CRW Joins Anti-Marriage Rally
Five years ago a group of right-wing extremists organized to recall the Montgomery County school board. They were unhappy about a new sex-ed curriculum that was going to introduce the topic of sexual orientation and included a video about the proper way to use a condom. They established a web site, RecallMontgomerySchoolBoard.com, called themselves Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum, and set out to trash the new curriculum. The group's first meetings were held in the weeks following the election of GW Bush to his second term as President, when social conservatives were talking about a "mandate" to make the US their kind of country. But they picked the wrong place to try it, one of the most liberal counties in the nation. TeachTheFacts.org formed as a reaction to that group in our county. In the end no school board members were recalled and the county now has a good new curriculum and a condom video.
The same group rebranded themselves Citizens for Responsible Government when the county council unanimously voted to extend the county's nondiscrimination law to include discrmination on the basis of gender identity. They attempted to get a referendum on the ballot, lying to potential petition signers about the new law, telling them the petitions were to "keep men out of women's restrooms." Eventually the court threw out more than half the signatures because of forgeries and irregularities, and the bill became law without a referendum. We still hear about them handing out flyers at parades and other public events, complaining that the law allows pedophiles and predators to lurk in ladies rooms, even though of course that hasn't happened.
That left the Citizens for Responsible Whatever in the position of being rebels without a cause, well not rebels really, what do you call people to try to enforce conformity?
This week they sent out a new flyer, they seem to have found a new cause.
This one is sent by Ruth Jacobs, a Shady Grove physician and CRW president. The Washington, DC, city council has recently voted to recognize same-sex marriages from other states, and is considering a bill to allow such weddings to be performed in the District. The bill will almost surely pass, but black church leaders are organizing to fight it. In particular, Bishop Harry Jackson, pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, is pushing to have a referendum on the topic. There will apparently be an anti-marriage rally in DC this weekend, and the Citizens for Responsible Whatever are encouraging their members to attend it.
Their flyer says:
Interesting to forget that those let "thirteen City Council members" were elected by the people.
This recurring call for referendums is becoming a trademark of the nutty right, and it is not hard to understand. They stand for issues where their peer group's norms are challenged by some kind of outsiders. You ask them and I bet you'll find that CRW cheerleaders will get just as red in the face ranting about "illegal immigrants" as they do talking about LGBT people. These are people who live a certain way and insist that everybody else should live that way, too. Why else would you want gay guys to marry women? Come on, it doesn't make sense on any level whatsoever. Why would you go out and protest the right of your fellow citizens to marry the person they love?
They invite people to come out to "hear the music," making me wonder what in the world kind of music they'd have. If you're going to align with the black churches, I don't see Toby Keith going over real big, and I don't see the suburban white folks getting worked up with accompaniment by Buju Banton. This is going to be a shaky alliance.
Calling it "the people's rally" is, I think, rather ominous. Do you want "the people" to vote on the details of everything you want to do in your private life? Man, I don't, I don't even want "the people" to know about my private life! That's why it's private, duh. There are some things that we do in the shared social space, individuals' outcomes are linked and we are interconnected sometimes with strangers. That's fine, a society does need guidelines and sometimes enforceable rules prescribing how to behave in public situations. But I'm sorry, who you're going to marry is nobody's business. "The people" don't vote on that. They vote to elect representatives to protect their freedom, their rights, and sometimes those elected representatives are going to protect the other guy's rights, that's just how it works.
But wait. There's more.
First they were opposed to teaching about sexual orientation in health classes. Then they supported discrimination against transgender people. Now they don't want gay and lesbian couples in Washington DC to be allowed to marry. These guys are a real piece of work.
The same group rebranded themselves Citizens for Responsible Government when the county council unanimously voted to extend the county's nondiscrimination law to include discrmination on the basis of gender identity. They attempted to get a referendum on the ballot, lying to potential petition signers about the new law, telling them the petitions were to "keep men out of women's restrooms." Eventually the court threw out more than half the signatures because of forgeries and irregularities, and the bill became law without a referendum. We still hear about them handing out flyers at parades and other public events, complaining that the law allows pedophiles and predators to lurk in ladies rooms, even though of course that hasn't happened.
That left the Citizens for Responsible Whatever in the position of being rebels without a cause, well not rebels really, what do you call people to try to enforce conformity?
