Virginia Sen. George Allen's desperate promotion of that state's anti-gay-marriage/anti-civil-union/anti-partnership-contract referendum may backfire, but not in the usual way. According to the archly conservative Washington Times, in Marriage Measure May Turn on Allen, those who are stirring the pot of anti-gay animus in the hopes of getting conservative Republicans to the polls on Nov. 7 are actually helping to bring out anti-gay (but Democratic voting) African-Americans, who will support the amendment but vote for Allen's Democratic challenger, Jim Webb.
Ironic, Isn’t It.
ADVERTISEMENT
18 Comments for “Ironic, Isn’t It.”
posted by Gomer on
Black homophobia is pretty distressing. What are they afraid of, that if the down-low culture dissipates under liberation, that they might displace the tax-contributing races less quickly than otherwise?
posted by R.G. on
Black homo-hatred is endemic. A black actor on the #1 rated show calls a gay colleague a “little bitch faggot” and the producer defends him! Imagine if the gay actor called the black actor the “n” word – he’d be off the show instantaneously.
The LGBT activists are so wedded to their “diversity” agenda that they never challange black homophobia. Why, that would be RACISM!
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
R.G. wrote, “The LGBT activists are so wedded to their ‘diversity’ agenda that they never challange black homophobia. Why, that would be RACISM!”
At the risk of being accused again by NL of “trumpeting” my work (a charge akin to saying that any manifestation of one’s gayness is “flaunting”), allow me to point out that I have written quite a lot about racial politics in the gay community. You can go to http://www.holdingthecenter.net and scroll down to the section on race. I agree that there are relatively few willing to speak up, but I cannot blame my fellow activists for being hesitant considering the amount of grief awaiting anyone who wades into this subject area. There is a high degree of jealousy, suspicion, and insularity, the historic roots of which are entirely understandable, but which are nonetheless counterproductive and can help to poison new relationships. All that people of good faith can do is to keep trying, not succumb to feelings of anger or futility, and stay alert for new opportunities for building connections.
posted by Terrance on
It’s ironic, and sad, particularly to me as a black gay man.
However, I don’t think the failure to confront black homophobia can be entirely blamed on fear of being called racist. (And believe me, I’ve walked into my share of shitstorms by attempting to talk about race. The only thing more intense than the ferocity with which people accuse you of racism is the ferocity with which some deny their racism.)
I think Sam Harris was on to something when he said that religion is the great “conversation stopper” in American culture. A person take almost any position, simply say that it’s based on their faith, and not be challenged on it no matter how ridiculous it is. People wouldn’t dream of challenging them. Harris suggests that when the president says “our freedoms come from God” it would be appropriate for someone to ask how that’s different from saying “Our freedoms come from Zeus,” but it doesn’t happen. And when it comes to African Americans have race and religiosity in their arsenal. Combine that with a intensely literal and insistently uncritical approach to scripture, and it’s nearly impenetrable.
Anyway, I’ve been writing about black homophobia on my blog.
http://www.republicoft.com/2006/10/27/historically-black-homophobia/
I don’t have any answers as to how to address it. For me, the solution was to leave the faith and community I grew up in. Of course, that doesn’t change it.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
a charge akin to saying that any manifestation of one’s gayness is “flaunting”
*chuckle*
Oh Richard, far be it from me to pooh-pooh your overwhelming importance to the movement. You’re absolutely right, challenging or standing up to Allen is “unproductive,” and gay Republicans who support Allen aren’t deluded but merely manifesting their deeply held beliefs. Done now?
Anyway, what’s even more interesting than Allen’s anti-gay-marriage campaigning is his OWN marriage history. Apparently Mr. Family Values went through such an acrimonious divorce from his first wife that the divorce records are sealed over two decades later.
So this divorcee who couldn’t keep his own marriage vows and so embarrassingly violated those vows that he needs to keep the proceedings secret two decades later is in a position to condemn the thriving marriages of gay people?
If we hope to actually win this fight, rather than cower in the corner and hope the Demopublicans will “save” us, then we need to raise these sorts of points, loudly, in public forums.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
LGBT activists are so wedded to their “diversity” agenda that they never challange black homophobia
Speak for yourself, not for me.
Besides, when was the last time Republican apologists challenged *any* homophobia?
