Why has DU become so mind-bendingly stupid in discussing prop 8?

[jpgray]

Specifically, in doling out blame for the atrocious measure's passage. What are the worst examples?

1. 'Twas the darkies!

Idiocy. If you accept the infinitesimal sample size of a single exit poll as accurately depicting the votes of blacks in CA, you've fallen in love with forming a simplistic narrative of antagonism to the point that risking error in judgment doesn't concern you. But let's forget that and presume the statistic is valid. The behavior of people who trumpet that statistic as the major cause of prop 8 passing is very familiar--narrow-minded scapegoating that inflates a small target for bludgeoning because it simply defines a vulnerable antagonist and evades the whole problem of confronting a larger, more amorphous target which seems difficult to harm or pin down.

When a vote is close and about something controversial, you'll see this behavior. Those who are angry about the outcome long to find a vulnerable target to beat on, preferably one that will actually feel pain from all the smacking. In close votes, one can pick and choose the target for this purpose--even the smallest demographic can be singled out as "decisive" in terms of numbers, due to the very nature of a close vote. Angry folks looking for such a scapegoat will avoid larger and less vulnerable targets, because beating on those won't draw as much blood. This behavior is mostly worthless even if it were justified--promoting a demographic for total blame out of proportion to its actual influence is not just invalid, it's hopelessly impractical. Say your righteous condemnations succeed in changing the group's behavior--what have you gained? A tiny shift, proportional to the group's tiny influence. Meanwhile, you've ignored the larger problems and wasted energy on a tiny isolated one.

An apt example of this behavior is found in the 2000 election, wherein poor deluded Naderites were the scapegoat for some. Sure, their numbers were enough to have turned the tide in FL, but were they decisive? Only after the media's two year war on Gore had borne its terrible fruit. Only after the GOP election officials and the SCOTUS had effectively disenfranchised the entire state. Might the latter two have been more appropriate targets for anger and vitriol? But no, Nader supporters are easily pricked, and the goal of some after all is to draw as much blood as possible--practicality and distribution of blame in proportion to influence are apparently not the concerns.

So it was with prop 8. Millions of dollars from Mormons? White progressive apathy? A general intolerance borne of ignorance that knows no specific race or creed? Forget all that, and focus on this one demographic. The concept of being able to hazard the rights of thousands on a simple majority, limited only by one's ability to buy up signatures? Forget all that, and focus on this one demographic.

2. OMG! It was the religionz!

Another simplistic narrative, slightly better because it gets to a larger target with actual influence. But it's still a simplistic narrative of antagonism, and it's still rife with error. This time the accused party is ill-defined to the point of incoherence. Blame Mormons? Well, we're talking about certain leaders and money-men there (note the position of Brigham Young's offspring was -against- prop 8). Catholics? Many voted against, and there is no small number of GLBT Catholics. "But what the fuck is wrong with you, jpgray?" You ask. "Some subset of religious peoples doubtless opposed the measure, but the core of support was driven by religion!" Well there's a lot that is the fuck wrong with me, but I disagree. The core of support for prop 8 was driven by ignorance. Ignorance abetted in specific instances by religion, but extant among the irreligious, and promoted by all sorts of ne'er-do-wells godless and pious alike. Being "religious" was neither sufficient nor necessary for bigotry in this case, and in truth it never has been for any sort of bigotry. Religion can be a vehicle for bigotry, but bigots can get along very well without it. Any tribalistic "us against them" impulse can drive bigotry and violence--nationalism, ethnocentrism, take your pick.

The point?

Singling out an isolated and tantalizingly vulnerable little scapegoat does little to cast light on the actual causes of a lousy close vote. Beating on that scapegoat may be satisfying but is ineffectual: the hoped-for change in attacking the scapegoat rarely materializes, and, lacking influence, changing the scapegoat's way of thinking won't have much impact. Tackling the larger and less vulnerable problems will yield greater results, and usually it is those larger problems that lurk behind the scapegoat's behavior anyway. If ignorance about gay marriage weren't so rampant, would black voters have voted the way they allegedly did on prop 8? If the media hadn't run their war on Gore, would so many Nader voters have voted as they did?

Think about that. And stop insulting yourselves and anyone else with a brain by pretending these tragedies of mass human behavior boil down to a simply defined target that is easy to abuse.

[Ian David]

1. The fight to stop Prop 8 in California is still going on in the courts. THEY need donations, too.

www.InvalidateProp8.org

www.eqca.org

[crappyjazz]

2. .

..

[jonnyblitz]

3. yet another pompous, longwinded diatribe misreprensenting

what is going on to hide. Let me guess, you are STRAIGHT. anyway, thank GAWD for the "hide thread" function. SEE YAH!:hi:

[TreasonousBastard]

4. Good points, somewhat arguable, but good. BUT...

rational discussion always loses when the mob mentality finds a thing to focus on.

"Mob mentality" is not always such a bad thing, but it is the way we tend to think-- we grab on to bandwagons and quick answers rather than think things through. Most of the time this actually works pretty well and the truth is we'd never get anything done if we had to rationalize everything.

While it's largely contructive for us to happily do our jobs and keep our houses clean according to the common will, it really sucks when we go off on witch hunts, lynchings, and wildeyed hysteria on internet boards.

Psychologists and anthropologists have a lot to say about this.

(Given a choice, I'd rather have internet hysteria than lynchings)

[HamdenRice]

5. Because there are lots and lots of racists here who needed an excuse to spew bile

And this was the perfect excuse to let out all their pent up rage against African Americans in general, rather than the voters for Prop 8.

[crappyjazz]

6. LOL

that was good, ha ha ha ha

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

13. Bullshit

Just like the OP's post.

Let me guess, you're both straight.

[crappyjazz]

16. The mind reels

Like I have said, we're supposed to sit down and shut up.

[chimpymustgo]

59. Ding ding ding!!!!

[TankLV]

130. Yeah - your a dingbat, that's obvious...

sure is comforting to see you defending homophobia and BIGOTS...

[Jamastiene]

7. I do not think it was necessary for you to use a racial slur

to make your point. I find that terminology offensive.

[renie408]

10. That is your choice and nobody will take that away from you. But you CHOOSE to be offended.

There was no intent to offend in the manner you have chosen to take offense. 'Darkies' was used to illustrate the racial bias behind that stance.

[renie408]

8. Yeah! It is way less insulting to lecture people like you are their mother

while not actually making any rational point at all.


I agree it has nothing to do with race, but saying religion isn't responsible is just stupid. Yep, I said it, STUPID. Who were the major supporters of Prop 8? That would be the Catholic church and the Mormon church. And those would be...RELIGIOUS institutions. That does not mean that we should close all the churches. But there needs to be a sea change in institutional religious belief for there to be any widespread support for gay marriage.

[jpgray]

21. I am the stupidest most lecture-y mother on the planet

But the fact is, I still believe "religion" isn't well-defined enough as a target. There are many "religious" GLBT folks, whether their denomination be UCC or even the Catholic Church. The real culprit is a specific subset of religious folks--it may well be a large proportion of those who identify as "religious," but it's still the case that religion is neither necessary nor sufficient to explain bigotry. One proof of that is the existence of irreligious bigots. Another is the existence of people who are both pious and tolerant. They don't tend to make as much noise, but they do exist.

[renie408]

46. So, you don't believe that the majority of churches in this country

preach AGAINST homosexuality?

Listen, you are trying so hard to be politically correct and not accuse any subgroup of being the culprit that you are willing to completely ignore the underlying problem: that the majority of large religious institutions in this country (and the world) TEACH INTOLERANCE TOWARDS GAYS. Just because SOME churches or denominations don't doesn't take away from the fact that the vast majority DO.

