HeartlandGirl
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
I'm going to stay out of the debate here, but I'd like to show my support for the employees as they attempt to overturn this decision.
Ashcroft bans DOJ gay pride event
- Thread starter BAW
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
beegee
Neon Zebra
why yes, fizz, i can explain.
the definition of phobia : a persistant, abnormal, or irrational fear of a specific thing or situation.
disagreeing with a lifestyle does not equal fear, nor does it equal hatred. nor does it make me irrational. nor does it make me abnormal. nor does it make me afraid. i never said i hated gays. i never said gays were inferior. i simply said that i disapprove. equating disapproval with hatred is just ridiculous.
the definition of phobia : a persistant, abnormal, or irrational fear of a specific thing or situation.
disagreeing with a lifestyle does not equal fear, nor does it equal hatred. nor does it make me irrational. nor does it make me abnormal. nor does it make me afraid. i never said i hated gays. i never said gays were inferior. i simply said that i disapprove. equating disapproval with hatred is just ridiculous.
FizzingWhizzbees
ONE love, blood, life
Actually homophobia is usually defined as fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay men.
I do believe that to "disapprove" of a person's sexuality meets the definition of having contempt for them. Disapproval implies that you believe there is something wrong with being gay, something worthy of criticism. What exactly do you "disapprove" of? And being gay isn't a "lifestyle" anymore than being a Black person or a woman is a lifestyle.
I do believe that to "disapprove" of a person's sexuality meets the definition of having contempt for them. Disapproval implies that you believe there is something wrong with being gay, something worthy of criticism. What exactly do you "disapprove" of? And being gay isn't a "lifestyle" anymore than being a Black person or a woman is a lifestyle.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Please don?t delete the post.
Bigotry is not pretty, covering it up just lets us all pretend it does not exist.
Did this event take place last year under Ashcroft?s reign?
In canceling it, is he not giving in to the haters?
Some gay friends told me they don't buy the Adam and Steve thing either. They said it would more likely have been Adam and Stefan
Bigotry is not pretty, covering it up just lets us all pretend it does not exist.
Did this event take place last year under Ashcroft?s reign?
In canceling it, is he not giving in to the haters?
Some gay friends told me they don't buy the Adam and Steve thing either. They said it would more likely have been Adam and Stefan
sharky
New Yorker
I think bonogirl's opinion makes for an interesting debate. There is a difference between not agreeing with the homosexual lifestyle and being a homophobe. If bonogirl doesn't believe its right for two people of the same gender to be in a sexual relationship, that's fine and we should all respect her opinion.
What Ashcroft is doing is taking this beyong a matter of opinion point. If he disagrees with homosexuality that's fine. But if he starts to crack down on it -- "You're having gay sex, off to jail!" -- then I have issues. Same with recognizing same-sex unions or same-sex work benefits. Disagree with the lifestyle, fine. But there is a fine line between opinion and bigotry.
On that note, I want a straight women pride day. Or would John Ashcroft say no -- owing to the fact that we should be barefoot and cooking at home?
What Ashcroft is doing is taking this beyong a matter of opinion point. If he disagrees with homosexuality that's fine. But if he starts to crack down on it -- "You're having gay sex, off to jail!" -- then I have issues. Same with recognizing same-sex unions or same-sex work benefits. Disagree with the lifestyle, fine. But there is a fine line between opinion and bigotry.
On that note, I want a straight women pride day. Or would John Ashcroft say no -- owing to the fact that we should be barefoot and cooking at home?
beegee
Neon Zebra
please, fizz. you're reaching.
you cannot tell me that because i disapprove, i automatically have contempt. it's ridiculous.
i'm having a bit of trouble with that last part as well. my lifestyle is not that of a woman? i'm confused.
you cannot tell me that because i disapprove, i automatically have contempt. it's ridiculous.
i'm having a bit of trouble with that last part as well. my lifestyle is not that of a woman? i'm confused.
pax
ONE love, blood, life
I think that was Fizzing is saying is that a "lifestyle" is typically something chosen and planned. For example, one might live the lifestyle of an environmentalist by recycling carefully and choosing environmentally-friendly products. One might live the lifestyle of a Jewish person by attending synagogue and observing Jewish holidays. Etc., etc.
Homosexuality, however, to the best of the evidence we have, is an orientation--*not* a choice. You can stretch the argument by saying that one chooses to engage in gay sex or to date members of the same sex, but for all intents and purposes, homosexuals seem to be born and not made. Jews or environmentalists, on the other hand, are made.
