BlaqueKnight said:

I think Ur onto something LOL

BlaqueKnight said:

I know many religions condemn what they call the "homosexual lifestyle" and unfortunately, that's their right. But in doing so they fly in the face of the reality of the situation. That is, that in all likelihood gayness is natural and innate and not a choice. They're essentially saying 10% of the population is doomed in their eyes. To me it is comparable to race because it can't be chosen or changed, and contrary to what some people believe, you can see it in most people.

Sexuality is an intrinsic part of who you are, and so is spirituality. But religion is not. Religion is a club that one joins either by choice or by upbringing. Something natural and inside yourself should be valued more than something you have an option on IMO.

meow85 said:

I feel you but I have to disagree with the bolded part. I wouldn't compare it to race as race is really a construct and if you focus on physical/genotypes then we look the way we look because our parents looked the same way. e.g. two dark haired, dark eyed parents beget a dark haired dark eyed child but two homosexual parents may not necessarily beget a homosexual child or hetero begetting hetero and we still don't have any concrete evidence to determine why one is gay anymore than why one has autism or why one has a genius level IQ or born retarded. I think its a crap shoot!
We also can't determine accurately the percentage of the population that is gay as you are relying on someone to not only truthfully respond to the question of whether they are homosexual but then have an understanding of what is homosexual. e.g there are plenty of people who may engage in homosexual behavior but not categorize themselves as gay which to me is mind boggling but whateva. Then throw in the bisexuals and the count changes again!

I think it is too complicated a subject for religious ppl or even atheistic to tackle adequately. The only thing that is certain is that we should all treat each other the way that we would want to be treated. Whatever is natural or unnatural, man's law and God's law will sort it out some how. Don't take that last statement the wrong way, I'm actually including all mankind cuz the religious right folks need to acknowledge all the straight folks living foul and stop focusing so much on the homosexuals.

meow85 said:

While I disagree that it is the same as race (again, I see it as an oversimplification of a much more complex issue), I agree that there has been much bigotry against homosexuality and a lot of it has come from religious groups.
That being said, just because Sheila lends her services to an organization doesn't mean that she supports every view they have. As I said, maybe she places less value on her sexual orientation as it relates to her. Many people feel the same way about their race, culture and so on, so why should peoples' sexuality be any different? If someone is a good drummer, its no insult to the person if he/she is hired for being a good drummer rather than a good gay drummer or a good straight drummer. Their sexuality has nothing to do with their job performance. Many people place more value on their personal accomplishments rather than their inherent traits. I agree with and respect that perspective. You can not help who or what you are but you certainly can take credit for your personal accomplishments because they are yours and yours alone. Sheila Escovedo is a world class drummer and that's why she is famous. She also has religious convictions and that's what draws her to certain organizations. I'd like to think that its because of the good those organizations do rather than their stance on certain issues - whether they relate to her personally or not.

Zannaloaf said:

Interesting you know its in the New Testament. The Old Testament speaks against too but I assume since you already know about the New Testament, you know where to find it. Once you read it, will you believe it?

I'm still stuck on 'homosexual explosion'.

Is this like spontaneous combustion? Should I be afraid? Might I explode at any minute without warning? Or does the bi part keep me safe? Enquiring minds want to know . . .

Alliasan said:

don't worry, the Revive Christian Group and the E Family are praying to stop the proliferation of such explosions!! It's a good thing that they are on your side.

TheWifey said:

This was not my post.....but WTF??? Are yo useirous?? Someone asks you a legitimate quetsion and your response is "I assume you know where to find it so go read it??" Obviously the person does NOT know where to find that; that is why he or she asked!!!!

Sounds like YOU actually do not know where to find this passage and thus you are now backpedaling.

Moreover, the "Old Testament" aka "Hebrew Scriptures" passage is very specific and open to lots of interpretation. And gues what??? It's written in Hebrew so don't assume your King James version is the correct translation let alone the correct interpretaion.