The biggest supporters, the ones who put up money, of Prop 8 were CHURCHES. CHURCHES practice RELIGION. RELIGION is not the same thing as SPIRITUALITY. No, I am not saying that ALL spiritual or even religious people are anti-gay. But, I would be willing to bet that just about every single one of those people who voted for prop 8 did so either consciously or sub-consciously based on the religious teaching they have heard their whole lives. Even the ones who don't identify that way probably did so. I base that on the fact that the only anti-gay propaganda I have ever heard came from a religious viewpoint.

The thing isn't to say "get rid of religion" or "religion is bullshit". The thing is for members of those large religious institutions to start asking some tough questions of their 'spiritual' advisers. The way religion and spirituality is taught in this country needs to change.

Also, keep in mind that you can be religious without being spiritual and spiritual without being religious. I am an atheist. I am in no way religious. But I consider myself spiritual.

[Bluenorthwest]

82. In all fairness,

if they are not making noise against organized hatred and allowing thier own reputation and the reputation of their faith be described by bigots, in my eyes they are not pious at all, and passive tolerance is of little value when what it needed is action. Silent support might as well be opposition.
You are splitting hairs, and I get the point, but I hold that the religious folk who are not bigots have the responibility to speak up strongly, and if they do not they should be content to be thought of as the behavior of the active faith folk defines them. They have chosen both their identity and their silence. They are, in Christian terms, holding the coats of the bad guys.

[EFerrari]

96. What we need here is a revival of Unitarian Jihad!

[IronLionZion]

90. And the religious folks who oppose Prop 8 and support equal human rights?

Are you going to pretend we don't exist and continue to speak in broad generalizations? In many ways, liberal bigots are not that different from conservative bigots.

[QC]

93. Every single Episcopal bishop in California came out strongly against Prop 8.

I haven't heard a single mention of that in these discussions.

[Zhade]

157. Well gee, if you need to be patted on the back for doing the right thing...

Thanks for not being a bigoted douchebag. Happy now?

IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU!

But seriously, I do thank you for doing what any sane decent person should automatically be doing anyway. ; )

[IronLionZion]

173. The broader the generalization, the narrower the mind

liberal bigots aren't any better than conservative bigots. At least many conservatives will admit to their bigotry.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. Exit poll, by religion:

Vote by Religion
           Total  Yes  No
Protestant (43%)  65%  35%
Catholic   (30%)  64%  36%
...
None       (16%)  10%  90%

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=CAI01p2

And if you look at the figure for how frequently people attend church, the difference is even more marked. Yes, religion, in particular organised religion that campaigned for the proposition, has a hell of a lot to do with this - and that's what the campaign itself says: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hZmLBrL36NObNyMR0ghXN7vB5hYwD94ADAB80

[renie408]

11. DING DING DING!! We have ourselves a WINNAH!! n/t

[jpgray]

14. By the same rationale, you can blame mothers.

From the same poll:

Mothers (20%)

61%

39%

What good does this generalized scapegoating and daft, simplistic analysis -do-? What has it done for you? Or anybody?

[renie408]

17. Because if you are going to change it, you have to understand it.

Are you really trying to say that religion wasn't the primary factor in people voting YES to prop 8? If it wasn't religion, what was it? People are not naturally homophobic, they are taught to be homophobic. Who has the largest stake in and does the most to teach people to be homophobic? It ain't atheists, that's for damn sure.

Ignoring the fact that organized religion is the major reason people feel the way they do about gay marriage in the name of being completely unbiased is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

[jpgray]

26. Specific aspects of religion -were- a primary factor.

So were specific aspects of the white vote, the black vote, men, women, young, old, the list goes on. A generalized "religion!" scapegoat clouds the problem--it increases the risk for errors in understanding. If religion is all, how do we explain the irreligious bigots? How do we explain the Catholics who voted against the measure? Again, I think the generalized scapegoating of blacks or religious people avoids the complex causes of this vote to seek out a simplistic antagonist for bludgeoning. What we're really after here is ignorance and hatred, and that knows no denomination. Can it be aided and abetted by religion in specific instances? Sure. We should identify those aspects of religion that helped cause this tragedy, and avoid attacking those aspects which opposed it.

[renie408]

35. What do you think all of those different demographics have in common?

[jpgray]

45. As far as the voters? Chiefly ignorance. It's why both sides ran ad campaigns

As far as those who pushed for this to be on the ballot and promoted its passage? A more pervasive and calculating bigotry. Their ignorance and prejudice was carefully considered, and this measure was considered to be somehow to their advantage. In my mind, the instigators and promoters of hate are the true villains, and they need to be disgraced and destroyed. Those voters who were simply ignorant need to be informed--any hate they have for the GLBT community should be replaced with understanding. While attacks and criticism may be a part of that, they shouldn't be the only part.

[renie408]

47. Really? You REALLY think that the main reason people voted for prop 8

was because of ignorance and not because of their religious beliefs and teachings?

Let me just say that I completely disagree and I think your inability to acknowledge that religion has a large part to play in this is willfully blind.

[jpgray]

50. If people vote based on hate spewed from the pulpit, the reason is ignorance

Those spewing the hate from the pulpit are not so easily excused. In fact, such spewage goes directly against their supposed beliefs and teachings. I argue that blame should chiefly be assigned at those spewing the hate, not those falling for it out of ignorance.

[renie408]

55. I find that argument to be sophist.

The OFFICIAL party line for the Catholic church and the Mormon church (and a lot of other churches) is that homosexuality is a sin. It is part of their church doctrine. The people spewing from the pulpits are telling the people who are sitting in the pews waiting to be guided into everlasting salvation that homosexuality is a sin. They are spewing that because they were taught that. They were taught that by other people who have been taught that. And so on for a couple of thousand years. As religion has pervaded society, so have religious beliefs pervaded society; even to those who do not necessarily consider themselves 'religious'.

All of this is true, right? So that makes me wonder exactly how you can continue to say that religion is not the central problem in homophobia in this country.

[jpgray]

70. And where did the "OFFICIAL" party line come from?

Are you saying it is something inherent in religion itself? The epochal shifts and revolutions undergone by even just the Catholic Church put the lie to that theory. "Religion" in any organized form is at the mercy of its leaders--they call on its authority for personal gain and influence. "Religion" exerts little to no influence over its leaders--they simply pick and choose what to promote and what to subvert. Look at Dawson's "Atheists for Christ"--there's nothing Christ-like whatsoever about using Catholicism, for example, to deprive others of their rights. In fact, the opposite impulse is more appropriate, and exists, as evidenced here:

http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_4557155

Nuns urge Catholic voters to challenge church
The coalition supports abortion rights and gay unions stands not in line with church teaching.
By Eric Gorski
Denver Post Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 10/26/2006 09:52:58 PM MDT

An organization of Catholic nuns whose leadership includes four Colorado women is urging Catholic voters to challenge church teachings against abortion and gay marriage while weighing a broad range of social issues on Election Day.

In an "open letter to Catholic voters," the National Coalition of American Nuns provides an alternative to the church hierarchy's voter education efforts in Colorado and nationwide, said Sister Mary Ann Cunningham of Denver, a board member.

Opposing war and treating immigrants with compassion are included in a list of seven issues outlined by the group. Mary Ann Coyle and Anna Koop of Denver and Sallie Ann Watkins of Pueblo are the other Colorado nuns on the board.

The letter also states, "We encourage respect for the moral adulthood of women and will choose legislators who will recognize the right of women to make reproductive decisions and receive medical treatment according to the rights of privacy and conscience."

Religion is like any other tool of social solidarity--in appealing to its authority, leaders can promote justice or bigotry, empathy or hatred. It all depends on who wields the authority, and to what ends he or she wields it. The edifice of "religion," "patriotism," or any other tribalistic impulse is used as a tool--in and of itself it has no real power, as both noble and hateful motives can be promoted out of it. MLK and Gandhi were heavily influenced by their religious beliefs. Stalin was an atheist. This doesn't mean religion is grand and atheistic communism is evil, it simply means tribal authority based on social solidarity can be wielded both for good or evil. Ideally tribalism would be stamped out entirely, but such is an inevitable result of organized society. You can see it everywhere in history.