This week they sent out a new flyer, they seem to have found a new cause.
This one is sent by Ruth Jacobs, a Shady Grove physician and CRW president. The Washington, DC, city council has recently voted to recognize same-sex marriages from other states, and is considering a bill to allow such weddings to be performed in the District. The bill will almost surely pass, but black church leaders are organizing to fight it. In particular, Bishop Harry Jackson, pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, is pushing to have a referendum on the topic. There will apparently be an anti-marriage rally in DC this weekend, and the Citizens for Responsible Whatever are encouraging their members to attend it.
Their flyer says:
This Sunday: Rally4Marriage, "THE PEOPLE'S RALLY"
Sunday October 25, 2009 2 to 5pm
Greetings!
Come to the rally to save marriage in DC, "THE PEOPLE'S RALLY" this Sunday, October 25th, Freedom Plaza at 14th and Pennsylvania. Don't let thirteen City Council members ignore the people's voice.
NOW IS THE TIME FOR ACTION! Demand a peoples vote on marriage!
Come at 2:00 pm to hear the music, and sign the petition. Speakers and rally start at 3:00 pm. Click here for more information
Interesting to forget that those let "thirteen City Council members" were elected by the people.
This recurring call for referendums is becoming a trademark of the nutty right, and it is not hard to understand. They stand for issues where their peer group's norms are challenged by some kind of outsiders. You ask them and I bet you'll find that CRW cheerleaders will get just as red in the face ranting about "illegal immigrants" as they do talking about LGBT people. These are people who live a certain way and insist that everybody else should live that way, too. Why else would you want gay guys to marry women? Come on, it doesn't make sense on any level whatsoever. Why would you go out and protest the right of your fellow citizens to marry the person they love?
They invite people to come out to "hear the music," making me wonder what in the world kind of music they'd have. If you're going to align with the black churches, I don't see Toby Keith going over real big, and I don't see the suburban white folks getting worked up with accompaniment by Buju Banton. This is going to be a shaky alliance.
Calling it "the people's rally" is, I think, rather ominous. Do you want "the people" to vote on the details of everything you want to do in your private life? Man, I don't, I don't even want "the people" to know about my private life! That's why it's private, duh. There are some things that we do in the shared social space, individuals' outcomes are linked and we are interconnected sometimes with strangers. That's fine, a society does need guidelines and sometimes enforceable rules prescribing how to behave in public situations. But I'm sorry, who you're going to marry is nobody's business. "The people" don't vote on that. They vote to elect representatives to protect their freedom, their rights, and sometimes those elected representatives are going to protect the other guy's rights, that's just how it works.
But wait. There's more.
Directions: Subway stops -Federal Triangle or Metro Center. Metro Center-12th&F Exit- walk to 14th/Penn-Freedom Plaza is close to the Wilson building and the JW Marriot Hotel
Too busy but want to do something? Click here to contribute directly to Bishop Harry Jackson's HILC Organization. If you would like to send a donation via mail, please address the check to HILC and send to HILC, PO Box 505, College Park, Maryland 20471
Save Marriage in Maryland!
What is happening in the District today could happen in Maryland tomorrow, but your votes and your actions can change that possiblity.
Click here to find out your Maryland State legislator's position on marriage.
Click here to find your Maryland State Senator/Delegates.
Make your vote count. Make your voice heard. Forward this email to friends
Volunteers needed. E- mail us at info@notmyshower.com if you would like to help.
People's Rally
First they were opposed to teaching about sexual orientation in health classes. Then they supported discrimination against transgender people. Now they don't want gay and lesbian couples in Washington DC to be allowed to marry. These guys are a real piece of work.
posted by JimK at 1:27 PM
32 Comments:
"In the end no school board members were recalled and the county now has a good new curriculum and a condom video."
and teen pregnancy rates have since risen
"the bill became law without a referendum"
a bill without effect used to subvert democracy
"what do you call people to try to enforce conformity?"
how about TTFers?
"There will apparently be an anti-marriage rally in DC this weekend"
how is working to preserve the meaning of marriage "anti-marriage"?
just curious
"This recurring call for referendums is ... not hard to understand."
no, it isn't
elected officials are in cahoots with liberal advocacy groups that don't represent the viewpoint of the people
"ask them and I bet you'll find that CRW cheerleaders will get just as red in the face ranting about "illegal immigrants" as they do talking about LGBT people"
look, mr tolerant creates two unfounded stereotypes in one sentence
"These are people who live a certain way and insist that everybody else should live that way, too."
not really
"Why else would you want gay guys to marry women?"