For example, most poeple take it for granted Moses parted the Red Sea; well guess what, if you go back to the original text, it's the Sea of Reeds.... a totally different body of water. Just a famous example of how mis-translation gets out of control.

Also, let's assume you do read the original passage you are referring to in the Old Testament/Hebrew Scriptures....it's in the same section that containes the passages that are used to explain why it is forbiddent to eat shellfish (doesn't actually say those words BTW), not to wear garments made of wool & linen, and other very specific prohibitions.

Moreover, the same word "abomination" is used for all of the above..... So if you believe "a man lying with another man as he would with a woman" (which is what it actually says roughly).....is an "abomination"...then you must also believe eating at Red Lobster is an "abominatin" and wearing a linen & wool blazer is an "abomination".

In fact the word "abomination" is often interpereted as "what is against our ritual".

Maybe you should do some research about the texts your are referring to.

BlaqueKnight said:

I tihnk these 2 posts are robably the most interesting part of this thread. Very well articulated!

Meow85's point is a great one, especially when it comes to specific minorities (whether it be the African American Church, Hasidic Jewish groups, various Christian groups etc.) who themselves have exprienced bigotry and hate.....then go about spouting similar type of bigotry.

Yes, one is entitled to believe whatever one wants....but going aorund saying all ills of society are because of a partiuclar minority group..... well doesn't that sound a lot like a particular dictator in Germany during the 1930's and 1940's??

Plus, as Meow points out, in today's US socieity, if one were to make these statements about Blacks, Hispanics, or another group, it would be condemned immeidately. You know poeple used to (and some probably still do!) belive it is a "SIN" and "Unnatural" for a Black and a White perosn to marry and have kids!! THere were even laws against it. Sounds very similar to religoius groups who say 2 men or 2 women marrying is a sin and are now fighting to make sure it is illegal.

Nevertheless, Blaquenight's comments are also interesting. IN fact, for the first time, it kinda answered my own speculation about how someone would get invovled with these types of religious groups who spout anti-gay rhetoric, when he or she might be gay or bisexual him/herself.

I think the idea of placing differnet elements of one's identiity at different focus might explain this. So something very interesting to think about.

Thank you both for your thoughts.


PS> I don't think Sheila needs the money though! She still collects her roylaties from GLamorous Life since she was credited as co-writer and it's played on the radio still!

GaryMF said:

I don't follow the Old Testament. Followers of Jesus follow the New Testament which still says homosexuality is against God but so are other sexual sins.

That's seems to be your real problem; you want to argue with people that don't agree with that behavior. Well guess what? You won't change anybody's mind so you're wasting your rage. If Sheila E. is a Christian, the Bible tells Christians not to engage in that behavior so go figure and I don't know the exact verse offhand but I know one is in Romans. If the poster is that curious, they don't need me to do their homework, you think?

DesireeNevermind said:

Homosexuality's occurence does appear to be more random than strictly inherited, but the evidence still points to genetic and hormonal, rather than social, factors. The fact that the oft-quote 10% figure is merely an estimate is irrelevent IMO.

And even if it didn't; even if homosexuality really was a matter of choice as some people claim, why should it matter? Would same sex desire being proven as a choice make it acceptable for people to prop up their bigotry under the guise of religious convictions?


The day religious conservatives start campaigning against The Bachelor and Vegas-style quickie marriages with the same fervour they do against homosexuality is the day I'll believe they actually care about morality and aren't just fixating on teh eeevul gheys.

BlaqueKnight said:

But again, it does beg the question, would we even be having this debate if this church group had decided to pin the evils of the world on, say, black people? They could be doing all kinds of good works -feeding hungry children, saving abused puppies, curing the common cold. But what would it say about their real morality if they were to blame all of society's ills on the melanin-gifted? Who would be defending them then? Who would be allying themselves with said group, choosing to overlook that groups' "opinion"?

To me, it's the same thing. A group can do all the good works they want, but I'd want no help from them if they were actively scapegoating an entire segment of the public as evil harbingers of doom and immorality.

