I’m grateful they’re being asked, but where was Cooper two weeks ago?

Not that Cooper is alone in his delay. It took the two Democratic candidates for President thirteen days to release comments on King’s death.

The New York Times took four days before running an AP snippet on the murder, and eleven days before they wrote their first story.

MTV News, a leader in coverage of youth issues, ran its first story on King nine days after the murder.

You get the idea.

I bring this all up because these are indeed questions to which there are no easy answers. It is not a new concept that violence against the queer community is often seen as a non-story.

And yet, despite temptation to declare this mainstream silence as a blatant expression of homophobia, I believe it’s more complicated than just that.

As a journalist who presently works in a position where it is my job to notice civil rights stories the media is ignoring, and to seek appropriate coverage, this case particularly stood out for me.

Despite my daily intake of large amounts of newsfeeds, I also first learned of this story via a friend’s Facebook post. Although this particular story falls outside of the purview of my job, I began emailing various journalist friends to figure out what was going on with their silence. These email exchanges quickly produced no real answers.

In an exchange with one of my most queer-friendly, mainstream media pals, no answers were found to the question of the silence. It was almost as if the institutional hindrances to seeing this as a story were so thick that they were impossible to define.

I asked my journalist source why the story hadn’t received the coverage it deserves. She said she didn’t really know, but likely the large shooting outside of Chicago was simply seen as a larger story. I pointed out that King was shot and two news cycles went by before the Illinois shooting. I pointed out that it was hard not to see shades of homophobia in the media not seeing King’s death as a big story. She wrote back that a boy wearing women’s clothing is exactly the type of thing the media would love to make a story out of. I replied that regardless of that assumption, the lack of coverage would say otherwise. This went on for a number of rounds.

Our exchange ended with her agreeing to research the story a bit more, and with her asking if I had contacts for King’s friends and family. I had to point out that I wasn’t inquiring to pitch her for my work; that I was merely an upset citizen, trying to make sense of the silence.

Her news organization took days more before they ran their first piece of coverage.

That “Mainstream Media” is made up of endless such folks, people who cared about the story, who engaged in private exchanges about it. And yet, and yet, the coverage remained absent.

I believe that we know the answer to Anderson Cooper’s questions. Yes. Yes, the death of Queer folks earns less mainstream outrage. (Has anyone heard of Simmie “Beyonce” Williams Jr.? Another feminine dressing, out-as-gay, young male of color, who was murdered this last weekend? Or Senesha Steward, who was killed in early February? It also deserves to be examined what role the races of these youth played in the lack of coverage their murders were given.)

Yes, such crimes tend to be taken less seriously.

What I don’t know is why. Why the impenetrable silence on this story, when reporters in numerous organizations agree that it was always a story worth covering? And perhaps even more bizarrely, why the sudden onrush of belated coverage? Why is it now popular for the mainstream media to cover how unpopular it was for the mainstream media to cover King’s death in the weeks after it first occurred?

Lawrence King is dead. And were it not for groups of hurt and angry young people, none of us may have ever heard King’s name.

Whether the mainstream media agrees or not, that fact is something worth our attention.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by MrFun



Do you know how retarded this statement sounds after you have tried using it dozens of times before when clearly the right to marry does not even mean that you can force someone to marry you?

When you have caught up with Boris and Asher with their posts BK, get back to me on my latest response to you.

The right to marry does NOT mean that you can compel someone to marry you.


As for Drake - there are legitimate comparisons to be made between the 50s and 60s civil rights movement with civil rights movement of today. Especially given the fact that the gay civil rights movement began later during that time period - DUH.

Just because blacks suffered comparatively worse systematic, quasi-legal violence in contrast to gays today, does not mean there are absolutely no comparisons that can be drawn.

[Naked Gents Rut]

But the two situations are not incomparable.

I have a hard time believing that gays in the sticks are in hiding for fear of their lives all the time, mainly because I grew up in the sticks and the several openly gay people in the community didn't seem to have any problems.

Blacks in the 60's, on the other hand, really did have to watch their backs. I don't think the economic clout and general safety of gays today is comparable at all to the situation of black in the civil rights era.

[MrFun]

To say that because there are some qualitative differences between two different civil rights movements means that you cannot draw any comparisons or parallels between the two at all, does not make any sense.