They don't want that. They just don't want government endorsing gay relationships.
Gays can have the relationship they want. They just don't have a right to expect the government to recognize it as a marriage.
"making me wonder what in the world kind of music they'd have"
Maybe a surprise performance by the Colliders with Dana as guest vocalist singing "I got the blues every day"
"Do you want "the people" to vote on the details of everything you want to do in your private life?"
no, and no one is suggesting that
gays are asking for public endorsement of their private life
"But I'm sorry, who you're going to marry is nobody's business."
then why don't they just get married in their own house and issue their own license and leave the rest of us out of it?
Now bad anonymous, remember your promise, this is more than four paragraphs so you can't respond to it.
Jim: "In the end no school board members were recalled and the county now has a good new curriculum and a condom video."
Bad anonymous: "and teen pregnancy rates have since risen"
Prove it, you're a well known liar.
Jim:"the bill became law without a referendum"
Bad anonymous: "a bill without effect used to subvert democracy".
If you think it had no effect you have nothing to complain about. Fact is its lessening discrimination against transgender people and this has gotten your panties in a twist.
Jim: "what do you call people to try to enforce conformity?"
Bad anonymous: "how about TTFers?"
TTFers support peoples right to marry whom they choose and right to be the gender they are internally. Their not trying to enforce conformity, you are.
Jim: "There will apparently be an anti-marriage rally in DC this weekend"
Bad anonymous: "how is working to preserve the meaning of marriage "anti-marriage"?".
Duh - you're trying to prevent people from marrying the one they love - that's anti-marriage.
Jim: "This recurring call for referendums is ... not hard to understand."
Bad anonymous "no, it isn't elected officials are in cahoots with liberal advocacy groups that don't represent the viewpoint of the people".
The people elected these officials, they are the people's representatives, the majority of people are getting what they asked for. You don't represent the people.
Jim: "ask them and I bet you'll find that CRW cheerleaders will get just as red in the face ranting about "illegal immigrants" as they do talking about LGBT people"
Bad anonymous "look, mr tolerant creates two unfounded stereotypes in one sentence".
I don't know about the illegal immigrants, but the CRW certainly is red in the face talking about LGBT people - that's a dead on characterization.
Jim: "These are people who live a certain way and insist that everybody else should live that way, too."
Bad anonymous: "not really".
LOL, yes REALLY. You insist everyone have a heterosexual marriage or none at all, you insist no one be gay, you insist everyone conform to your gender stereotypes.
Jim: "Why else would you want gay guys to marry women?"
Bad anonymous: "They don't want that.".
Yes, they most certainly do want that, they support groups like P-fox and Exodus who encourage gay men to enter sham marriages with women.
Bad anonymous: "They just don't want government endorsing gay relationships."
Too bad for them. They have no right to discourage any relationship that harms no one and benefits the people involved and thus society.
Bad anonymous: "Gays can have the relationship they want. They just don't have a right to expect the government to recognize it as a marriage.".
They have just as much right to have the government recognize it as marriage as straights do. The gay couple down the street getting married doesn't affect you in any way, you don't have any justification for preventing it.
Jim: "Do you want "the people" to vote on the details of everything you want to do in your private life?"
Bad anonymous "no, and no one is suggesting that".
Yes you are. A marriage is a private relationship - you're attempting to interfere in that.
Bad anonymous "gays are asking for public endorsement of their private life".
Straights are asking for public endorsement of their private life. Gays deserve the same rights straights have.
Jim: "But I'm sorry, who you're going to marry is nobody's business."
Bad anonymous "then why don't they just get married in their own house and issue their own license and leave the rest of us out of it?".
You are left out of it. The gay couple down the street getting married requires nothing of you - stay out of it. Marriage gives them the right to visit each other in the hospital, make medical decisions for each other, receive each other's pensions, not to have to testify against each other in court, to retain parentage over their children if one partner dies and 1400 other rights and benefits. If it was left up to you you'd force a gay couple to be seperate as one dies alone in the hospital, have their family split up and allow hostile relatives force the surviving partner out of the home the two shared and take all of their joint possessions. You seek to do tremendous harm to gay couples, marriage prevents your animosity from becoming reality.
