The Exodus media blog promoted the following propaganda pieces by antigay political allies this week, and withheld alternative viewpoints from the Exodus readership. (Exodus does not technically “endorse” what it promotes. But the half-truths that Exodus reprints — and the truths that it neglects to share with readers — are an indication of the integrity of the Exodus national office, or lack thereof.)
- A LifeSite criticism of TV’s Dr. Phil for “promoting homosexuality.” LifeSite criticizes Dr. Phil’s reliance upon facts to criticize inaccurate claims of success issued by the abstinence-only sex-ed movement. LifeSite also mischaracterizes Dr. Phil’s position regarding Planned Parenthood. And LifeSite criticizes Dr. Phil for using a doctorate to imply expertise in unrelated fields, even as James Dobson and Warren Throckmorton have done the same. Because Dr. Phil weighs the available science, he is accused of “promoting homosexuality.”
- A Concerned Women for America defense of Robert A. Jason, a Canadian from Fonthill, Ontario, who was confronted by local police (but not arrested) after he distributed hate mail about homosexuals. Samples of Jason’s tirades are available online. He regularly and broadly accuses anyone who supports tolerance, or who declines to reprint his venom, of being pro-gay, pro-abortion, anti-faith, anti-family, and anti-country. Jason offers no specific facts to support his accusations — and neither Concerned Women for America nor Exodus share the specific e-mail that got Jason in trouble with police. Even Jason acknowledges that the United States has a First Amendment to guard against Canada-style crackdowns on venomous foul-mouths. But Jason, and CWA, illogically conclude that the United States is at risk anyway.
Exodus also misidentifies the writer of the CWA article, Lee Duigon, who is affiliated with the Chalcedon Foundation, an organization dedicated to evolving the U.S. government and population into an ostensibly Bible-based theocracy. The organization was founded by Christian Reconstructionist R.J. Rushdoony. Memo to Exodus: Consider your sources.
- A Concerned Women for America article cheering the removal, from an unrelated Senate bill, of a provision adding sexual orientation (both heterosexual and homosexual) to existing hate crimes legislation. Neither CWA nor Exodus explain their failure to oppose existing hate-crimes laws that toughen sentencing for offenses against certain social demographics but not others. In the view of CWA, some minorities are more equal than others — and Exodus seems content to promote that view (without officially endorsing it).
- WorldNetDaily propaganda promoting antigay Massachusetts parent David Parker’s battle to prevent public schools from opposing antigay prejudice and violence. Exodus promotes WND’s accusation that “angry homosexual activists” somehow dominate the town of Lexington and its schools. WND neglects to explain why Parker has been banned from the town’s schools, and Exodus seems content to aid in that factual omission. WND and Exodus also seem to be transferring their own anger to their opponents: A site that monitors Massachusetts antigay group Article 8 reports regularly that it is Parker and his few supporters who are not only angry, but venting hatred of gay people and seeking to silence those who expose and oppose antigay violence.
- An American Family Association endorsement of Repent America’s harassment of the city of Philadelphia. (Previous XGW coverage of Repent America and Exodus’ past endorsement of this hate group.) Repent America leader Michael Marcavage recently advocated for a future fundamentalist U.S. government that will legally and methodically put homosexuals to death.
- A WND promotion of culture-war venom in the form of a new book whose title rants against the marketers of “evil” and “corruption”: “radicals, elitists, and pseudo-experts” — in other words, anyone who isn’t a social conservative. Exodus reprints an excerpt from the book that contends it was a conniving homosexual 12-year-old who “seduced” antigay conservative former congressman Robert Bauman, when he too was a youth, into growing up to have sex with male prostitutes.
- An interview with Janet Folger, hosted by Focus on the Family. Folger, a former Coral Ridge Ministries activist who supports the imprisonment of homosexuals under sodomy laws, accuses equality and tolerance advocates of seeking to do likewise: jail “Christians” like her. But Folger offers no evidence of such efforts. Instead, she cites Swedish authorities’ efforts to limit the antigay public protests of pastor Ake Green. Folger neglects to note that Green’s freedom of speech was defended by homosexual activist Peter Tatchell — and Exodus complies with the factual omission. For more supposed proof of persecution against antigay Christians, Folger illogically cites conservative Muslim theocrats’ intolerance of Christians; Folger fails to indicate any similarities between Muslim theocrats and liberal equality advocates. For that matter, Folger fails to indicate any differences between those theocrats’ intolerance and her own. Coral Ridge Ministries, headed by D. James Kennedy, is sympathetic to the Christian Reconstructionist movement, which seeks to grow a Bible-based U.S. government that harshly punishes homosexuals, feminists, and other presumed heretics.
