wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

separate but equal is good enough for gays, says 70% of the blacks

As a person with moral character, I do not want to see civil unions recognized for either "gay" couples or hetrosexuals who want to live together out of marriage recognized. I can not see any reason for benefits for people who can't follow the laws of marriage, regardless of their orientation.

I am surprised that marriage is so big to the gay movement. My age is showing, but I remember when feminists were opposed to marriage and gays had bathhouse sex. What happened? The wild ones died from AIDS. White women struggled to raise children without a husband (black women never got included in the feminist movement). Society did not change. Gay marriage does not strike me as a progressive development; it is an acceptance of defeat. Instead of changing institutions, gays want in to an institution that has limited men and women. I don't get it.

If we’ve learned anything from the elections of people like Hillary Clinton, Christine Quinn, Barney Frank, and Barack Obama it is that sex, race, and sexuality don’t matter when it comes to elected officials… a politician is a politician is a politician. Some are good, some are bad, we’ll see how this one turns out.

Whoa Pete, where did that come from? Your previous posts seem to be full of somewhat misguided hope and respect for Democrats when it came to LGBTQ issues, and then the explosion against Obama?
Obama isn’t an oppressor of homosexuals, and he did give a token shout-out in his speech election night—he knows a thing or two about tokens—he’s just indifferent to LGBTQ issues. It doesn’t affect him (outside of what his church tells him to believe) so he doesn’t address it. Addressing it will affect him politically, so he doesn’t. The same goes for saying to the American public that Muslims and Islam aren’t evil… If he says it, it will hurt him politically, so he doesn’t. (Now, if you’re wondering why I’m defending Islam and gay rights in the same breath, it’s because it is the Constitutional thing to do. I’m fully aware Muslims want to oppress homosexuals just as much if not more so than Jews and Christians) Do I think Obama privately supports homosexuals, not at all, but I don’t think he deliberately threw them under the bus to get elected. He ignored people in dire poverty, so called working class blacks, Muslims, white-collar workers not in nuclear families, renters, people who don’t drive cars, and a whole other slew of people to get elected.

MC

Rose colored glasses? We are talking about human rights here. Denying gays and lesbians rights is the same as denying blacks, Jews, etc. rights. Oppression is oppression. Democrats such as Obama and Biden are darn good oppressors. The first African American ever elected to the white house and he forgets to mention that gays and lesbians shouldn’t be in the back of the bus? Obama is a disgrace to human beings everywhere. He could have gotten elected without jumping on the “stomp on the gays bandwagon.” I do expect more from Democrats on human rights and I certainly expect more from the first black President. Right now, Democrats and Republicans are separated by two issues – abortion and the war. The repubs are right on the war and no one is right on the abortion issue. So basically, we are left deciding what is more important, supporting or opposing the “war on terror” and being pro life or pro choice. The Dems got elected because the country hates Bush. And when the country stops hating Bush, the Dems will be left being cowards on human rights and naïve on national defense. What a shame that the first African American president is also an oppressor of human rights. Obama supports apartheid against gays –shame he hasn’t learned a darn thing from the proud history of civil rights.

For the record, there are a lot of "religious" people, like me, who support full equality for all Americans, regardless of sexual orientation. Don't add "faithophobia" to the other forms of discrimination.

While it looks certain that Prop 8 in California will pass, it is by no means certain. It is the media that has "called" the result for the Yes side. With about 10 million votes counted, the Yes side lead by about 500,000. But there are between 2 and 3 million absentee mailed-in votes yet to be counted. The California Sectretary of State's office has confirmed this. Remember the infamous Chicago newspaper headline "Dewey Defeats Truman"? The "fat lady" has not sung yet ...

I would like to have, that is write "the last word"

Respectful #44,
You make a good case for Stephanie's suggestion for taking this out of the realm of the state altogether. Let churches do what they will and allow equal treatment of everyone under state law. Respectfully, I must add that you can find justification in the Bible of slavery and of burning your neighbor's house down if he violates the Sabbath, so let's not go there.

Peter of Sunset Park,
I think that we can agree that the Dem Party is just as self-serving as the Repubs. No rose-colored glasses here.