Now PReya, remember your promise, you were supposed to shut up.
brilliant anonymous: "and teen pregnancy rates have since risen"
PReya said: "Prove it, you're a well known liar."
Acquaint yourself with a newspaper, PReya, everyone already knows this.
Brilliant anonymous: "a bill without effect used to subvert democracy".
PReya: "If you think it had no effect you have nothing to complain about. Fact is its lessening discrimination against transgender people"
No, it isn't. There was none to begin with.
Brilliant anonymous: "how about TTFers?"
PReya: "TTFers support peoples right to marry whom they choose and right to be the gender they are internally. Their not trying to enforce conformity, you are."
Bad example.
TTF think everyone falls into either a gay or straight box. They can't accept that most gays are just bisexuals.
They are also biased against those afflicted with same sex attraction who want to change.
Brilliant anonymous: "how is working to preserve the meaning of marriage "anti-marriage"?".
dumb PReya: "Duh - you're trying to prevent people from marrying the one they love - that's anti-marriage."
that's only true if accept that the definition of marriage has already changed
it hasn't- state after state, voter afetr voter has rejected this offensive notion
Brilliant anonymous "elected officials are in cahoots with liberal advocacy groups that don't represent the viewpoint of the people".
dumb PReya: "The people elected these officials, they are the people's representatives, the majority of people are getting what they asked for. You don't represent the people."
if the gay agenda represented the people's will, lunatic fringe gay advocacy groups wouldn't work so hard against referendums
dumb PReya:"CRW certainly is red in the face talking about LGBT people - that's a dead on characterization."
Have you ever met anyone from CRW?
dumb PReya: "You insist everyone have a heterosexual marriage or none at all,"
that's the only kind there is, by defition
Jim: "Why else would you want gay guys to marry women?"
Bad anonymous: "They don't want that.".
brilliant PReya: "Yes, they most certainly do want that, they support groups like P-fox and Exodus who encourage gay men to enter sham marriages with women."
those men are bisexuals, just as straight as they are gay
if a straight guy engages in a homosexual act, gay fringe say it's proof he's gay
if a gay guy engages in a heterosexual act, gay fringe groups also say he's gay
think about it
when you're not having an delerious moment
Brilliant anonymous: "They just don't want government endorsing gay relationships."
delerious PReya: "Too bad for them. They have no right to discourage any relationship that harms no one and benefits the people involved and thus society."
actually, we all have a right to encourage or discourage anything we want to
we're not a socialist republic like Canada
Bad Anonymous said "Now PReya, remember your promise, you were supposed to shut up.".
I never made any such promise, you however did promise you weren't going to respond to any post of mine that was more than 4 paragraphs long - you lied yet again.
Bad anonymous: "and teen pregnancy rates have since risen"
I said: "Prove it, you're a well known liar."
Bad anonymous said "Acquaint yourself with a newspaper, PReya, everyone already knows this.".
Thanks for admitting you lied by failing to provide proof. Your screams of "Did too!" only prove what a fool you are.
Bad anonymous: "a bill without effect used to subvert democracy".
I said "If you think it had no effect you have nothing to complain about. Fact is its lessening discrimination against transgender people"
Bad anonymous "No, it isn't. There was none to begin with.". You're the proof that there was, you've repeatedly expressed your desire to deny trans people employment, housing and access to safe bathrooms. If you believed there was no discrimination against trans people you wouldn't have opposed this bill.
Bad anonymous: "how about TTFers?"
I said "TTFers support peoples right to marry whom they choose and right to be the gender they are internally. Their not trying to enforce conformity, you are."
Bad anonymous "Bad example. TTF think everyone falls into either a gay or straight box." They can't accept that most gays are just bisexuals.".
Ridiculous. TTF people always acknowledge the existence of bisexuals, hence our use of the term LGBT.
Bad anonymous said "They can't accept that most gays are just bisexuals.".
Plethyseismograph testing by Michael Baily suggested there are no bisexuals, people are either gay or straight. There are some problems with his study that suggest he ignored some bisexuals in it, but even taking that into account it shows that the majority of people are either completely gay or completely straight. Once again you have nothing to support your bald assertion that most gays are bisexual. Your screaming what you want to be true won't make it so.