- An American Family Association accusation that unseen “homosexual activists” hiding behind civil-liberties advocates are “pulling the strings” of Ohio youths who seek to reduce antigay violence and prejudice within their own school. AFA’s accusation is recycled from antigay Ohio activist Linda Harvey, and is unsupported by any facts. Harvey redefines “homosexuality” to be one specific high-risk behavior, and then smears anyone with same-sex attraction by attaching the redefined label to them. Exodus offers no objections.
- The lawsuit of Exodus vice-chairman and Love In Action leader John Smid — recycled via the American Family Association through the religious-right Alliance Defense Fund — against the state of Tennessee for requiring that Smid’s exgay live-in therapy center and boot camp obey state laws regarding live-in facilities, particularly those that counsel the mentally ill.
- Allegations by Alan Sears and Baptist Press — unsupported by evidence — that same-sex-attracted people pose a mortal threat to children in foster care.
The allegations have been frequently disproven by experts in child care and criminal justice, but Sears and Baptist Press withheld that information from readers, and Exodus complied with the omission and declined to cite what the experts actually say about sexual orientation and child care.
So much half-truth and misinformation, in just one very ordinary week at the Exodus media blog.
Mike, I find Lifesite articles very insulting and disturbing to read. It just oozes a contempt and blunt hatred that makes my skin crawl. Do you know who leads this organization, how big it is and how influential it is. The website doesn’t seem to give much insight into the background of the organization.
LifeSite.net is operated by Canada’s largest anti-abortion organization, the Campaign Life Coalition.
CLC’s ties to U.S. extremists have been the subject of some debate in Canada.
In late 2001, Canada’s Pro-Choice Action Network questioned why CLC was opposing Canada’s Anti-Terrorism Act.
The Act exempts peaceful protests, but classifies organizations as terrorist if they promote violence in the service of their cause.
The CLC is viewed by legal-abortion advocates as complicit in abortion-clinic violence. A 1999 CBC-TV documentary, Thou Shalt Not Kill, described the CLC a “moderate” organization but noted that CLC president Jim Hughes had invited U.S. extremists who support the murder of doctors to participate in Canadian pro-life events. In the documentary, Hughes offered ignorance as a defense — he hadn’t bothered to check the backgrounds of his invitees. Hughes later alleged that the documentary was biased, and that he had been emphatic in his opposition to violence.
Apart from CLC’s somewhat apathetic posture regarding ties to U.S. extremists, the organization also resorts to a small bit of deception regarding its connection to LifeSiteNews. On four occasions, Exodus quotes LifeSiteNews staffers talking to themselves: Hughes and CLC staffer Aidan Reid are quoted as speaking to LifeSiteNews as if it were an independent media organization, when it is merely their own media office. Exodus does not warn its readers of this deception.
Thanks Mike, I did note that a lot of their articles were Canadian news items but did not know they were based here. At any rate, they are a scary bunch and appear to yield a lot of influence and seem very devious to me.
As to the last point, I have often wondered how many foster children people like Sears and his ilk have taken into foster care. I recognize that Sears’s mantra about gays being more interested in child molestation is a red herring, but seriously. Where are the kids going to go? To Sears? Give me a break
I stopped looking over the internet a few years ago, but the irony is that there have been several cases in which male conservative Protestant preachers confested to molesting to having molested underage females. One of the most eggregious was the case of Earl “Butch” Kimmerling, from Indiana.
There was another case out of Tennessee in which the heterosexual couple–reputedly well regarded in their town–literally kidnapped the, and held her hostage for several years, during which the husband molested her. Unfortunately, I don’t recall the caption.
I stopped looking over the internet largely because there were so many mentions of hetero child molestations, and so many instances of idiotic manipulation of statistics, that it became pointless. Maybe Sears would like to clue us in. How many kids does he have in foster care?
Increasingly, I find I can not separate the ‘pro-live’ movement from the ‘hate-movement’. They are virtually identical. Those gay people who are against abortion are intellectually and politically in the same camp as the ‘Jewish Nazis’. This is a sad realization for me, as I have known a few, a very few, ‘pro-lifers’ who were not hard core mysoginists. But IMHO that is the way it is.
Dalea,
Forgive me, but your thinking on this is lazy. You assume that because you don’t know any principled pro-lifers that there aren’t any. Have you considered that your bias may make you unapproachable on that issue? Consider Melissa Fryrear who claims not to have talked to any gays that weren’t molested. She’s not open to hearing otherwise. This is similar to your position.