The only way forward is to take what we have and keep pushing. In September my girlfriend of 8 years and I got married in Massachusetts, expecting that we would need to make a stop in Toronto for a honeymoon to get an official marriage license. The law about out-of-state same sex couples getting married changed weeks before, and we were able to get legally married in MA. Now Paterson has started the ball rolling toward recognizing our marriage here - and I feel very privileged to be legally bound to my significant other. We're just patiently waiting for the rest of the country to catch up. These new bans are the last gasp of a dying world view trying to hold on in any way that it can. But we are proof that some progress is being made.

Um, Peter, I know we seem to largely agree on the issue, but when did you get the impression the Democratic party supported civil rights for homosexuals? Yes, coincidentally a large number of people who support such rights tend to identify as Democrats, but the this is not , nor has it ever been part of the party’s platform.

Correct me if I am wrong, but….

Lance, spend a little time in the black church. And, if that statement was to racial for anyone… spend a little time in any evangelical church. You’d think homosexuals were the walking lost soul minions of Satan. Church rhetoric often goes beyond hating the so called sin and loving the sinner directly into conflicts of good and evil. And when you hear what’s preached across America every week of every year, you will see homosexuals are not only seen as second-class citizens, but a second-class species.

Shame shame shame on the democrats for dissing gays and lesbians. One step forward, one tremendous step backwards.

People will continue to get dragged and tortured behind pick-up trucks as long as the democratic party continues hating gays and lesbians. So sad for America and liberty.

Respectful Disagreement: I respectfully disagree. Yes, there is a clear Biblical definition of marriage; the Bible was also more than clear on whom could and could not marry, marital roles, women’s status as subordinate property, and the rules regarding divorce and remarrying. The Bible also laid down some pretty direct dietary laws, rules on whom may and may not enter the sanctuary, and rules on what one must do to show your piety. The Bible does all of this, the Constitution does not. It is not the role of government to codify religious dogma. To suggest anything else is a slap in the face of the (longstanding understanding of the) first amendment. And believe me, as a homosexual man and descendant of slaves, this is a civil rights issue.

Voter[49], gays are "considered to be sub-human" by whom specifically?

Maja,
The ballot measure in Florida was worded in such a way as to amend the state constitution to invalidate same-sex civil unions, as well as to ban same-sex "marriages." Not just a semantic issue.
"... no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized."

Note that two sexisting state law in Florida already banned same-sex marriage, so this amendment was intended to prevent the state judiciary from being able to intervene to protect the rights of same-sex couples.

Not so, Stephanie, not so… people who feels marriage is a solely sanctimonious institution aren’t stupid. (some of) These people also believe in school prayer, that the United States is specifically blessed by God, that God led the hand of the drafters of the Constitution, and that religion should be a barometer against which legislation is measured. Since these people feel religious beliefs (specifically their religious beliefs) should be at one with government, they see no difference between government and religion. Government gives them many benefits for being in their sanctimonious contract. They will not give up these benefits.
And yes, these people do have a problem with legal rights for “gays”. (the reason I said “gays” versus your use of the phrase “gay people” is because homosexuals are considered to be sub-human… This is worse than blacks under Jim Crow in which it was considered a triumph to consider the notion that blacks may in fact be some kind of human (the equal part), that still needs to be separate from proper society.)

Respectful (change your name to homophobic):

You are wrong. I will explain why. Denying gay marriage is wrong. It is a civil rights issues because it involves folks with power (folks with guns) telling others that they deserve less freedom and fewer rights than others. I can't argue with you about people choosing to be gay or not - you will believe what you want. But elected leaders are choosing to deny human and civil rights to a group of people because of who they are intimate with. Your homophobia is not only disrespectful, but chooses to deny human rights to good people. Please stop preaching hate and please start being respectful.

Respectful, we cannot pick and choose passages of the bible to legislate. The Bible is not our constitution (thank God!). I don't really give a rat's tush what the bible says about marriage or homosexuality or adultery or stoning or eye-for-an-eye or the Whore of Babylon. The bible is a collection of stories and if we're making laws out of Leviticus, we have to make laws out of ALL of Leviticus. And if we do that, we may as well make laws out of Bullfinch's Mythology and start chaining convicted felons to rocks in Long Island Sound to be devoured by sea monsters. Or set them to work rolling stones uphill.

I don't know, it seems that we're arguing semantics. We're trying to legislate the definition of a WORD. That THEIR love is "this" and OUR love is "that" simply based on what sexual organs are involved and/or whether the ceremony took place in a religious institution.