It should be kept in mind that there have been religious organizations over the years who've misused the Bible or other holy books to support racist ideology. Food for thought.
[Edited 9/22/08 15:08pm]

GaryMF said:

Really, if you're going to take that passage strictly literally, it's only condemning the man who's on top, as the guy receiving is definitely not lying with a man as he would a woman.

meow85 said:

I believe we would not because I don't believe that racial discrimination and sexual orientation discrimination are the same. That's another thread for the P&R forum but I don't go there anymore, so I won't be having it there.
Racism is not a primary basis for any of the mainstream religions (Christianity, Catholicism, Muslim, etc.) so your argument, while true to an extent is still not indicative of religious doctrines themselves. No mainstream religion believes that being "of color" is a sin. Since MOST OF THE WORLD is comprised of people of color, that is not a likely ideology anyway. While religion is misused by some, its primary function is not to hate gays but rather to unify people in the name of God, Allah or whatever name said religion sees fit to use, while teaching whatever set principles are taught within their particular sect.
Your sexual identity seems to be really important to you. You must understand that not everyone else feels this way. Apparently Sheila doesn't. Not everyone is willing to forsake their religion for their sexual identity - or their racial identity or any other aspect of themselves for that matter. Its just the way it is.
[Edited 9/22/08 15:49pm]

simm0061 said:

Whew! I am so relieved!!!

Reading all these posts I've got two questions...

1) Why does there seem to be more of a concern with male homosexuality than female homosexuality (mention of bible passages and man lying with man) and these preachers always talking about Adam and Steve ? AND

2) Why when there is a defense made for anti-discrimination of gays, does somebody always have to bring Black people into the mix?

WTF?

Are people less threatened or disgusted by female gays than male? If so, why? Also, last time I checked, Blacks weren't the only ones discriminated against in this country or abroad but they always come up in a discussion about Gays which doesn't make any sense given that homosexuality is still taboo among Blacks! I just don't imagine most Blacks appreciate the comparison. Another thing, Blacks don't have to tell anybody that their black, its usually apparent. However,if you were gay wouldn't you have to tell someone or behave in such away as to give them reason to suspect? I mean, i don't know if someone is gay unless they tell me or unless they do something like I dunno, dress up in drag and even then its not obvious cuz hey, Guiliani did it and he's straight! Plus I probably wouldnt care.

DesireeNevermind said:

For years there has been a movement for others to equate their struggles with that of the black experience in this country. It garners more attention to their cause and gives the connotation of seriousness given the common knowledge of the black plight in U.S. history. Many others have done this - not just the homosexual community. While I do acknowledge that they have had it hard (no pun intended), it is NOT the same. That's why I said earlier that racial discrimination and sexual orientation discrimination are NOT the same. To be real, general minority discrimination and discrimination against black people specifically are not on par either.
This is going way off topic. Let's stick to Sheila before the mods move this thread to P&R.
Sheila did the gig, right? That's about all there is to it, I guess. Right?
[Edited 9/22/08 16:38pm]

simm0061 said:

For real.

I hate to say it but gays have been around for thousands of years. There ar those that would rather commit sucide then have others know. My brother is gay and I have grown up knowing a lot of gay people. We let our differences get in the way that is ine problem with society, and there are always people to use the dofferences of other as scape gpaots as their own failures.I still think she is being a hypocrit.

TheWifey said:

My problem??? I'm not the one arguing with anyone. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of your posts where to used the New Testament to support your position, then when someone (not I mind you) asked in a genuine manner to point out the passage, you were not able to. You're stil not able toactually.

It's pretty laughable.

It's like a laywer saying in court "yo know that's against the law. I can't tell you what law, or where in the books it's written. but trust me it's illegal".

And most Christian denomiations still consider the Old Testament to be pat of the Bible..... and read from it every Sunday, even if they don't adhere to all the laws contained therin.