And no, I’m not talking about their “defense of Mary Cheney” from big bad John Kerry.
posted by raj on
Passage of the anti-gay amendment in Virginia was never in doubt, but if its being on the ballot helps get rid of George “Macacawitz” Allen and his thugs, I guess that would be some solace.
posted by Greg Capaldini on
This is fascinating, so thanks to Steve and the foregoing commentators. Two reactions, first being that we Virginians are set to waste a ton of money defending the inevitable constitutional challenge to that silly amendment. Second, with regard to the evident anger and mistrust on the part of some black Americans, I’m a bit torn. Part of me regrets the hardship and mistreatment that people have endured in the past, but another part of me wonders if a dislike of other minorities (not just gays) is consistent with the ideals of civil rights pioneers active during my lifetime.
posted by Anon on
I can’t help but think we should be pushing for clearly unconstitutional language in these “Marriage Protection” amendments – just so they can be later struck down at the federal level.
posted by randy R. on
Anon, it doesn’t work that way. If the people of a state vote to amendment their constitution, it becomes a part of that constutition. Therefore, by definition, it is constitutional. No judge or tribunal can rule otherwise. Now, there may be a problem with interpreting the language, but they are stuck with the language.
Since Virginia is amending it’s state constitutional, the federal courts have no jurisdiction and cannot review it. Therefore, it will never even be heard at the federal level.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
If the people of a state vote to amendment their constitution, it becomes a part of that constutition. Therefore, by definition, it is constitutional.
Not quite. The federal constitution has primacy — one reason why the anti-gay state amendment in Colorado was shot down by the SCOTUS.
If amending state constitutions was all that was needed to ensure continued lack of equal treatment under the law, Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas would have amended their state constitutions to enshrine segregation as well. Segregationism was as popular in the 1960s as homophobia is down there today.
Doubtlessly, ND30 and others would have been relentlessly assailing Martin Luther King and others for “attempting to override the will of the majority” in the 1960s as well, and would have blamed such efforts as “backlash against the undemocratic actions of militant negro groups.”
posted by Randy R. on
NE: Well, er, you are correct. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land. And anything that contradicts that is unlawful.
The reality though is that marriage law and family law is all left to the states. Unless the Amendment clearly violates the US Con, the courts won’t even hear it.
It could happen, of course. A federal court may find that the amendment violates equal protection or due process. But under this SCOTUS, I highly think not. In other words, it would be a poor strategy to rely on SCOTUS to bail us out.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
marriage law and family law is all left to the states. Unless the Amendment clearly violates the US Con, the courts won’t even hear it.
It could happen, of course. A federal court may find that the amendment violates equal protection or due process. But under this SCOTUS, I highly think not.
Which is, of course, a clear illustration of the ideological bent of the court which the two old parties have delivered to us — a court which adds the words “just kidding” to the parts of the Constitution it doesn’t like.
it would be a poor strategy to rely on SCOTUS to bail us out.
I’m not relying on anyone other than myself to bail myself out. I am simply noting the catastrophic damage to our Constitutional process that folks like ND30 and his party have delivered — all for an ephemeral taste of absolute power for themselves.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Doubtlessly, ND30 and others would have been relentlessly assailing Martin Luther King and others for “attempting to override the will of the majority” in the 1960s as well, and would have blamed such efforts as “backlash against the undemocratic actions of militant negro groups.”
Not really.
MLK’s crowning achievement was the legislative passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
But the reason gays have to try to pervert the judiciary instead is made quite obvious by the comparison of NL to MLK.
posted by chukoffskii67 on
lamictal [URL=http://lamictal.viphls.com] lamictal [/URL] http://lamictal.viphls.com
allegra d [URL=http://allegra.viphls.com] allegra d [/URL] http://allegra.viphls.com
levaquin side effects [URL=http://levaquin.viphls.com] levaquin side effects [/URL] http://levaquin.viphls.com
buy levitra [URL=http://levitra.viphls.com] buy levitra [/URL] http://levitra.viphls.com
celexa side effects [URL=http://celexa.viphls.com] celexa side effects [/URL] http://celexa.viphls.com
lexapro side effects [URL=http://lexapro.viphls.com] lexapro side effects [/URL] http://lexapro.viphls.com
amoxicillin side effects [URL=http://amoxicillin.viphls.com] amoxicillin side effects [/URL] http://amoxicillin.viphls.com
ativan lorazepam [URL=http://lorazepam.viphls.com] ativan lorazepam [/URL] http://lorazepam.viphls.com
posted by sailor moon hentai on
sailor moon hentai
mulan hentai
simpsons porn
lion king hentai
lilo and stitch porn
starfire hentai
teen titans hentai
disney porn
ariel porn
futurama porn
famous toons
adult flintstones
digimon hentai
dragonball z hentai
posted by anime rape on
anime rape
anal rape
gang rape
gay rape
lesbian rape
hentai rape
girl raping
rape fantasy
rape videos
rape stories
rape porn
teen rape
rape sex
raped girls
posted by anime rape on
anime rape
anal rape
gang rape
gay rape
lesbian rape
hentai rape
girl raping
rape fantasy
rape videos
rape stories
rape porn
teen rape
rape sex
raped girls