I am personally conflicted on the abortion issue. I do not like the fact that at the present time, abortion is used primarily as an after-the-fact birth control. I also recognize that my personal distaste with abortion does not give me the right to make personal moral decisions for others. Like what I suspect is the position of a great many people, I’m anti-abortion and pro-choice. I would not make abortion illegal, but I wouldn’t associate with someone who makes it their form of birth-control.
This does not mean that all people who oppose the legality of birth control are just trying to control those around them. I know some pro-life gay people (and straight people) who truly view this as killing, akin to murder. They ask how you can impose capital punishment on someone whose only crime is existing. Whether or not you agree with their premise, their position is not without merit.
Additionally, there are some who worry that should it ever become possible to predict with reasonable accuracy the sexual orientation of a child in the womb, then gay babies would be aborted. This, I suspect, is at least to some extent true.
I think that what you object to is the political agenda of the right wing conservative Christian militants. What you have to realize is that for them, abortion is just flank in their war on evil. They view themselves as embattled, under attack, and fighting the good fight. The enemy, to them, is a vast consortium of abortionist, homosexuals, Hollywood, the media, and liberal elite. Any concessions to the above would be losing a battle in this war and that is why we see them behave in a manner that is often cruel and harsh. It’s war.
But your assertion that “Those gay people who are against abortion are intellectually and politically in the same camp as the ‘Jewish Nazis’.” is the intellectual equivalent of their assertions that we are “trying to destroy the family”.
You assume that because the most vocal opponents to legal abortion are also the most vocal opponents to gay equality, that you know who they all are and what they are like. Yes, and all gay people are drag queens and leather daddies.
So, I have to say: Dale, you are smarter than this. No, it’s not “the way it is”.
Over the years I have met and talked about abortion with a great many prolife people. My objection to the position comes down to the fact that I have never had a clear answer on how this would work. AFAICT the only truly effective prolife program was in Romania, in the 70’s and 80’s. The system used there was to require random, mandatory pregnancy tests at road blocks, at factories and offices, in schools. Any woman who tested positive was then hauled off to a state run facility. She was chained to a bed in a dormitory until the baby was delivered. This effectively prevented abortions.
The prolife people always reacted in horror, telling me that this was not what they had in mind. What did they have in mind? Something else. Which is? Just something else. Maybe make abortion illegal. But something else.
I am still enough of a libertarian to realize that very few problems can be solved by making things illegal. Laws outlawing hard drugs do not solve the drug problem. In fact, IMHO, they make things worse. So, I seriously wonder how this would work. And how much thought and analysis has gone into the subject. My firm impression is that the really hardline prolifers have done this. And could quite comfortably live with the Romanian solution. And that the rest of the prolife movement is simply fronting for what amount to concentration camps for breeding. If there are prolifers who have other detailed concrete solutions, I would love to hear them. So far, after many years of listening, I have not heard them. All I seem to encounter is the Evangelical Christian equivelent of New Age Fluff Bunny. So, tell me how this would work.
In terms of the gay rights movement, part of politics is to cultivate allies. They support us and we support them. For at least 35 years, the prochoice groups have been ardent allies of ours. In return we support them. It is a quid pro quo. The prochoicers stood with us long ago when we were almost alone in the public arena. They have probably been the most fervent ally of the gay movement from the beginning. So, when I see gay people quibble about supporting abortion rights, I am troubled. And see a great deal of myopia and ingratitude. IMHO, this is also politically dangerous and foolish. That is the reason for my comment about Jewish Nazis. I feel I am looking at people who want to abandon long time supporters and allies only to embrace those who are on most issues enemies. Which I personally think is at best stupid.
I think it is important Timothy that we try to avoid the painting with one brush stroke technique that our enemies use against us. That being said, I tend to agree with Dalea in regards to the premise pro-life=hate movement. In many cases, this is true. These people, particularly the “Lifesite” crew, really, really hate us and are passionate about that. I find most of their articles bone chillingly hateful and I do take it personally when I see attacks against gays. I also do not think that they own the terminology pro-life because that also applies to being against genocide and needless death in war, crime and workplace health and safety violations. I am fervently pro-life in regards to those matters but whole-heartedly back a women’s choice to terminate her pregnancy, it is her and the father’s decision. I like to think amidst all of the disjointedness in the gay community that we do have some degree of solidarity and it is vital that we reciprocate support when it comes our way. Dalea is right that the pro-choice movement has come to our defence on more than one occasion and for the most part, are an ally. I treat straight allies in my personal life like royalty. I have one co-worker who is as red-neck as they come, but he is also one of the best friends I’ve ever had. Even though I have no obvious signs of being gay, he has said many times that he knew very shortly after we met. We have had many heated discussions, but the mutual respect that we have, solidifies our friendship. The point is, sometimes we can find an ally in the most unlikeliest place and we need to embrace that now more than ever. I think we need to speak out loud and often against these religiously based hate organizations because, they are simply wrong and way out of line. Free speech my behind. I don’t pull any punches on other blogs but try to exercise some restraint out of respect here.:)
Frankly, I’m very tired of the whole “gay —- (fill in the blank) are intellectually and politically in the same camp as the ‘Jewish Nazis'” We heard this before, and it is no less foolish the second time around.