BlaqueKnight said:

I don't know if I'd call it a "movement".....nor would I say it's an attempt to "equate". Rather, when discussing discrimination in the US, unfortunately, the most commonly understood form of discrimination is against African Americans given the country's history with slavery and inequal rights.

It's more of using it as an comparative example, not saying it's the SAME thing. It's probably impossible to equate any 2 forms of discrimination becuase by definition they will be different.

And shouldn't we consider all forms of discrimination to be "serious"? If one is against bigotry, shouldn't one take all forms of bigotry seriously?
[Edited 9/22/08 21:57pm]

BlaqueKnight said:

But if we have to go there -religion is the thing that's a choice; an option. It's a club that a person can choose to take or leave with no real consequences to their spiritual, emotional, or mental well-being. Race and sexuality are things you're more or less stuck with, whether you like it or not. Assuming that people understand there is a difference between spirituality/God and religion, I don't understand why a person would choose their club over a part of their self.

DesireeNevermind said:

I'm not sure which gay people you've been associating with, but most queer people you can tell they're gay/bi/trans pretty quickly. It's very rare to find a person whose sexuality comes as a complete surprise to others.

DING! Hello!

Thanks to Wifey for the reference to Romans 1. After having had my coffee and not assuming it was Old Testament plague and smoting, I read the passage. What interests me most of all is that after Paul (not Jesus mind you) talks about homosexuality- he also say this "They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless." So the point would be - any church that condemns homosexuality SHOULD and by the Bible's passage would be COMPELLED to also rail and make laws against all of that too. So it is a clear case of bigotry because they are singling out ONE of many bad behaviours listed.I mean - look at that list- aren't we ALL in huge trouble? Anyone here NEVER disobey your parents? Gossip? I'd say those are a good start for most peoples downfall according the passage that is held so high as to call for action from Christians.

...Well then.

BTW- Desiree...the bilbe is fair and blanced :"Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones". Also from Romans 1

JudasLChrist said:

and btw- we have had that history in our nation already. Most religious text has been used by someone, somewhere to single out a group to hate or condemn. Even if that is antithetical to the practice of said religion. Crazy, I know...

meow85 said:

I think it's just the opposite; it's very common for some people's sexuality to come as a surprise.

Either way, Desiree, I think it's a natural comparison to the black movement. We're talking about a group of people who face discrimination and who are attempting to fight it through unity. It's important to learn from other groups who have gone through similar experiences.

Efan said:

We will have to agree to disagree then. I don't think its a natural comparison at all and there are plenty of other groups that could have been chosen as a comparison but I think its like someone said earlier, the gays like other groups choose the black struggle/plight to bring seriousness to their own movement.
Gays weren't forcibly removed from another continet and robbed of their language, name, culture, religion, laws, and freedom nor have they had their families split and sold off in bondage and forced to be subservient to a group who were already in the habit of discriminating against others (native americans).
They never had separate drinking fountains, public lynchings, separate schools and medical facilities that were designed to be mediocre at best. Never been denied the right to vote, I mean jeez I could go on. I think when gays as a minority group try and say, "we've had it as hard as you" to black people how could they be taken seriously? You're trying to compare a holocaust that lasted hundreds of years to just discrimination which in and of itself has been experienced by almost everyone. Every minority group has experienced hate crime, been denied housing and employment and yes its flat out wrong but you argue. As for the whole marriage thing, well at the end of the day its just a civil union/contract and I think the religoius groups have deemed marriage this holy sacrament so that's why they fight so hard for it in some states. With the divorce rate being what it is and the whole underground polygamy...its a wonder why anybody wants marriage period!

DesireeNevermind said:

Actually,gay and lesbian people and those perceived to be gay, such as transgendered folks, have had it quite bad throughout modern history. You want to say that gays have never been lynched? Have never been dis-included from their culture or religion? Have never been denied adequate health care and access to housing? Gay people have been through all of that and everything you say.

Here's the rub, though: Black people are gay people, too. And the argument you are making, which is about slavery, doesn't hold, unless you want to deny that no slave was ever gay. And beyond that, white skinned people were slaves throughout history as well. Look at Cuba, and European serfdom.