[Occulus]

100. "Are you saying it is something inherent in religion itself?"

Lev. 18:22

[renie408]

146. A combination of cherry picking through the Bible, over 2000 years of tradition and the Pope, in

the case of the Catholic church. THAT'S where the OFFICIAL party line comes from. Who the fuck knows where Mormons get their ideas.

Ok, let's try this a different way...

You are a Christian, right?

Is homosexual activity a sin?

[Zhade]

158. *crickets*

But to be fair, I doubt he does.

[bluedawg12]

63. The RW churches played the religon angle for latent

fear of gays. Period. It was there and they played to it and it surfaced.

[JVS]

20. people who are married with kids!

68-32

[muriel_volestrangler]

23. A little bit of maths:

Women with children: 61% yes, 39% no
Women without children: 48% yes, 52% no

So being a mother increases the chance of bigotry by 1.27 times - or decreases the chance of being fair by 1.25 times.

With religion:
Being a Protestant, rather than having no religion, increases the chance of bigotry by 6.5 times - or decreases the chance of being fair by 2.57 times.

This is not daft or simplistic - religious groups were the backbone of the proposition 8 campaign. Calling those groups out on their bigotry will do a world of good, for gay people, and for people in general.

[jpgray]

25. This is still daft. Having a Y chromosome increases fairness, by your logic

But it isn't logic. It's facile analysis. Anyone can play:

Men w/No Children (25%)

37%

63%


Women w/No Children (35%)

48%

52%

[muriel_volestrangler]

30. The correlation with religion is statistically significant; with sex or parenthood it isn't

Plus there's the huge religious campaign for proposition 8, and the proud claims by the campaigners that 'it was religion wot won it'.

If this was a drug trial, the 'effective' drugs to increase bigotry would be:
Conservatism
Republicanism
Religion

with age possibly thrown in there too.

[jpgray]

32. By that rationale, bigotry did not exist prior to the GOP, organized religion and politics

Do you seriously believe that? I acknowledge fully that all those things mentioned were vehicles for bigotry in this case, but not in any generalized way. You can't tell me that any given religious person is a bigot, no more than you can tell me any given conservative or Republican is a bigot. Any instance of mass bigotry originates from some authority--absent all those "drugs" you mention, another authority has been readily found to be the vehicle throughout all recorded history.

It wasn't Teutonic heritage, in other words, that predicted bigotry during the Holocaust, it was adherence to a particular brand of nationalism. It's important to get your targets right, and not to get lost in lazy statistical analysis--99% of a certain group may be infested with bigotry, but it's not necessarily simply existing as part of that group that causes the bigotry. If you attack the group while ignoring the cause of their behavior, you've done very little. Look within the group to identify the cause, then attack the cause.

[muriel_volestrangler]

34. No, by that rationale, the GOP, organized religion and politics *increase* bigotry

and I'm happy with that as an assertion - as long as 'politics' is qualified as 'conservative politics'. Yes, nationalism increases bigotry too.

We take attacks on the GOP for granted here. In this case, the Catholic church, the Mormons, and other churches, are to blame as well. Those churches have caused bigotry, because their members have a high number of gullible people in them who listen to the bigots in the pulpits.

[jpgray]

48. But are the gullible chiefly to blame, or are the instigators?

That's my problem with this sweeping, generalized line of attack. There's a calculating hate on the part of church leaders or fundraisers who promote this sort of thing directly that isn't necessarily there on the part of your average Catholic or Mormon--the latter are seduced by appeals to authority, but the chief problem is those who are making the appeals to authority in the service of hate. Absent the latter, the groups you mention would never have been whipped up to actively deny the GLBT community their rights. In large part you can blame ignorance and gullibility for the "yes on prop 8" voters, whereas those who actively pushed for the measure's existence do not simply lack information or understanding--they possess a calculating brand of hate that requires direct attack and criticism.

That's why I don't like taking "religion" as some monolithic evil to be attacked--there are some total and relative innocents that are unfairly targeted by that broad brush. The real villains see such broad brush attacks as an easy escape hatch--they would seek to paint any attacks on their hateful rhetoric as attacks on all religious people. Bigotry isn't inherent in Mormonism or Catholicism, but calculating bigots will appeal to the authority of religion to enact their agenda. It is those bigots, rather than religion in general, that are the chiefest villains here.

[spoony]

56. There's something in there that goes back to the other part of your OP

It's very subtle a lot of the time, but it's when people imply (by specifically pinning the blame on black clergy) that black voters are more influenced by their churches than white voters. I've seen it a few times now, and it--possibly unintentionally--reeks of saying that black people are more gullible or less able to make independent decisions. A bit off topic I reckon but reading about the leaders versus laity made me think of it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

83. I'd say they share blame, so saying 'the churches are to blame' sums it up well

The leadership of various churches were active in spreading fear and hate; and those members who were unwilling to think for themselves must bear some blame for that attitude too. Together, leaders and congregations make up a 'church'.

I acknowledge that various churches are blameless, and some worked actively against the proposition; but it seems that the majority of churches, in terms of number of members, were in favour of the proposition.

I'd also note that Islam has an even worse record on homosexuality - this isn't just certain Christian denominations. But they're not a significant grouping in California.

[Cronopio]

110. In any model some degree of generalization is inevitable, and assumed.

I agree with you that the assumptions shouldn't be taken for granted and should always be questioned. Otherwise, people will eventually mistake the model for the reality.

There needs to be a (somewhat arbitrary) distinction between religion and "churches" as a political movement and the members of that movement who are pushing for something more inclusive - and the people who are ambivalent to their church being used as a part of a political movement. But most of the time in casual conversation those statistical outliers (the "relative innocents") can be assumed.

The sheep who are easily whipped up into a reactionary frenzy switch their colors all the time, so no statistics can consistently apply to them.

[Zhade]

159. Hmmmmmm. That's an interesting point - are the brainwashed guilty?

Worth chewing on.

[onefreespiritedchick]

52. Agreed and thank you for posting the stats

Religion...Christian upbringing is the key here.

[IronLionZion]

91. stock market investors voted against it! Whoo!

:wtf: are you trying to justify bigotry? Is bigotry against religious folks somehow better than bigotry against gays or whoever you like at the moment?

[muriel_volestrangler]

142. Where is there bigotry against religious folks?

There's criticism of the bigotry of various Catholic, Mormon and evangelical preachers who bankrolled Prop 8, and pushed it heavily on their congregations; there's criticism of the gullible fools who believed them and voted for it - or, if they were bigots anyway and would have voted 'yes' without the propaganda (the 10% of the 'none' category gives us an idea that very roughly 10% of people are bigoted in California without any help from religion); but no bigotry. It all flows from the actions of those denominations.

"whoever you like at the moment" ? Who is the 'you' you are aiming that at? Who are you saying has fickle loyalties?

[IronLionZion]

154. The blanket statements condemning religion include those who were against Prop 8.

There are progressive religious people and organizations that were strongly against Prop 8. Shall we lump them all together and treat them like they are all the same, just like all Americans are the same as Bush? Those very figures you cited showed many religious folks voting against it!

[EFerrari]

108. Religion is a delivery system, the vehicle more than the tenor.

This was marketed to churchgoers. Why didn't we do better? :shrug:

[mcg]

115. 35-36% is not the same as 0%. nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

143. See reply #23 (nt)

[Recursion]

12. Because we're all Trotskyites at heart

And if we don't have the occasionally bloody purge we feel we aren't doing enough to keep things real?