Also, at least for me, I'd say that I have contempt for most things I disapprove of. I have contempt for murder, child abuse, racism, etc. I would say that for most people, they go hand in hand. I try not to have contempt for the *person* who does such things--this, I guess, is what is meant by "hating the sin and loving the sinner"--but I do have contempt for the acts themselves.
I suppose I'm as interested as everyone else in finding out why it's okay to have a huge problem with something that 2 adults do in their own homes, that harms no one else, and actually puts *more* love out into a world that really needs it.
Homosexuality, however, to the best of the evidence we have, is an orientation--*not* a choice. You can stretch the argument by saying that one chooses to engage in gay sex or to date members of the same sex, but for all intents and purposes, homosexuals seem to be born and not made. Jews or environmentalists, on the other hand, are made.
Also, at least for me, I'd say that I have contempt for most things I disapprove of. I have contempt for murder, child abuse, racism, etc. I would say that for most people, they go hand in hand. I try not to have contempt for the *person* who does such things--this, I guess, is what is meant by "hating the sin and loving the sinner"--but I do have contempt for the acts themselves.
I suppose I'm as interested as everyone else in finding out why it's okay to have a huge problem with something that 2 adults do in their own homes, that harms no one else, and actually puts *more* love out into a world that really needs it.
Last edited:
beegee
Neon Zebra
oh yes, i forgot. it can't be helped.
and once that argument comes into it, i always step out.
and once that argument comes into it, i always step out.
OP
OP
BAW
The Flower
deep said:Please don?t delete the post.
Bigotry is not pretty, covering it up just lets us all pretend it does not exist.
Did this event take place last year under Ashcroft?s reign?
In canceling it, is he not giving in to the haters?
Some gay friends told me they don't buy the Adam and Steve thing either. They said it would more likely have been Adam and Stefan
I agree, I think it should be left up.
This event has been held every year for the past 6 years, but the new rule requiring a presidential proclamation was added this year...Bush refused to give the proclamation. I guess "Leif Erikson day" had more significance.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
All I have to say is that, if it is a choice, and it seems you think it is. Don't you think you would choose a much easier "lifestyle". Choosing a lifestyle that so many have a stigma towards, that is plagued with violent bashing in so many parts of the world, and a lifestyle where certain rights are denied depending on where you live. This is the reason for a day of recognition. When there's a group in this country that is this large and they have rights being denied them, just because a majority doesn't "understand" or they "dissaprove" of them it's a step backwards, and you need people standing up to get heard and to educate the public of who they really are.
OP
OP
BAW
The Flower
BonoVoxSupastar said:
2 people very close to me are gay and readily admit that although the are happy and have fulfilling lives, this not something they would have "chosen" given the hatred and stigmas attached to it. To not even be able to talk about the person you love at work or even acknowledge they exist if you are in the military is not something most people would voluntarily ask for.
FizzingWhizzbees
ONE love, blood, life
I agree with everything Pax said and I think she said it better than I could have done, so I'll just say that and not repond to bonogirl's post, even though it was directed at me. 
The only thing I want to say is, you use the phrase "it can't be helped" as though being gay is something which should be prevented if that were possible. Again, to me that seems like having contempt for lesbian and gay people because it's saying that their sexuality is something which can "be helped" implying it can somehow be changed to being "normal." I don't think homosexuality is a choice (BVS and BAW make good points about who would choose all the difficulties lesbian and gay people experience) and even if it were, I don't believe it would be a choice that ought to be discouraged anymore than being heterosexual ought to be discouraged.
*Fizz.
The only thing I want to say is, you use the phrase "it can't be helped" as though being gay is something which should be prevented if that were possible. Again, to me that seems like having contempt for lesbian and gay people because it's saying that their sexuality is something which can "be helped" implying it can somehow be changed to being "normal." I don't think homosexuality is a choice (BVS and BAW make good points about who would choose all the difficulties lesbian and gay people experience) and even if it were, I don't believe it would be a choice that ought to be discouraged anymore than being heterosexual ought to be discouraged.
*Fizz.
Fine then. Since we're on the subject of disapproval...
Islam should be a banned religion. In fact, let's ban all of religion. I don't disapprove of religion, but when these religious folk start parading around and showing off in public, that's where I have to take a stand! Republicans...well, I disapprove of them, so let's make any Republican activity illegal. Not Republicans, mind you. God loves Republicans, but not what they do. And straight men...well, I'm tired of how the media constantly caters to this psychologically disturbed class of people. A world of bimbo blondes, beer, and bad fathers, not to mention infidelity, poor manners, and setting a bad example for our children! If they pray hard enough, these straight men can be healed of their affliction!