We often bemoan people who use bad stereotypes and broad brushstrokes to demonize us without taking into account the rich diversity of our lives as gay individuals. We know it is a favorite tactic of theirs to take the most radical and outrageous statements by gays and lesbians and use those statements to say that all gay feel that way. We complain loudly, and it’s a worthy complaint. So why do we insist on doing the same thing ourselves? I’ll never understand it.
If we are going to excoriate (and in the process, exclude) members of our own community who don’t agree politically, morally, religiously, and in every other way, then the remnant of that community will be mighty small indeed. This is a miserable waste of energy, but I see it so often it makes my head spin.
I for one, have no problem with gay people quibbling with abortion rights. Don’t get me wrong: I am pro-choice. But a pro-choice position with regard to abortion isn’t an automatically gay position. Allies are good, but we need a whole lot more of them than we have now because obviously the ones we have aren’t enough. And that can only mean that we need to try to cultivate allies among those who aren’t allies currently.
But yeah, keep up with the whole Jewish Nazis allegory. I’m sure that will work wonders.
Jim, I spoke in my previous post about the disjointedness (that is different than diversity, it is the in-fighting, the gossip, the obsession with youth and beauty) of our community and I believe it is probably as big an enemy as the religious right. The only way we gain support of our fellow man is to be in their lives and enrich it. Forcing a person to believe or think a certain way doesn’t work. The only way people support one another is through mutual respect and true friendship. In my view, this doesn’t include those who live by such statements as ” I have a lot of gay friends who are wonderful people but I abhor their heinous sinful lifestyle”. That to me is not friendship and alliance, it is hyprocrisy. We need to be aware of this and not accept it because it is so juvenile and it is wrong.
Sheesh, I guess I should provide an open-discussion page now and then, so folks can vent over abortion.
(I’m pro-life but oppose a total ban on abortion, by the way. I believe reducing war, poverty, crime and environmental annihilation are of equal importance to reducing abortion.)
Back to the subject of this page:
Does anyone believe that Exodus can legitimately divorce itself of association with inflammatory and factually false views that it reprints without qualification?
As far as I’m concerned these issues over abortion are red herrings. After RU486 becomes widely available for purchase over the Internet–and it will–the issue will largely go away.
I’m not a big fan of abortion either–just trying to be practical. And the abortion issue has nothing to do with equal rights for gay people.
I do not use the ‘Jewish Nazi’ idea promiscuously. Rather it strikes me as a precise and apt anaology. Please pay attention to the context. Timothy, it would help to hear from you.
On Exodus and its associations, I can only say this. Exodus is to a large measure enabled by the Bridges Across effort. This effort does not hold e/cC opinions as being in any way an obstacle to respectful dialoge. Since I have recently been banned from that site, my thoughts may be considered somewhat off the mark. But my opinion is that BA more than any other LGB site lets Exodus produce its views as a legitimate expression.
I am extremely angry about BA and its treatment of me. And am ready to blow the whole thing out of the water. Please contact me at: dalea91505@hotmail.com for further information.
MikeA, you might well consider starting using “open comment threads.” Two topics that I have noticed often come to dominate comment threads are (i) abortion and (ii) guns. When either comes up, you know the thread is dead, even if Hitler isn’t mentioned.
As to the last, I’m referring to Godwin’s Law, of course.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
Dalea at October 26, 2005 12:41 AM
I do believe that the term “Jewish Nazi” primarily refers to the Jewish inmates at the Vernichtungslager–the extermination camps. They were referred to as “Kapo” It is an abbreviation–I don’t recall what it referred to but it may have been something like KonzentrazionsZentrumPolizist (concentration camp police). They entered into it to try to preserve themselves. It was a horrendous time over in Nazi occupied Europe–I have relatives there who lived there during that period. My partner’s grandfather was interred in the Dachau KZ–and he wasn’t Jewish.