[renie408]

15. No. People are attacking each other because an entire segment of the DU

community was set back a few decades and they (and the people who support them) are mad as hell. As they should be. In the first rush to figure out who is responsible, people are jumping on the obvious: skin color. It is easiest to see. But upon longer reflection, people will start to consider WHY such a large percentage of african americans voted for prop 8. Then they will blame organized religion which plays on people's natural fears and biases and encourages people to make choices based on their lowest prejudices instead of their highest selves.

[hippywife]

18. Thank you for this!

For centuries real change on every level has been stifled because of a divide and conquer mentality.

Beating the animosity drum only pushes us further away from the change we wish to see. Real change will only come through addressing the issue and changing minds peacefully without making people feel backed against a wall where they will invariably defend their position til death.

Draw people out and then draw them in with a real, non-confrontational discussion of the real people, the real lives that are effected by such unequal treatment under the law. Stand firm, but don't throw stones at the person you could make an ally, rather than a sworn enemy.

This may not work with the to-the-core haters, but there are enough people outside of that little group that can be convinced that any type of inequality is wrong that a difference can be made.

:hi:

[hippywife]

19. Dupe! n/t

[crappyjazz]

22. Sure thing

We'll sit down and shut up.

Of course you and Mr. Hippy are fine. No one voted for your marriage to be invalidated, did they?

[hippywife]

28. I beg to differ with you.

I am completely behind everyone having complete and total equality. All I am saying is change comes from standing firm and working for what is right without engendering further hatred on either side.

If you look back through history change has always been hampered by playing one side against another. It's the people who want to kill it that manipulate this tit-for-tat game and play on the anger felt by those who have been disenfranchised. Falling into that trap only falls into their plan to keep people from coming together as human beings to recognize that they aren't really that different from each other at all.

It's the same mental game played during the civil rights movement and to rev people up to get behind a war. Demonize the other and it's easy to hate them, work against them, and even kill them.

[Zhade]

160. DIVIDE AND CONQUER. Great point.

NT!

[hippywife]

33. Just to add something further

is that all I'm saying is that you have a right to be hurt and angry. I would also in your place. But don't let your anger effect how you go forward. Anger isn't a strategy, and it blinds people to the path that could, and usually does, mean success.

You can't change the mind and heart of a hater. But there are many people who voted for this, and all the other legislation against equal rights in every other state, out of fear and ignorance. Those people can be convinced that it was wrong. Come at them in anger and you create new hater. It makes the task ahead even more difficult and the goal ever harder to achieve.

Please know that I am with you all the way. :hug:

[crappyjazz]

36. I agree with you which may surprise you

I don't think hate will help anything.

This is about hurt and disappointment for me at least. And that is what I expressed, but I was told I was a scapegoater, bigot and racist pretty much.

I have said this before. If just one African American had the gall to vote for Prop 8, I would be just as hurt and disappointed. It's not the numbers.

I'm told it is religions fault, the Bible's fault. The same people that used these "tools" to promote racism, slavery and other vicious discrimination against African Americans are now using them on homosexuals. The fact again, that even ONE African American is okay with that is what hurts.

But I understand we're not supposed to point this out. I'm trying to shut up, really, I am.

[hippywife]

39. It's really not a matter of pointing it out.

It's looking for someone to point fingers at and to demonize that people are concerned about, I think. People of all stripes made this possible. I think the powers that be love to break this stuff down into demographics to further the divide amongst people who would be casting a more critical eye their way if they didn't keep us all divided.

I live in one of the reddest states in the country. Not one county went blue in this last election. Not one. Even the Dems here are really backwards when it comes to these social issues. They are still guns, God, and gays voters. I envy those of you who can fight these battles from bases that are a little saner and safer. It's difficult being a liberal in such a place as this and trying to accomplish change on social issues. They voted their anti-gay legislation the last general election. I was so tired of working on peace and social issues since before the 2000 election with so few fresh troops, I had to take a break and sit it out for a while.

[crappyjazz]

41. They have every reason to be concerned about those that are

There are idiots everywhere ...

I think we just thought we'd have more understanding here. We do on the surface as just about everyone here will post they support us and our rights.

But when it gets to the real nitty gritty, we better watch what we say.

Really, it doesn't matter. One shouldn't care too much about people's opinions on a message board, I just thought higher of this place before.

I will say to you though, that I admire your fortitude living where you do :)

[goclark]

42. Please try harder and encourage DU members that feel the

same way to try harder.

I am not gay and I have posted to many of these threads.

I happen to be an African American and I have strongly supported this issue.

No one, not one person that has said vile remarks on this "progressive" board has even responded to one of my post.

This will be my last post and end of this discussion for me.

Until I see that African Americans are not called names that should not even be ALLOWED at DU, I will need to step back from this entire issue.

It is insulting, especially for those of us that have given time, money and support to NO on 8.

[crappyjazz]

44. And you will you do the same for those DUers who are calling us bigots, racists and scapegoaters?

[goclark]

49. I certainly will and have - that is why I have given huge donations

to the cause leading up to the CA election and way before.

Your lack of trust in what I have said is telling.

I am not the enemy so to reply to my post in that manner speaks volumes.

[crappyjazz]

51. Your post is "telling" as well ...

If I say it is, then it is ... that's how it works around here right?

I didn't ask if you contributed money, or if you were for or against the cause, I asked if you would also encourage those on DU to stop calling us all out as racists and bigots. How does that make me calling you my enemy?

Scapegoating goes both ways doesn't it.

Having said, I appreciate very much that you support the cause and I'm glad you've donated to same.

[Psyop Samurai]

37. hippywife, I appreciate your words immensely...

...and we can all lose sight of them at times. Thank you so much.

:hug:

[hippywife]

76. I can't say I can always do it

but I try really hard to live up to the philosophies of the man in my sig line. Hate is such an easy emotion. What's hard is to look someone in the eye and really have a rational discussion, ya know?

I've spent the last eight years angry and it didn't hurt anyone but me health-wise, and didn't change a single thing.

I appreciate you getting this discussion started. I hate it when people would alienate those who are, or even would be, their allies if approached, one thinking, feeling, reasoning human being to another. Really counter-productive. :hi:

[Psyop Samurai]

87. Talk about anger and hurting no one but yourself...

I know that song in no notes!

I hear what you're saying, and on an everyday basis, I do successfully practice those principles. But when it comes to contentious issues where misunderstanding is rife, I come up far short. I'm wondering if I contributed adversely to the current situation. It has become clear that certain gaps in understanding can't be rectified right now, and so it's best to let them go. We'll need to refocus.

Despite the overwhelmingly negative and unexpected turn of events, it has been a learning experience. I will try not to further antagonize anyone, or demand that they cease their narrative, though I feel it to be false. Perhaps there are things that should only be discussed among fellow GLBT. But I take solace in the voices from many quarters, and know that there are allies everywhere, and many more potentially.

:hi:

[JohnnyLib2]

24. I like your focus on ignorance and bigotry.

Having come of age in the 60s, I'm also aware that many "strategies" go into bringing about cultural change. Surely, surely, this (CA) episode is a large but messy step in blasting through some ignorance. All of history says the changes will be messy, to put it blandly.

K & R

[readmoreoften]

27. Let me reduce your point: gays and their supporters who are pissed off about prop 8 are stupid.

Newsflash. T'was Religion.

[jpgray]

29. Anger is justified. I just don't see any reason to misdirect it.

My point is first about the perils of generalized scapegoating, and the worthlessness of casting blame on isolated factors out of proportion to their actual influence. That last point applies to the fuckwits who claim that MA's sanction of gay marriage caused our defeat in 2004, just as much as it applies to the current calling-out of black CA voters.

[wildflowergardener]

31. interesting

I have stayed out of these threads because I am not gay, so I can't really know what it feels like to be singled out like this and I am sure would be upset as well if it were me. It is probably hard to have a rational, thought out discussion about how to change things, when you are so involved and upset about what happened.