Bad anonymous said "They are also biased against those afflicted with same sex attraction who want to change.".
They aren't afflicted with same sex attraction, they are afflicted with internalized homophobia. No one is biased against those who want to change, we feel sorry for those who are encouraged to hate themselves and fall prey to money hungry operations that give them false hope of acceptance and use them to achieve anti-gay political ends.
Bad anonymous: "how is working to preserve the meaning of marriage "anti-marriage"?".
I said "Duh - you're trying to prevent people from marrying the one they love - that's anti-marriage."
Bad anonymous: "that's only true if accept that the definition of marriage has already changed
it hasn't- state after state, voter afetr voter has rejected this offensive notion".
Bzzzt, wrong answer. the definition has changed in several states. And even if it hadn't, that wouldn't change the fact that you're still trying to prevent people from marrying the one they love - you are by definition anti-marriage.
Bad anonymous "elected officials are in cahoots with liberal advocacy groups that don't represent the viewpoint of the people".
I said "The people elected these officials, they are the people's representatives, the majority of people are getting what they asked for. You don't represent the people."
Bad anonymous: "if the gay agenda represented the people's will, lunatic fringe gay advocacy groups wouldn't work so hard against referendums".
An election is a referendum, if your bigotry represented the people's will you wouldn't work so hard to overturn it.
I said "CRW certainly is red in the face talking about LGBT people - that's a dead on characterization."
Bad anonymous: "Have you ever met anyone from CRW?".
Irrelevant, their rage is apparent from their online rants.
I said "You insist everyone have a heterosexual marriage or none at all,"
Bad anonymous "that's the only kind there is, by defition [sic]"
Bzzzt, wrong answer. Thousands of gays have been married in the U.S.
Jim: "Why else would you want gay guys to marry women?"
Bad anonymous: "They don't want that.".
I said "Yes, they most certainly do want that, they support groups like P-fox and Exodus who encourage gay men to enter sham marriages with women."
Bad anonymous said "those men are bisexuals, just as straight as they are gay".
A few of them may be, but the vast majority are not. Anyone who is a 50/50 bisexual would never have felt the need to go to Exodus to pray away the gay, they could have easily chosen an opposite sex partner. Only people who are mostly gay feel a need to seek help to be in a straight relationship. Alan Chambers, the head of Exodus talks about how he struggled to consumate his marriage, it taking over a year before he could force himself to do it. That's not what a 50/50 bisexual does.
Bad anonymous "if a straight guy engages in a homosexual act, gay fringe say it's proof he's gay".
Nonsense. The vast majority of LGBTs know that one sexual act doesn't define your sexuality.
Bad anonymous "if a gay guy engages in a heterosexual act, gay fringe groups also say he's gay".
He probably is. Once again, one sexual act doesn't define your sexuality. Many gay men have had sex with women in an attempt to avoid societal oppression. They fantasize about men in order to get aroused - they're still gay.
Bad anonymous: "They just don't want government endorsing gay relationships."
I said "Too bad for them. They have no right to discourage any relationship that harms no one and benefits the people involved and thus society."
Bad anonymous said "actually, we all have a right to encourage or discourage anything we want to we're not a socialist republic like Canada".
No you don't. You don't have a right to encourage a riot or murder. You don't have a right to discourage someone who's decided against suicide. And you most definitely don't have a moral right to discourage gay relationships which is what I was referring to.
Priya is correct in her charicterization of gay men, anonymous is mistaken.
Here's the simple truth of the situation in D.C., as highlighted by Jim: CRGers have NO say in what the citizens of the District of Columbia want. It's typical of the hubris of these extremists to think they can control the decisions and lives of anybody they hate, much less citizens who live in ANOTHER JURISDICTION.
Hint to CRCers/CRGers/CRWers, Various loopy Anonymous posters: Mind your own business for once in your sad lives! Take your fears, bigotries, hatred to a psychologist or to your Lord and find a cure for your illness.
Citizen
You mean like when TTFers protest at a church holding a Love Won Out when they aren't church members?
or Robert speaking at a TTF event when he's not a resident of Montgomery County?
or PReya commenting on events in the U.S. when she's actually one of the Queen's subjects?