But again...just because I disapprove, it doesn't automatically mean that I have contempt.
....
Don't forget that, under all the ideology, gays and lesbians are people too.
Melon
Islam should be a banned religion. In fact, let's ban all of religion. I don't disapprove of religion, but when these religious folk start parading around and showing off in public, that's where I have to take a stand! Republicans...well, I disapprove of them, so let's make any Republican activity illegal. Not Republicans, mind you. God loves Republicans, but not what they do. And straight men...well, I'm tired of how the media constantly caters to this psychologically disturbed class of people. A world of bimbo blondes, beer, and bad fathers, not to mention infidelity, poor manners, and setting a bad example for our children! If they pray hard enough, these straight men can be healed of their affliction!
But again...just because I disapprove, it doesn't automatically mean that I have contempt.
....
Don't forget that, under all the ideology, gays and lesbians are people too.
Melon
Hans Moleman
The Fly
bonosgirl84 said:
that's what i tell women all the time. damn women. maybe if they pray to God more and have less abortions, they can be healed of their womanness and be a man like God intended for all of His creatures.
~the moleman formerly known as "melon"
oliveu2cm
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
paxetaurora said:
oliveu2cm
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
melon said:
But... aren't all those things "Normal"? Let's pray we raise more "straight men" in this vein. I know I as an intelligent & independent woman I support it.
(in a side note it always makes me laugh when I see posts asking if Bono is gay.. I think because he exhibits none of those stereotypical qualities people question his sexuality. interesting huh.)
Everyone keeps saying how disgusted they are that Ashcroft did what he did. My question is why? Why is there a need for a gay pride, black pride, women pride day/month etc? If the goal is unity then what is the purpose.
My opinion is special interest groups such as gays/lesbians are trying to shove their agenda's down everybody elses throat. Its pure insanity.
My opinion is special interest groups such as gays/lesbians are trying to shove their agenda's down everybody elses throat. Its pure insanity.
UofU2 said:
"Pure insanity." I'll tell you what "pure insanity" is. Being a part of these subordinate groups in a straight white Christian male country. I'm guessing, I guess, that you're a white male, merely because you'd make an asinine comment like this, considering that, everyday, I'll pass by, seeing straight couples making PDAs everywhere. Or in the workplace, where co-workers will ask you about your spouse or boyfriend / girlfriend, when you didn't even want to bring it up. Or church, where it is little more than a bastion of heterosexism. Straight white Christian male morality is *constantly* shoved down our throats, merely because we know life no differently.
In an ideal world, all groups would be treated equally. So that means that everyday should be Gay / Black / Woman / Etc. Pride Day, just as everyday is Straight White Male Pride Day. But the powers that be don't like that; inequality is what drives humanity.
Melon
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Bono's American Wife said:
I agree, I think it should be left up.
This event has been held every year for the past 6 years, but the new rule requiring a presidential proclamation was added this year...Bush refused to give the proclamation. I guess "Leif Erikson day" had more significance.
I guess W does not like to sign proclamations.
But, then there is this
uofu2, were you talking about W's jesus day?
sharky
New Yorker
melon said:
melon -- I think there is a difference in this particular case. In the case of recognizing Gay Pride Day, if Ashcroft doesn't sign the recognition, it doesn't mean people who go to a Gay Pride Parade are breaking the law. In this case, there is a difference between making Gay Pride Day and just not recognizing it.
I think we need to redefine this thread. There is no LAW being signed, its just recognition.
That being said, the Puerto Rican Day parade was yesterday. If we can recognize a U.S. territory that doesn't pay taxes and has Spanish, not English, as its major language, why can't we recognize gays and lesbians?
melon said:
If homosexuals have such "PRIDE" then why do the questions that you listed above strike such a painful chord? These questions aren't meant to shove the lifestyle of mainstream American's down peoples throats...they appear to be polite conversation starters to me.
The real issue here, and the reason that I decided to take the time to respond, is that these gay pride days/weeks/months do nothing to "enlighten" the narrow minded, asinine comment making, white Christian males that I know. In fact, they further distance these groups from us.
UofU2 said:
Well, allow me to stop responding in ideologically-driven anger and ask you an earnest question. What is it about these groups that "distance" you from them? Don't be general; be specific.
In fact, I may end up agreeing with you...