I don't believe blaming blacks is the answer - what good does it do? I do believe religion plays a big part in this though. I have never been a very religious person - and am unmarried (and have no intention to get married, so marriage is not that important to me as an issue - I say if gay people would like to get married though, why not - it doesn't hurt me. If I were married, it wouldn't hurt me - why would it make my marriage less sacred? I don't think it would. Who knows, maybe I would feel differently if I were married - though I doubt it. To feel it hurts you, would have to mean you feel that being gay is wrong (which I don't - hey it's not for me, but for others it's who they are and not for me to judge them) and then feel that if gay people can marry it somehow it makes your marriage not as meaningful. I don't feel that, so really don't think it would make me change my mind about this.

I have, personally, found myself reluctant to get involved in religion lately, though I've thought about it, because of the last eight years - I have thought I would like to explore this personally, but then I see how the right wing use it - and say religion is not for me. I'd like to see liberals take back religion, and make it ok to be religious again. It's not always a bad thing. I know there must be religious tolerant people. You just see the intolerant ones - they are the most visible. I think you need to make it ok to be religious and liberal again, then maybe you can begin to change churches from the inside out. When I was growing up it was not wrong to be both liberal and involved in religion - I think it has only gotten so much more radical and hateful lately - at least the visible ones, that it drives away sensible, religious people. It makes me think - why would I want to be religious - if it would make me like them.

Just curious - does the bible actually say negative things about gay people - or do certain religious people just use it to try and justify their prejudices? I admit I have never looked into this - but somehow I really really doubt that jesus was this intolerant if I really explored the bible. Maybe the old testament - I suppose you can pick and choose the passages to support any prejudice you want while ignoring the overall theme of love and tolerance and helping others if you wanted to.

Sorry I know I have gone a bit off tangent from your original topic.

Editing to add: I don't think it is helpful to call people stupid if you really are interested in having a meaningful discussion.

Meg

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

38. There Is Not A Thing Wrong With Identifying The Largest Subgroups Requiring Further Persuasion.

AA's had by far the largest yes/no split and it is mandatory, if progress is to be made, that the group is identified as a core group requiring further education and persuasion. It needs to be done constructively and responsibly, but done nonetheless.

Religion is a no brainer. We already know that those who take religion to extremes are for prop 8. They will be a lot harder to persuade than others.

There are many core reasons and groups responsible for the passage. We need to work with the groups that we have the best chance of success with and that have the largest room for improvement, first. That's called common sense and it is responsible to do so.

And comparing this to the nader situation is asinine. Nader cost us the election. His ignorant short sighted and narrow minded voters cost us the election. Fuck Nader.

[NorthernSpy]

119. screaming "nigger" at a black gay couple who showed up to help protest...

... doesn't count as "persuasion".


http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=8077


Yes, I know that you know that, OMC. But not everyone does, apparently.

[Duncan Grant]

139. That is contemptible behavior. No one I know would condone or ignore that.

Do you think DU is like this incident you referenced?

edit: sp

[Zhade]

162. Uh, nader just made it easier for the ignorant to blame nader.

Hello? Coup? Theft? Ring a bell?

[book_worm]

40. for some reason they want to blame black people despite the fact that they made up only 10%

of the voting population and 30% did vote for gay marriage. Those 70% of the 10% of blacks who opposed gay marriage were not nearly enough to defeat it, but it seems that black folks are the scapegoats.

[Duncan Grant]

86. A core constituency of the Democratic party voted 70% in favor to remove rights for gays.

Even if "No on 8" were victorious, the 70% vote is still significant.

No one is blaming blacks for the success of "Yes on 8" -- they're saying: "Why did this constituency vote for hope and change but kick gays to the curb?"

It's incongruous. There is no party unity regarding the legitimate civil rights of LGBT people. Let's not vilify gay people for wondering who their allies are in the Democratic party.

[gaspee]

97. Exactly

How are so many people so damned stupid as to miss this point
entirely.

It's just so much easier for all those holier than thou DU'ers to say teh gays are hating on african americans.

DU has never been a place for LGBT folk and that gets more apparent day by day.

[EFerrari]

103. Yes, people have blamed black voters for the passage of this POS.

Explicitly. That's very different than wondering who allies are or than asking why black voters voted as they did or than being furious with yes voters in general.

And look at your civil rights framing. What amounts to a different subculture apparently doesn't see it that way. That's the crux right there for enlisting these voters.

We can't expect people to agree with us simply because we know we're right. If that were true, there would be no need for campaigns, elections or political parties.

[Duncan Grant]

111. Evil is perpetrated by people who know exactly what they're doing.

Gay civil rights is not a new concept. Let's not even begin to pretend that people don't know the difference between right and wrong.

Democratic constituencies know exactly what the gay struggle is about. No amount of context will make those "Yes on 8" votes more palatable. Ever.

[EFerrari]

113. Culture blindness. And those votes don't need to be palatable.

They need to be switched.

[Corkey Mineola]

118. You are Dangerous 94114

dangerous rhetoric... you are going to be in BIG trouble when you come to bed tonite...

oh wait a minute...

did I just out you as my husband....
damn

08)

[NorthernSpy]

124. And I want to keep them as a core constituency.

If you're asking us to shove them out of the party, then the answer is simple:



No.

[Duncan Grant]

135. The Democrats lost them to the Mormons on this issue. What's next?

The Mormons were looking for a way to gain legitimacy among evangelicals. They found it with Prop. 8.

Who'd of thunk it?

edit: Had a serious snark relapse - thankfully, thought better of it.

[NorthernSpy]

144. what's next is we try to find a way out the current crisis..

You know -- the war, the economic meltdown, the energy and infrastructure problems. Because all that stuff is completely up to us now.

[Bolo Boffin]

150. I'm sorry, but if you do the math, the margin that the proposition was passed is equal

to 20% of the African-Americans who voted on it. If African-Americans had split their vote like all the other constituencies, the vote would have been a statistical tie. If they had voted in large numbers to not write discrimination into the California constitution with the same hand electing the first African-American president in history, Prop H8 would have been defeated.

There is a lot of work to do, and there are a lot of angry people right now. But math doesn't lie.

[Psyop Samurai]

43. 'Twas the darkies?... OMFG!

Well, there you have it, people.

That, apparently, is the consensus.

That's what we were really doing.

The matter is decided.

There will be no appeal.

It is done.

To my lgbt brothers and sisters, please heed hippymom upthread. She is right, and we can do better. We must strive to be the larger person and take care not to alienate potential allies.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

53. There are probably a couple dozen threads on this subject right now.

Maybe there should be a separate "proposition 8" forum... it is very demoralizing to have this racial tension here at this time

[crappyjazz]

54. Yes, let's not muddy up the board with civil rights issues

:wtf:

[eowyn_of_rohan]

58. THis is a very unfortunate thing that happened

But blaming a RACE for it seems narrow-minded at the very least. It is offensive and demoralizing to many people here to see this happening less than a week after we have elected our first African=American president.

[crappyjazz]

60. Again, if a few are blaming an entire race, they are wrong

and I would argue a minority.

But for the rest of us, we are now being scapegoated.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

64. Huh? Who's scapegoating you? surely not I. I think voting corruption is to blame

and possibly disenfranchisement and/or suppression. And that is where I would project my anger and my efforts.

[crappyjazz]

65. Read some threads

We're all racists and bigots now

Ugh ... I give up

[Psyop Samurai]

74. Yep, that's what we are...

I give up too.

[mondo joe]

81. If you think THIS is demoralizing, try having your civil rights eliminated.

That's fucking demoralizing.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

85. IT SUCKS

Not much I can do about Calif. Prop 8 from Wisconsin but to tell you I am shocked and sorry. I know how heartbreaking and outrageous this is. Just don't like the race-based thread titles about it.