"Priya is correct in her charicterization of gay men, anonymous is mistaken."
The infamous "teacher" who can't spell.
You mean when PReya said that everyone who engages in a homosexual act is gay but not everyone who engages in a heterosexual act is straight?
No, she's not right, Robirt.
Virtually all gays are bisexuals.
The remnant are mentally ill.
The idea of widespread exclusive same sex desire is a myth.
agreed, and that's why, when you get down to it, homosexuality is a choice
Religion is a choice.
indeed, it is
so what?
As I've asked before, how does anonymous know so much about gay men? Did he learn it in Sunday School, perhaps? As noted before, he is simply mistaken, perpetrating myths because he has no genuine source for knowledge, and those half-truths fit into his prejudicial views of queer people better than reality.
The current urban myth at our school is that if 3 more students get swine flu, Fairfax will close all its schools.
Robert, someone needs to put you in a corner with a dunce cap on your head.
There are statistics showing that most "gay" men have had a heterosexual experience.
If they're capable of it, they're bisexual, by definition. I'm sorry if it doesn't fit the propaganda of the gay advocacy movement but the truth is, men don't get erections unless they enjoy what they're doing.
btw, 3 more students will get swine flu in Fairfax County. The Obama administration has failed to make the vaccine available in time, despite knowing this was coming. The flu is hitting early and hitting people under 25 disproportionately and serious cases are happening in that segment of the population regularly.
bottom line: kids will die for the incompetence of the Obama administration
"Anonymous" : please site the source of your "factoid" that "There are statistics showing that most "gay" men have had a heterosexual experience."
In your dreams! Anybody as obsessed with gays and homosexuality as much as you are is generally considered to be a "closeted gay" - unable to deal with your own sexuality for fear, supposedly, of your own "eternal damnation" or some other cockamamy reason.
Get a life!
""Anonymous" : please site the source of your "factoid" that "There are statistics showing that most "gay" men have had a heterosexual experience.""
You denying it's true?
"In your dreams! Anybody as obsessed with gays and homosexuality as much as you are is generally considered to be a "closeted gay" - unable to deal with your own sexuality for fear, supposedly,"
whoever wrote this belongs in the corner with Robirt, wearing a cockamamie cap!
Robirt? Didn't we just have a discussion about my spelling skills?
OK, let's follow the logic:
1. Men can't get erections unless their interested in the person their with (were you never a teenager).
2. Most gay men have had a sexual experience with a woman at least once in their lives (from some vaguely remembered statistic somewhere that I guarantee will not be cited here by the trole (please note spelling))
3. By definition, men who have had one sexual experience with a person of each gender are by definition bisexual (where in the world did you come up with that? No definition of bisexual that I've ever heard of).
4. All bisexual people are the same in their attraction to people of different genders (do you actually talk to bisexual people, or do you just sit around in front of your computer making crap up about people you don't know, and don't like)
5. If people are attracted equally to members of both genders, therefore any relationship they have is a deliberate choice to (what? sin? be perverts? corrupt marriage?)
6. Therefore, gay men are bad.
QED
Good god, do you read what you write? Do you really think these things?
I will only wear the dunce cap if it is a dark, navy blue; that color brings out my eyes. Could you make me one? Thanks so much, I know you really love me.
rrjr
Obama controls the process and the rate at which flu vaccines are produced? Huh?
Want to talk about government and disease, let's discuss Reagan and AIDS. The charge has been levied that obfuscated and delayed deliberately because it was percieved as a disease of gay men, immigrants, drug users and African-Americans: throw-away people.
Do you agree?
rrjr
There are statistics showing that most "gay" men have had a heterosexual experience.
If they're capable of it, they're bisexual, by definition.
Science Blog reports research conducted at SUNY Buffalo found:
"A study looking at the prevalence of sexual assault among 1,014 women between 18 and 30 found that 38 percent had experienced sexual victimization and nearly half of that group had been raped."
How does Anon spin the sad sexual experiences of so many young women into his/her definition of women's sexuality?
oh, I agree that lesbians can have heterosexual activity without an attraction
we're really discussing homosexual men here
"By definition, men who have had one sexual experience with a person of each gender are by definition bisexual"
Robirt, you mock this thinking and yet you guys continually imply that anyone who's had a gay experience is gay.