And is this distinction really going to fly, are straight people really going to start differentiating between civil unions and marriage? Couples are going to send invitations requesting the honor of your presence at a civil union? Engaged couples are going to say, "Yes we're being unionized next year"?

What gives the Church the exclusive right to own and define the word "marriage"? Why don't they invent a new term if it's such a big deal? People have been GETTING MARRIED for centuries. Nobody wants to call it anything else and frankly, why should they?

The Mormon church was not the only religious organization that provided substantial financial support for this measure. The Knights of Columbus (a Catholic fraternal organization) also contributed.
Here are two of the ads that were widely broadcast on radio and tv leading up to the vote (I was visiting LA last week).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kKn5LNhNto

https://www.icontribute.us/protectmarriage/initiative/truth-web

I respect the feelings and choices of all individuals however it is rather clear from a biblical basis that Marriage is between a Man and a Women. All these state constitutional initiates did is codify this simple fact since it was called into question.

The LGBT community is free to choose whatever lifestyle they wish (as adults) however to escalate that to the level of the sacred institution of marriage is a slap in the face to all those of traditional (Judeo-christian) faith in this country.

Finally, this is NOT a civil rights issue because there us a humoungous difference between someone's race or ethnicity and who a person chooses to sleep with. To equate the two is to make a mockery of the travesties of slavery and the holocaust and other issues civil rights legislation was designed to address and rectify.

But wouldn't really religious people who feel strongly about the "sanctity" of marriage want to protect said sanctity from "attacks" by the state by just moving marriage out of the realm of the state altogether? I mean, these people don't have a problem with legal rights for gay people, do they? So everyone would benefit if we just took marriage out of it. Right?

What a sad day for America. At the same time that a black man is elected president, gay peope are told to sit in the back of the bus. Gay rights = human rights. Shame on the dems for giving up on human rights to win an election.

Stephanie is a genius.

I am an African American Lesbian - 40yrs old and I was raised by a Southern Baptist grandmother for much of my life and I think what we're looking at with this 70% of African American Californians (only 6% of the total California Population) is RELIGION NOT RACE.
My grandmother managed to work it out and actually be incredibly gay positive and supportive of my activism and general dykedom ;)

But i think that's very unsuaual.

I'm very dissappointed in the way that folks voted in California with regard to Prop 8 but I DO NOT think this is surprising. African Americans are overwhelmingly Christian. Non-progressive, fundamentalist and born-again Christians over overwhelming anti-gay.

Obviously not all versions of Christianity or anti-gay (Unitarians for instance are very inclusive) but I think we're talkig about folks voting from a Religious perspective, not a Racial perspective.

What Tuesday's results show me is that CHRISTIANS supported Prop 8. African American Christians. But if you look at the numbers, EVEN IF EVERY AFRICAN AMERICAN IN THE ENTIRE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HAD VOTED AGAINST PROP 8, it wouldn't have made a bit of difference in the face of how EVERY ONE ELSE voted. We're talking 6% of the population.

I'm just so incredibly saddened by Prop 8's success and also the ensuing "race baiting" that's occurred which puts Gay and Lesbian African Americans in a horrible place.

Right on Leigh!

Voter from Brooklyn #8,
Agreed completely, couldn't have put it better myself. Especially the "ick" factor. I wish people could grow up. Unfotuntately there was no place in either major party for anyone interested in this issue to go. Obama-Biden were no help on it but McCain-Palin were worse.

Stephanie #15
I think this is an idea that bears pursuing. Maybe we can find enough common ground to get something done on it that way. At least it would treat marriages equally.

Having family in Cali, a gay brother and a Mormon background - this issue has been very close to home and has spurred many heated debates within my family. Because the Mormon Church used it's staggering resources to support Prop 8, my brother and I(having been not active in the Church for 15 years or so) have decided to officially take our names of the roles of the Church. There is a large group of Gay and Gay friendly people all over the country doing the same thing in protest.

It's impossible to ignore how similar this all is to bans against interracial marriage from not that long ago - especially since Massachusetts had been using a law that was created to stop out of state interracial couples from getting married there to do the same thing to out of state same sex couples.

This is the last frontier of tolerance. I can only hope that 40 years from now we will be electing our first lesbian president and saying we never thought we would see the day.