[dysfunctional press]

57. there needs to be a seperate "prop 8" forum until this shit settles down.

unfortunately, it's now the law- until there's an election to overturn it. and then THAT will be the law- until yet ANOTHER election overturns THAT...

eventually it will probably have to end up being decided by the scotus.

but that's going to take awhile, and if there's going to be dozens of daily threads on the subject, it deserves it's own dungeon forum.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

61. I totally agree-nt

[QC]

62. How dare people discuss civil rights on a progressive politics forum!

We should stick to critiquing Michelle's outfits and helping the Obama family pick out a dog.

[bluedawg12]

66. apparently only white conservapigs can be homophobic.

If you call out any other group, even when you speak in solidarity, as in another thread about the positive view of marriage from a black pro-gay group you are a racist then. too!

f8ck it.

[QC]

67. Let's sit down and shut up and maybe we will get a nice pat on the head. n/t

[dysfunctional press]

68. actually, it should be a sub-set of the california forum.

seeing as it doesn't really concern the other 49 states. :shrug:

[bluedawg12]

71. This is post Prop 8 - we are discussing civil rights issues

for gays and how straight people do or do not support it in a progressive coalition.

[QC]

72. "it doesn't really concern the other 49 states"

It's hard to know quite how to respond to this one....

[Duncan Grant]

95. The search function is your friend.

Sometimes I use the search function with a username and a "hot" topic -- gay marriage, for example.

If one searched any topic of relevance to gay people and a username...

:hi:

[QC]

99. Funny, isn't it, how some people can always be counted on to show up in gay-related threads

and then bait everyone.

We truly have some master baiters here.

[dysfunctional press]

171. you could try explaining how it has anything to do with voters in other states...

:shrug:

[muriel_volestrangler]

80. Similar measures passed in Florida and Arizona

though they were 'pre-emptive' rather than reacting to a situation in which gay marriage was already allowed; and they now want to lobby in New York and New Jersey using the same religious tactics:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hZmLBrL36NObNyMR0ghXN7vB5hYwD94ADAB80

Sooner or later, this will be a matter for all states, and countries too.

[Bluenorthwest]

88. As a native Californian in exile

I say you are misinformed.

[Zhade]

163. Um, equal rights for all concerns all Americans.

You DO support our equal rights, don't you?

[dysfunctional press]

170. definitely- but there's nothing i can do about it as an illinois voter.

it's a california issue.

[bluedawg12]

69. Seperate but equal forum?

Oh you did mean dungeon! LMAO.

Give those gays a dungeon. Nice. really nice.

[crappyjazz]

73. We're not going away

Sorry to disturb your day, but our rights are just as important as yours.

[dysfunctional press]

77. well, then maybe there should be a PERMANENT prop 8 forum.

nt

[QC]

78. Or maybe you could learn how to scroll past threads that don't interest you. n/t

[Duncan Grant]

116. Hey Einstein, maybe you could use the "hide thread" function? (nt)

[Zhade]

164. We're not going away. Get fucking used to it.

NT!

[Taverner]

106. GD:P -> Prop 8?

[Bluebear]

148. IDEA: Maybe you could just leave for a while until it all "settles down"?

[kevinbgoode]

75. Right...the gays should just shut up about being scapegoated themselves

and abused right out of their constitutional rights. If they speak up about it, they are just insulting themselves and "anyone else with a brain."

Apparently you have a problem with identifying the demographics supporting the stripping of someone's constitutional rights. By merely pointing those demographics out, we are "targeting" poor, innocent people and the other poor, innocent people who bankrolled 77% of their campaign to remove those constitutional rights at the behest of their church.

[tjwash]

79. "OMG! It was the religionz!"

Ok...sure then. We will just disregard the 20 million dollars dumped into the campaign by religious orginizations like the Knights Of Columbus and the UTAH LDS, not to mention the petition drive that got it put on the ballot, that was conducted by Bader & Associates at a cost of $882,900, and funded by the Mormon Church in Utah.

You betcha...no religious influence here! :eyes:

[jpgray]

84. Specific religious leaders are absolutely to blame.

"Religion" in general? Nope. See, the thing about religion (or patriotism) is that it's a tool. It doesn't represent an irresistible push to mass bigotry or hate in and of itself. What leads to the mass bigotry is those who call on its authority to exploit the ignorant. Religion (or patriotism) can also be used to uplift and humanize, as in the cases of MLK Jr. or Gandhi. It's about those who draw authority from religion and abuse it--they are the villains, not necessarily religion itself.

When we blame "religion," we hit some total and relative innocents with our blame. When we blame the church leaders who instigate and promote this sort of hate, then we're much nearer the mark, I think. Blaming poor dumb Joe Mormon doesn't get us far, but calling out those who exhorted him to hate seems much more productive to me. I make a distinction between "religion" and those who abuse it for the sake of bigotry, and I think that's important. I can understand though if it didn't seem clear in my post.

[IronLionZion]

92. Oh hell yes! Justify that bigotry with evidence!

You do know racists and homophobes can easily out-justify and shout down the most knowledgeable liberals any day of the week right? The amount of "proof" they can pull out of their ass will smother you into silence. Justifying bigotry is a game you are going to lose my friend.

Hating the perceived haters only spreads more hate in this hate-filled world. Love a little, you might like it.

[IronLionZion]

89. Become? DUers were always into mindless infighting and ridiculous witch hunts

It really hit me when a lefty socialist I know was shocked that I post here "among those angry lunatics". She's well to the left of me. Like all despicable acts, it's OK if you justify it claiming you are some sort of brave revolutionary patriot. For us it's religious people and oddly enough black (which shocks the hell out of me) and for the Repubs it's gays and lefties. While I've been told that white liberals know what's best for black people, I am truly shocked to see them expose their condescension of black people so openly. Usually it's at least thinly veiled.

DUers would gladly heap elitist scorn on black Christians who opposed prop 8, especially members of the United Church of Christ. These DUers are a very narrow-minded and bitter bunch. I love it when they tell me how "progressive" they are for thinking in such broad and bigoted generalizations.



:rant: :sarcasm:

For what it's worth, I'm an Indian-American Catholic opposed to Prop 8 and gladly stand up with the blacks, religious folks, gays, and similar peoples persecuted at the hands (typing fingers) of liberal elitism. It took a hell of a lot to get to where we are now and it's impressive and amazing. It's going to take more to get to where we want to go. The important thing is that we are moving in the right direction and Obama's election and the Dem gains across the country are giant leaps towards our progressive future. Good things are more likely to happen when we have good people in office with the votes to pass it and a good president to sign it into law and appoint good judges to check it. What's difficult about this concept?

[Duncan Grant]

94. Hey all you gay people! Shut the fuck up, you're destroying the illusion of party unity.

Okay gay people, settle down. Move along, nothing to see here.

That stain of complicity from Democrats who voted "Yes on 8" even after the Democratic party leadership said vote no? Ignore it.

The incongruous results from a campaign rooted in hope and change? Don't worry your pretty little heads about it.

Democrats voted to end animal cruelty but gay people's state-sanctioned civil rights were removed - by those very same voters?! It doesn't mean we don't love you.


Gay people? REMEMBER YOUR PLACE.




(Pardon the snark, but this profound lack of empathy is getting tiresome.) :grr:

[gaspee]

101. Snort. Exactly

I am so freaking sick of this. And even looking at the numbers and try to figure out what happened is racist.

These people sound like republicans. "The numbers lie!"

The numbers don't lie. People in CA voted to take away rights from a minority group. People who voted FOR the "Hope and Change" candidate took away rights from a minority group.

So, we were shrill to complain about the underlying message sent by the whole preachers of hate debacle that kicked off the Obama campaign, huh? Pretty prescient if you ask me.

That's right. We gays should just sit down and shut up and wait our turn - meanwhile, we'll just vote away your rights, but one day it will be your turn!