Melon
melon said:
It's not the groups that put me off...it's them lobbying to have a designated day celebrating their way of life. They have every right to live how they choose, don't get me wrong. I just feel that these lifestyle celebratory events have no redeeming value. I'm sure it feels good to have a specified day that celebrates your issue, but who else pays attention to it? I wish I could find statistics relating to the subject, but I doubt the crowds at such celebrations are terribly diverse.
The point I'm trying to make is that the trouble these things stir up surely can not be worthwhile in the long-term.
Here is the official statement of the group quoted in the article. You may find their website interesting as well.
CWA Praises Ashcroft for Stopping Government Endorsement of ?Gay Pride? 6/6/2003
Calls for All Department Heads to Refuse Federal Support for ?Gay Pride? Events
Washington, D.C. ? Concerned Women for America President Sandy Rios praised Attorney General John Ashcroft today for his refusal to politicize sexuality by preventing a homosexual
?pride? celebration at the Department of Justice, and urged other departments to follow suit.
?Homosexuality is immoral and dangerous behavior and taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize its promotion,? said Rios. ?I am so grateful that Attorney General Ashcroft has taken a courageous step to stand against the pressure of the politically correct elite. This is a welcome departure from the Clinton years.?
The White House was quoted in The New York Times this morning that the president does not believe ?in politicizing people?s sexual orientation.?
?The government, and taxpayers, should not be in the business of promoting homosexuality,? Rios said. ?It?s time for all other federal agencies to stop funding or endorsing similar ?gay pride? events.?
Last year, Rios challenged the Attorney General?s office to reconsider the department?s official celebration of harmful and unhealthy behavior. She warned that sanctioning ?gay pride? events alienates the administration from its pro-family grassroots base.
?We are disappointed that other departments are not following the example of the White House. By using their government offices to support homosexual activist groups, they are promoting behavior that is dangerous to families and children,? Rios said.
CWA has learned that taxpayer funds have been allocated by the Department of Transportation to celebrate ?Gay Pride Month? activities. Other government agencies are reportedly sanctioning events to be held in government buildings and lending support through offices and officials. These include the Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department, and the Peace Corps.
http://www.cwfa.org/main.asp
CWA Praises Ashcroft for Stopping Government Endorsement of ?Gay Pride? 6/6/2003
Calls for All Department Heads to Refuse Federal Support for ?Gay Pride? Events
Washington, D.C. ? Concerned Women for America President Sandy Rios praised Attorney General John Ashcroft today for his refusal to politicize sexuality by preventing a homosexual
?pride? celebration at the Department of Justice, and urged other departments to follow suit.
?Homosexuality is immoral and dangerous behavior and taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize its promotion,? said Rios. ?I am so grateful that Attorney General Ashcroft has taken a courageous step to stand against the pressure of the politically correct elite. This is a welcome departure from the Clinton years.?
The White House was quoted in The New York Times this morning that the president does not believe ?in politicizing people?s sexual orientation.?
?The government, and taxpayers, should not be in the business of promoting homosexuality,? Rios said. ?It?s time for all other federal agencies to stop funding or endorsing similar ?gay pride? events.?
Last year, Rios challenged the Attorney General?s office to reconsider the department?s official celebration of harmful and unhealthy behavior. She warned that sanctioning ?gay pride? events alienates the administration from its pro-family grassroots base.
?We are disappointed that other departments are not following the example of the White House. By using their government offices to support homosexual activist groups, they are promoting behavior that is dangerous to families and children,? Rios said.
CWA has learned that taxpayer funds have been allocated by the Department of Transportation to celebrate ?Gay Pride Month? activities. Other government agencies are reportedly sanctioning events to be held in government buildings and lending support through offices and officials. These include the Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department, and the Peace Corps.
http://www.cwfa.org/main.asp
UofU2 said:
Well, I have to agree to a point. These days, however, are intended less for the general public, but for the specific groups in question. And it is puzzling. To be honest, I find little satisfaction in these celebratory events, and I think they are self-denigrating and self-defeating. I guess there's no better way to be disgusted with stereotypes thrown at you than to have a parade...of stereotypes.
It's a phenomenon I've seen played out in many "minority" groups, and it is something that I can neither accept or understand. However, when you use phrases like "pure insanity," that's where the unabated anger will come from. I look forward to the day when women and minorities of all kinds can live naturally and without discrimination. Unfortunately, when we have a media that thrives on conflict and fearmongering, I fear it may never happen.
Melon
- Status
Similar threads