Make up your mind what propaganda line you want to use.
"Want to talk about government and disease, let's discuss Reagan and AIDS. The charge has been levied that obfuscated and delayed deliberately because it was percieved as a disease of gay men, immigrants, drug users and African-Americans: throw-away people.
Do you agree?"
No.
Going back 25 years is a little irelevant but I'll bite.
The problem in the early eighties was that gays didn't want to be tested because they were afraid of discrimination. This is what hindered prevention and efforts to isolate the disease.
George Bush, more recent, vastly expanded funding for AIDS prevention in Africa.
This is Obama's watch and a catastrophe is developing.
Much to George Jr.'s credit, he increased funding for prevention and treatmentin Africa, though they pushed the abstinence only bit beyond reason, which our current government is changing.
I wonder again, anonymous, whether you are a professional, rather than the amateur indifferent observer you claim to be. You really have the talking points of the anti-gay industry down pat, to a remarkable level of detail and facility.
Nevertheless, I don't think you can blame the government's indifference to the epidemic in the '80s on gay men. It really was a failure of leadership on the part of our leaders, much to their shame.
"I wonder again, anonymous, whether you are a professional, rather than the amateur indifferent observer you claim to be. You really have the talking points of the anti-gay industry down pat, to a remarkable level of detail and facility."
That's because they get all their ideas from my posts on various blogs.
They oughta pay me but they don't.
"they pushed the abstinence only bit beyond reason, which our current government is changing"
W's mistake was to get the government involved. Ab only education had driven teen pregnancy rates down but getting Federal funding got these lunatic liberals up in public in front of kids saying "kids will have sex anyway". Politics takes lives.
"I don't think you can blame the government's indifference to the epidemic in the '80s on gay men."
I was around then, Robirt. I remember it. That's what happened.
Robert said: "I wonder again, anonymous, whether you are a professional, rather than the amateur indifferent observer you claim to be. You really have the talking points of the anti-gay industry down pat, to a remarkable level of detail and facility."
I have said, often, in the past that our much-loved "Anonymous" is in the pay of one of those looney right-wing anti-American groups. He sits at a computer all day long, probably collecting an indecent salary, (no doubt collected from the working-class supporters of the "Tea Party" element) making up all sorts of crap about anybody and anything the loonies do not like.
The amount of time and energy he spends "expounding" his rants and raves here is astounding! Anybody who works for a living could never get away with spending so much of a work-day, neglecting the duties of his job, writing the tiresome, endless tripe he does here...unless this is his job!
Diogenes
Diogenes
I think what anonymous just said is that he not a professional member of an anti-lgbt organization, but he wishes he were, and is offering his services.
Whatever.
I was around during the '80s, but don't remember any of ACT UP or the government's policies on AIDS issues. I was deeply embedded in ex-gay 'therapy', and remember mostly that AIDS was God's punishment for sin.
'you guys continually imply that anyone who's had a gay experience is gay'
A straw man. I don't recall anyone saying that. You must have heard in your straw man seminar.
p.s. When do I get my navy blue dunce cap? Cobalt blue would be even better, perhaps.
"'you guys continually imply that anyone who's had a gay experience is gay'
A straw man. I don't recall anyone saying that. You must have heard in your straw man seminar."
Robirt, anytime someone is found to have a secret gay thing, the gay fringe says this. Ask Larry Craig with his long marriage and family.
here's an exchange with PReya above:
"Brilliant anonymous "if a gay guy engages in a heterosexual act, gay fringe groups also say he's gay".
PReya: He probably is."
"p.s. When do I get my navy blue dunce cap? Cobalt blue would be even better, perhaps."
In a way, every comment you make is a kind of dunce cap.
Just change the colors on your screen.
Larry Craig is a US Senator who was arrested for cruising in an public airport bathroom for sex.
If you want to claim him as straight, fine by me.
rrjr
How do you feel about "Diapers" Vitter? "Appalachian Trail" governor? Thank god these people can't marry men, they would destroy marriage.
Are you really that stingy? Sew together the cap and send it to me UPS. Rhinestones would be nice.
Sorry, I mispelled that.
Robirt
Sorry, I mispelled that.
Robirt
I've noticed those who were dropped on their heads as a small child often misspell words and repeat themselves
they're English outlaws and repeater elves
Post a Comment
<< Home