Makes me sick.

[Ellen Forradalom]

107. Yes.

I knew gays were under the bus since last spring. LGBT were trampled in the BO stampede.

[Duncan Grant]

153. Prescient, indeed.

They tried to hand our asses to us on that, too. More than one LGBT DUer was excoriated over that fraudulent PR exercise.

I was warned politics was a contact sport but I forgot to watch out for my own team members! :D

[Ellen Forradalom]

104. Yep

I think some folks wanted their moment of redemption at any cost. And they got it.

Let them earn their moment of redemption now.

[Duncan Grant]

152. Well said.

Your posts in recent weeks have resonated with me more than usual. :thumbsup:

[EFerrari]

109. If the choices are scapegoating and silence, we need to develop better choices.

And did anyone honestly expect the Democrats to support marriage rights overtly? I sure didn't. And I was surprised that Obama found a way to come out against H8 and that Feinstein released an ad -- granted, when there was no risk for her, but she did it.

Maybe I'm just up to my eyeballs in cynicism but there are issues I don't expect the party to support: election reform, gay marriage, prosecuting Bush come to mind.

[Corkey Mineola]

120. OMG He is so hot when he's radical

why I married him

Too bad our marriage will probably be anuled... for the 2nd time...FUCK

I for one am happy the chickens are safe now...

Now if I could just get my radical too cook me one once in while...

See, gay marriage ain't it's all cracked up to be.

[NorthernSpy]

122. Party unity? Many of the loudest voices in this uproar swore months ago...

... that they loathed Obama and they would do nothing to help us get him elected.


So it seems that we've won without their help. So it also seems that scuttling party unity is something that they simply haven't the power to do.

[Duncan Grant]

129. You have an amazing ability to state the obvious.

Your apathy toward the injustices perpetrated against gays and their families (in multiple threads) is duly noted.

It's also obvious that some members of the Democratic constituency get a pass when it comes to bigotry. No surprise really, all that equivocation on gay rights gives Democrats a lot of wiggle room.

[NorthernSpy]

140. I posted a discussion of how Connecticut Vote No stopped a similar effort in CT...

You'd think that learning how to win such battles might be kind of important right now. And only about 5 people bothered to post.


So don't lecture me about "apathy".

[TankLV]

132. NOW we "have a winner"...

It would be racist to try to NOT criticize wrong when it is purpetrated...

[LeftCoast]

165. Wish I could rec your reply!

You said it!

[Zhade]

166. HA! if they think we will, they should have their heads examined.

NOT

GOING

ANYWHERE

[EFerrari]

98. I want to get beyond the bs and find out stuff. Like, what happened in L.A. County?

Obama got a million eight; a million three voted on both sides of Prop H8, with the "yes" sidee getting only 1% more.

That's so wrong! Didn't "No on H8" see that coming? Imho, it was lost right there. It's hard to believe that volunteers wouldn't have gone to Los Angeles to work in the weeks before the election. Why was there no mobilization? What was the thinking?! :shrug:

[Raster]

102. Good points, although a certain amount of deflection. I don't blame mormons, per se....

however, I do blame the church leadership which openly advocated support on 8 from the Sunday morning pulpit. The mormon high command encouraged their members all across the country to send massive amounts of money to the effort. It is estimated that AT LEAST HALF of the millions funneled into "Yes on 8" came from the mormon church. The church even ordered and paid for tens of thousands of "Yes on 8" signs and handed them out to members after Sunday services. Don't fucking tell me not to blame the mormons.

I like your posts, jpgray. They are usually thoughtful and well-written. However, this misses the mark. I know who my enemy is. I have known for years. The mormon church is a nest of vipers and has meddled in politics for decades. They use their tax deductible contributions to fund their right-wing efforts. I was raised mormon. I know exactly what I'm talking about. And quite frankly, I suspect the church was even more involved in proposition 8 than most people know.

[EFerrari]

105. Not only Mormons but also dominionists like Eric Prince's mother.

She poured money into this POS.

The darkest heart of fascist perversity in Christian drag deployed itself in this effort. It's a cancer in our culture.

[GreenFiles]

112. Scapegoat?

Can you offer a reason for its passing?

[EFerrari]

114. If you've read any of the 2,000 threads on this topic

you'll have already learned that black yes voters are only 7% of the total yes vote. Maybe I need to put that in my sig line for now.

We've been thoroughly propagandized. Almost immediately, the media made this "black people hate gays!" on the basis of one problematic poll. And we've eaten it up with a spoon.

[Duncan Grant]

121. Among core Democratic constituencies there's a profound disconnect.

For me, this dust up at DU isn't about the fact that "Yes on 8" prevailed.

Democrats voted against the interests of one of their own most supportive ($$$) constituencies: gay people. The hope and change message was a rip-off, a fraud. That 70% of all Black votes and 60% of all Latino votes were given to "Yes on 8" is the question.

Democratic constituencies elected Barack Obama (who said a "yes" vote was the wrong vote). Democrats ended animal cruelty (2:1). Democrats abandoned their friends and allies and voted to remove their state-sanctioned civil rights.

Party unity doesn't exist for gay people and we're not going to be fooled by this disingenuous deception again.

edit: "dust up at DU"

[EFerrari]

125. It's the "question" because you are privileging that frame

not because it is the question objectively. Your focus on these two groups is disproportionate and I suspect, you know that.

Do we have a problem in those communities? Yes, of course we do. We didn't close the sale there. What kiind of effort was made in those demographics? We should have seen this coming miles away.

I never expected the party to do sh!t on this issue. But, you are so right to put it in those terms. Wtf is the party doing for gay rights?

[Zhade]

167. Yeah, but here's the thing; NOT ONE AFRICAN-AMERICAN SHOULD HAVE VOTED YES.

They know exactly what it's like to have their rights taken away!

[McCamy Taylor]

117. Because it is another Divide and Conquer issue for the Freeper moles to exploit

Solidarity! Do not allow yourselves to be distracted. Eyes on the prize. We should be talking about what the new Congress and administration are going to do, not creating division among the ranks.

Remember divide and conquer is the RNCs number one tool

[earth mom]

123. Sorry but it all boils down to fundie whack jobs who seek to control the entire planet.

They are of all colors and of all political parties-they are even Democrats.

[Corkey Mineola]

127. and we must never underestimate their vast resources

or their ability to mobilize people through fear tactics.

Obama's campaign somehow inoculated itself from Palin's crap. I wonder if there are lessons to be learned there?

[earth mom]

134. Most people here on DU choose to ignore the fundie underpinnings of Obama's campaign.

Just look a the words "hope" and "believe".

Those two words are some of the most religious words in existence.

Not only that, but Obama used lots of other code phrases and other code words that spoke to his fundie base.

I'm agnostic and strongly support the separation of church and state.

Which is why I noticed what was happening from almost the beginning of Obama's campaign and was one reason I didn't support him.

That said, Obama is somewhat better than Palin who is a complete and total whack job who wants to bring on the rapture. :nuke:

[Corkey Mineola]

126. Core issues DO count -- underlying problems

I think sexism is a huge driver of anti-gay bias in all communities.
Do you think sexism is a problem in the black church? I'd venture to say yes. But I grew up in a faith tradition that still will not ordain women. So people who throw stones...

[TankLV]

128. When the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of a group votes a particular

way - and for a particularly HORRIBLE VINDICTIVE and HURTFUL position, then it is ENTIRELY VALID, nay, DEMANDED to point that out.

When some asshole CULT masquerading as a religion, MAKES IT'S VERY EXISTENCE depend on FUNDING and being the AUTHOR and PRIME FIGHTER for things that are HORRIBLE VINDICTIVE and HURTFUL to MILLIONS of people, it is ENTIRELY VALID, nay, DEMANDED to point that out.