I think that white people, regardless of sexual identity, experience the benefits of white privilege. But what does white privilege matter when you have been fired from your teaching job because you are gay? Or someone beats you to a pulp and ties you to fence crucifixion style and leaves you to die? Or you find out that your happens-to-be-gay father's new psychopath neighbors are sic-ing their pitbulls on your father and his partner (your other father) whenever they come out of their house?

It may be difficult to hear some white gay person who may oblivious to the conditions of white supremacy rant on about the oppression of sexual minorities. But you got to see it for what it is. Oppression of sexual minorities is as real as racism.

I've heard black people get up in arms many times about comparing gay struggle and black struggle. I agree that the struggles are different and work different culturally sometimes, but the difference is not worth noting on a scale of "who suffers more". Often I see this resistance to acknowledge that gay struggle is on par with the struggle against racism to be a function of homophobia. The subtext is that somehow connecting Black liberation to gay liberation somehow brings black people down.

Persons focused on gay liberation may invoke the perceived successes of the Civil Rights movement, and I think that makes sense. The civil rights movement is inspiring and speaks to the best of who we are as people. Also, it seems that people don't take gay struggle so seriously. They see it as a religious issue and not a civil rights issue. Comparing gay liberation to black struggle helps to reframe the the gay issue as a matter of civil rights. Most Americans are offended by racism, but are not as far along in interrogating their own discomfort with homosexuality.
[Edited 9/23/08 12:23pm]

DesireeNevermind said:

I suggest you pickup a goddamned book and educate yourself on the subject before you start rattling off about how gay people haven't faced anything near as bad as black people, or any other group.

Fact: In 2008 in North America, queer people are routinely denied adequate medical care. It is perfectly legal in several states to fire or refuse to hire a person based on their sexual orientation.

Fact: Until 2003 sodomy was a punishable offense in the state of Texas, and yes, it was enforced with large fines and even jailtime.

Fact: Until the early-to-mid 1970's bars, clubs, and other establishments catering to a gay clientele faced systematic harassment from police and other authorities.

Fact: It was only in 1973 -35 years ago! -that the APA declassified homosexuality as mental illness. Before that decision, queer people were often forcibly admitted into asylums and given schock treatments and lobotomies in attempts to "cure" them.

Fact: At the end of the 2nd World War, when the Allied forces stormed the remaining prison camps and freed prisoners, those marked by the Nazis as gay with a pink triangle were left by the Allies to finish out their total sentences.

Fact: The suicide rate in gay youth is almost double what it is in the non-gay population, as a direct result from the discrimination and harassment they face for who they are.

Fact: People who identify themselves as gay -and even many who are not but are wrongly identified as such by others -face daily the threat of harassment and violence. Even so-called gay neighbourhoods in bigger cities are not a safe haven. Every queer person knows one of their own personally, either themself or someone they are close to, that has been the victim of anti-gay violence. The perpetrators' crimes are rarely taken seriously by authorities, even when the crime results in the death of the victim.

Fact: Organizations calling themselves churches like Westboro Baptist, who protest at funerals of fallen soldiers and AIDS patients, are rarely if ever reprimanded by or interfered with by the authorities. They have the right to spew their hate message of "God Hates Fags" as a religious freedom, and use the Bible (specifically, Leviticus and Paul's letters) to justify themselves.

Fact: During the height of the AIDS explosion in the 80's, anti-gay discrimination and scapegoating reached ludicrous heights. Even Ryan White, a kid who'd contracted the virus through donated blood, and his family faced death threats, harassment and violence for being a "dirty fag".

Fact: In many parts of the world today, homosexuality is an offense punishable by death. The execution is often carried out in the most brutal way possible.



This goes a hell of a lot deeper than you seem to think it does. What I gave heere are only the examples I could think of off the top of my head. Tell me again how comparing the experience of gay people to other minorities isn't comparable. I'd be thrilled to hear how you think this is any different.