As I see it, this should be a complete non-issue. The 14th Amendment states that no state can deny any citizen equal protection of the law. What they are saying is that because this group has different beliefs and preferences, they are not entitled to the protections given to married couples. Duck soup, done, clear as crystal, no further questions, it's right there in black and white. If you don't like it, pass a US Constitutional Amendment. Until then, that is the highest law in the land.

Also, those already married as same sex couples in CA should be covered by the provision against ex post facto laws in the Constitution. It was legal when they did it, the rules can't be changed after the fact.

In my view, the fact that the Supreme Court hasn't laid the smack down on the whole issue already is a violation of the First Amendment because they are putting their own religious views ahead of the Constitution.

Benny from Soho,
As a black man, a homosexual man, who grew up in the black church… Blacks will hop on the train of taking away the rights of anyone who is either not like them or that they do not approve of. These polls are not racist, black people just take offense to being called on their bigotry.

How is this NOT a discrimination issue? I'm just so sad for my gay/lesbian friends. Why do religious people think this is a conscious decision? Do they themselves choose to love a partner of the opposite sex?

Stephanie, Obama’s vision of unity was not inclusive of and was never intended to be extended to the LGBTQ community. To believe anything else is what was fantasy. Obama paid the perfunctory lip service he had to; his proposals of Jim Crow for homosexuals was rather repugnant. Yes, I voted for Obama, but I had no illusions on who he really was. I agree with the second paragraph of your post fully, but keep in mind, Obama (whether he is Muslim or Christian) is part of the religious establishment and his religious beliefs will influence how he leads (both positively and negatively.)

What about Connecticut?

We rejected a Constitutional Convention that could have opened the door to revising the constitution to reverse the recent court decision allowing gay marriage in the state.

this is a state issue, leave BHO out of it. he's got enough on his plate (thanks to the worst president ever bush)

I grew up in a black and puerto rican neighborhood and am delighted that Obama won but that was for the effect it would have on young minorities.
With all this hullabuloo about Black identity it confirms what I noticed long ago. There is no black american, the similarities far, far outweigh the differences. We are americans! and they just got the oppertunity to be the f**cKe% up white people I grew up with.
Decency ain't no color.

I grew up in a black and puerto rican neighborhood and am delighted that Obama won but that was for the effect it would have on young minorities.
With all this hullabuloo about Black identity it confirms what I noticed long ago. There is no black american, the similarities far, far outweigh the differences. We are americans! and they just got the oppertunity to be the f**cKe% up white people I grew up with.
Decency ain't no color.

I grew up in a black and puerto rican neighborhood and am delighted that Obama won but that was for the effect it would have on young minorities.
With all this hullabuloo about Black identity it confirms what I noticed long ago. There is no black american, the similarities far, far outweigh the differences. We are americans! and they just got the oppertunity to be the f**cKe% up white people I grew up with.
Decency ain't no color.

Right on, Voter. It's pure and simple ick-based discrimination. Gay marriage grosses people out. It's repugnant on an array of levels therefore they must legislate against it.

Felons may marry. Rapists may marry. Pedophiles may marry. In some states, two first cousins may marry. The poor, the addicted and the psychotic may marry. People of different race may marry. But two college-educated people of the same sex may not marry. Why? Because it's gross. Opponents can conveniently couch their revulsion in moral, religious and "family-values" language, but the bottom line is us/them discrimination against a group of people who are so different, they are not deemed worthy of the same civil rights.

Nobody, however, has the honesty to stand up and say so.

Brain 70% is NOT ACCURATE. Check Survey USA: http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=0d4fd538-5834-4c18-98c8-6e58da254976

Catholics: Manys Dems and Obama pass the Pope test when it comes to war (Iraq), death penalty, and economic issues.

I'm really angry about all this talk about race. This was a WHITE initiative. Blacks and Latinos and Asians are not out there trying to take rights away from anyone.

Preying on people's education and religion is disgusting. I'm outraged, these polls are racist. That CNN poll only polled 224 black people.

Overreach... should have been "Civil Unions" first.

for those who are disappointed in the outcome, blame california -- the state asked for it by putting a christian hot button issue on an official state ballot.

What was the generational breakdown for this vote on the ban?

I have no feelings either way on homosexuality. I am under 40 and don't care about this issue. I fail to see how gays getting married affect me either way.

we shall over come!

Prop eight or prop hate!! What Jason just said doesn't surprise me. Again, they sat back and thought SF is gay friendly, it will fail.

AND ANOTHER THING...