To try to cry and whine about some IMAGINED slight to these very BIGOTED AND HATEFUL people who do this is simply INEXCUSABLE.

To do OTHERWISE than POINT THIS OUT and CONDEM these horrible people, is fucking HATEFUL.

[EFerrari]

136. To overlook the vast majority in service of scapegoating a very small minority

is hateful. Get your hate on -- that will work.

[Duncan Grant]

137. A more accurate summarization does not exist.

The stain of complicity cannot be removed by context.

:applause:

[curse of greyface]

138. Hear Hear... nt

[NorthernSpy]

141. In effect, you're demanding that we single out blacks, and push them out of the party.

My answer: Go fly a kite.

[Duncan Grant]

149. Where does the post say that? We're asking for fucking JUSTICE and ACCOUNTABILITY.

Quit trivializing gays with this lie about pushing blacks out of the party. It's not helpful.

[Raster]

172. Thank you Tank!

The mormon church has crossed the line. Their hate and bigotry is appallingly apparent. The church has pushed proposition 8 from the beginning, and can even be termed a "parent" of this shameful legislation. No other organization--religious or secular--has had more bearing and influence on the passage of proposition 8.

[bridgit]

131. Perhaps as would a ballerina @ a strange recital; we'll take 2nd position 1st...

2. "The 'ill-defined to the point of incoherence' Religionz!" - oh contrare Monsignor, not so little defined as some would think from the comforts of their puter chair...

Brigham Young had his 'dark angels' working strange wills upon the landscape the church is still able to think in those ways, so the Mormons are on their own they like it that way. Forget what their money could have done for poor inner city kids outside the Mormon fold so there that is. But it wasn't merely the Catholics, they were Knights of Columbus fashioned upon models reminiscent of Masons, and Knights Templar in their ability to impact the flow of another's history; and right when you may have thought only Opus Dei was able to effect Tom Hank's dream-scape in ways Hollywood has yet to consider, BAM! There they were, an antique mobile of similar concerns all turning slowly toward 'the day'. And what 'day' is that, bridgit, some may ask?

I am sorry, but if *that* has to be broken down Barney Style, then there are no points on any compass anywhere, golden or otherwise, in this world where *tribalistic "us against them" impulse'* form the basis of too many things from Venice Beach to Alaska to Biloxi to Grosse Pointe to WV to Boca Raton to Brooklyn to Israel to the ME to London to Russia to China and back to Venice Beach though I'm sure someone's been left out. Oh yes! Lions on the Serengeti :thumbsup:

1. "the darkies!"

Now they're the ones that play basketball, right? Cause I seen Barack sink a 3pt shot once, and they say he plays b-ball to relax and stuff. And I heard Michelle Obama say her brother told her when she met Barack; to discover the measure of a man take him on the court and so she did and now they're solid. But let's move past all that when in the great clamor, the cacophonous search for tags & frames why not understand "the darkies!" adherence to their community, religionz, spiritualism, their identities? "The darkies" was a brush with idiocy though on who's part?

http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1378391.html

Can't say as I'm privy to your concern, jp, as to DU becoming any more or less "mind-bendingly stupid in discussing" anything let alone Prop 8 in that there's very very little new under the DU sun we bask within daily. Even the cool kid/word-smiths seem willing to work the way too comfortable, tattered old threads & templates Stephen King refers to as: home, his old bathrobe, naw...

At this level, DU is the cyber-entity that degraded/discounted mightily, and proudly so, the hill billy's of WV and anyone else that offered opposition to primary group-think as ignorant, low-informational, bigoted, racist; the list goes on & on...and DUer's were race-baited & wrung through Byzantine apparatus for suggesting people vote their conscience or that there were indeed questions to be answered it was nasty, it was ugly, and people that don't remember need more Omega-3 fish oil or whatever it takes to recall that many were threatened with cyber-excommunication, where others were TS'd outright, long term members of this community much longer memberships than mine, nea!

Some people think only some people's chickens are even able to come home to roost. They are nurtured, rec'd, coddled & furthered for their beliefs in a nation where Barack Obama himself lays story into mention and I believe it; of people, centenarians voting for the first time because prior to him they had no one to vote for, or the will or the apparatus to see that they did. The downside may be this...

When low informational voters of all colors any color, hold in their fired up & motivated hands for the first time, a voter information pamphlet which can seem like: The Official 5$ Joey Pajama's Horse-racing & Handicap Racing Form sold outside para-mutual betting parlors; they take that form through that curtain for the first time as well, and stand before a machine for whatever reasons they are there with, perhaps, a new flush of democratic citizenry and one (1) vote able to express both joy & reprisal.

They peruse, they bring their experience, their pride, their prejudice, and they decide period end of story, right? Would that it were so.

The point? Really? There's a point? Then let it be this in part...

Politics is seen by many as a game, a sport, a blood sport. Maybe especially by the people that prevail at it routinely. As a sport, points are able to be shaved/fixed. Money entices even the most respected referees, turning their heads arms are tugged balls are stripped/dropped people are pushed and elbows poked into eyes. Soon the game is won by someone/some group. And others have lost in OT. This world is flooded with ignorance; flooded with wrongs and injustices. Inhumanities & bigotries, "tribalistic us against them"-isms; with too much wrapped & rolled; a liturgy of stank sushi & simplistic narratives, cherry picked scripture barked from bully pulpits then into microphones then into the ears of millions then into voting booths were 1,2,3% Pt's either way can mean the denial of freedom & liberty for all.

I'm thinking, maybe let's get it right the next time instead

[Waiting For Everyman]

133. This keeps reminding me of the log cabin Republicans.

If we can answer why they'd support RWers, maybe we'd know why Dems voted for Prop 8.

[TWiley]

145. spell it again ....... WEDGE ISSUE

[AntiFascist]

147. Religion had everything to do with Prop 8 passing....

that is because marriage is largely considered a religious institution.

Expressing anger at religious people, or trying to eradicate religion, is counterproductive. We need to acknowledge that there are churches which support gay unions. We also need to channel our anger into protests and in addressing the CA Supreme Court by expressing that we will not tolerate religious persecution.

[Zhade]

168. And wrongly so at that. If it were solely a religious institution, there'd be no married atheists.

Ironically, my two best friends - who now can't marry like they planned - are atheists.

[IsItJustMe]

151. Damn, you mean to tell me that there is still intellectual honest and thinking people here at DU on

this issue. Thanks for bringing a little sanity back to this place.

[D23MIURG23]

155. Religion can be a buttress for ignorance.

I can't deny that ignorance is the root cause of of prop 8 passing, but the fact remains that the majority of same sex marriage detractors have a major religion to justify their bigotry.

[Lumpsum]

156. In a way, it was religion.

The Mormons bankrolled the campaign for Prop 8.

There was no money whatsoever put into a campaign against Prop 8.

It's no surprise why it passed when you look at some of the commercials that were being played non-stop in favor of it. Commercials, by the way, funded by ZOMG TEH RELIGIONZ.

[ColbertWatcher]

161. Your apologies are simplistic.

Religions that stayed silent are as much to blame as the ones that openly funded and publicly opposed Prop Hate.

Those churches should have their tax exempt status investigated, including whether they preached to their congregation how to vote on the matter.

I understand your desire to find a common ground and make peace, but as a straight, married Californian I am ashamed that we even consider ourselves liberal when anyone can be rendered invisible to the protections provided by law to everyone else.

[Raster]

169. Thank you! Your points are spot on! This was a highly organized attempt to TAKE AWAY legal

status and protections from a specified minority group. This was a vote to discriminate. This is bigotry in its worst form--hate for the "public good." I will not go into all of the legal ramifications-they have been discussed extensively on DU. However, I challenge ANYONE straight and married to explain how their marriage has now been strengthened, sanctified or is now more secure. Please, enlighten me.