Marriage hasn't "always been between a man and a woman"...there are remaining rituals on the books that "married" two men. And further, "marriage" was always between a man and his PROPERTY! And a woman was part of that chattel.

Sorry I made a mistake with the word "racists," I typed racism it changed per my spell check.

Definitely, a lot of the same people who showed up in droves to vote for Obama voted against same-sex marriage, which totally destroyed the Obama-inspired fantasy I had of unity only the night before.

That said, I don't understand why people are fighting for gay marriage rather than fighting for marriage to be taken away from the jurisdiction of the state. There should be civil unions for EVERYONE. Marriage is a religious issue. And you can't force religious institutions to perform ceremonies they don't support. But you can take religion out of the legal issue and only deal with civil unions when you are talking about legal rights. If people want to get partnered in the eyes of the state, they get a civil union. If they want to get married, they can go to a church.

please ask the guest about the mormon vote and how that influenced prop 8 in california.

Could someone please make the distinction between a religious ritual of Holy Matrimony and the civil right to marriage? One is a religious ceremony and the other is a civil contract. The confusion is the blurring of the lines between church and state.

The Civil Rights movement took a huge blow and African Americans who voted for any civil rights ban should hang their head in shame. For all the joy about Obama's victory i was embarrased by the approval of prop 8.

Is anyone really surprised? REALLY? C'mon even other minorities think we are lower than human and fit for hell. They too overlook the discrimination factor that they suffer like we do. Barack Obama did not support gay marriage; he said NO, frankly NO. And someone on this very site had the nerve to attacked me for saying it was the only issue I intended to vote on. I should have stuck to that, instead I did vote for Barack Obama.

He said 8%? That CNN poll said 10% we need to get these numbers straight before we start pointing this at minorities.

Truly sad for California--and all of America. The NY legislature needs to make same sex marriage legal ASAP.

The passage of California’s proposition 8 isn’t a surprise at all. The Democratic party is full people who are racist, full of people who are homophobic, full of people who preach religious intolerance, full of people who look down upon the disable or economically less fortunate, and full of people whom wish to dictate to others how they should live their lives. Though the numbers may be less than those of the Republican party, these factions still exist.
Peter from Sunset Park is correct… Obama/Biden made no promises and created absolutely no hope for the LGBTQ community outside of a promise to let someone visit a loved one in a hospital.
We still live in a world where people talk about an “ick” factor as if it should matter. We still live in a world where religious beliefs control social policy… hell, we still live in a world where supposed bastions of liberalism like WNYC still support statements to the effect that lesbians take it all off for the excitement of men (a comment made by Leonard Lopate about the program The L Word and not denounced by his producers or WNYC).
This really isn’t anything new.

Brian,

Thank you for bringing up this issue of race. If you look at the polls on Survery USA it is almost a wash when it comes to racists if you factor in 'undecided.'

A lot of people yesterday angered me coming out blaming blacks. This is legislation drafted for and by WHITE people. Clearly they went after the religious and uneducated.

Now there is an effort to scapegoat minorities.

Please check survey USA

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=0d4fd538-5834-4c18-98c8-6e58da254976

A much smaller number is 58% for blacks. If you factor in all the undecided it is a WASH.

NOT FAIR!

I'm very excited about our first black president.

But one of the side effects of so many newly registered and active black voters has to be antigay legislation.

Blacks are culturally much more phobic about homosexuality in their community than either whites or latinos.

This is such a disappointment. As the numbers were coming in yesterday I felt my initial enthusiasm at Obama's win evaporate.

Such a major setback.

There was a lot of money poured by out-of-state Mormons into prop 8. It is also strange that the state voted to protect the right of chickens (other prop) but not humans.

I am very disappointed in the outcome of these initiatives. We did OK, by and large on Election Day, we stood in line, voted, didn't lose our minds and the outcome of the presidential election is not even close to being in dispute. But we also took some steps backward, not just on Election Day but throughout the whole campaign season. A bittersweet outcome, to be sure.

I believe that the newly registered voters who voted for Pres. Elect Obama may not all that liberal. I'm sure there were many church going democrats who do not believe in certain social issues such as abortion rights and gay marriage... Could these voters be the beginning of a Religious Left?

Talk about being a day late. Obama and Biden were no different on gay rights then McCain and Palin. The only bigger disgrace is that it now becomes a story after the election.