Did it happen? Yes. Was it right for some people to try to save themselves at the possible expense of others? I’ll leave it for you to decide. I try to avoid moral judgements in an immoral world.
I’ll elaborate on my last comment merely to point out: did their efforts to try to save themselve succeed? Usually not.
My partner’s grandfather–who had been scheduled for execution while interred at the Dachau KZ–was saved only because the Americans liberated the camp before the execution could take place.
The plotting that took place to out Jews covered all possible bases. Some Jews were blackmailed with the torture and deaths of their families to out their peers. Sometimes food was bribe enough.
Jewish overseers were a part of the camp system as incentive for release and they were pressured to inform on any possible rebellions by the inmates.
Gays and lesbians were also situated in the same way.
Gay officers were used as bait in clubs and private homes of gay people to have them revealed and arrested.
The gay Nazi collaborators, as too their Jewish collaborators were eventually betrayed by the Nazis. They were summarily imprisoned or executed once the Nazis had no use for them.
As I have mentioned here before…I volunteer for the Museum of Tolerance founded by the late Nazi hunter, Simon Weisenthal.
There is much information about collaborators, blackmailers and who participated and why in the archives and how thoroughly the Nazis were in control and how they got that way.
Evil has no limit…up down or sideways as to what tool would be employed to flourish.
It’s really the subtleties of evil that people need to watch for.
It doesn’t take an extreme regime like Nazism to do considerable damage to another human being’s civil rights and protections.
Hello, our own President has offered his support of an amendment, that for THE FIRST TIME, would limit said protections against a SINGLE minority group.
He’s done it with a straight face, and done it in such a way that mirrors just how the Nazis became so powerful in the first place.
Hitler’s willing participants in the persecution of Jews, were after all, everyday Germans grown fatigued of depressed wages, lack of jobs and control of their resources.
Sound familiar?
All one has to do is place blame on the most vulnerable minority target and it’s on.
Instead of Jews…Bush picked gay people.
If he’s willing to be dangerous to gays because he’s feeling certain no one will object to his treatment of gays…imagine his next target.
No one is safe, if he can treat anyone this way.
It strikes me that there’s an obvious middle ground in the abortion debate that never comes up.
I believe a woman gets to do whatever she wants with her body but I don’t like the idea of abortion as birth control either. While technically a form of life exists at conception (or even before) that life is certainly not what can be considered a person – it has no emotions, no sense of self, no sense of sight, touch or pain or anything that resembles a person. Of course it gradually comes a person and we should have increasing concern for that commesurate with its state of existence. The critical differention between a group of cells that is only technically human and a real person are markers like the ability to feel pain or perceive. The development of a nerves which allows a fetus to feel pain is to me an obvious moral dividing line. Abortions prior to this point cannot be considered immoral (logically in my opinion) in even remotely the same way that those after that point can be.
An aside I thought interesting:
Raj said “As far as I’m concerned these issues over abortion are red herrings. After RU486 becomes widely available for purchase over the Internet–and it will–the issue will largely go away.”
This demonstrates how global communities of like minded individuals are forming and the world is asserting its perhaps inevitable dominion over nations and artificial boundaries. National laws are sometimes becoming irrelevant as they are superceded by the more powerful will of global groups unified by ideas and not borders. Internationalism helped byt the internet is allowing people to take back control of their own lives from the laws passed by people who wish to control lives other than their own. ‘Tis a good thing, no? No wonder religious conservatives are angry at modernity and globalism. No wonder third world and other religious nations are afraid of the legalization of equal marriage in countries like Canada. I feel tremendously proud and relieved to live in Canada. When I was younger the states seemed like just the flashier version of Canada. Now with the vicious war on gays spilling over the 49th paralell it sometimes feels like I’m living next to Iran. It looks like the backlash against Bush and the mess he’s made is coming, thank god. I don’t think this religious committment to putting out the most one sided hateful story possible is sustainable. I seek the cause of justice across all borders.
DaleA
“In terms of the gay rights movement, part of politics is to cultivate allies. They support us and we support them. For at least 35 years, the prochoice groups have been ardent allies of ours. In return we support them. It is a quid pro quo. The prochoicers stood with us long ago when we were almost alone in the public arena. They have probably been the most fervent ally of the gay movement from the beginning.”
This, unfortunately, is a myth.
Do pro-choice groups often support gay causes? Yes. But not at any cost to their own cause. And yet I’ve seen gay groups support a pro-choice candidate out of some sense of obligation over a more gay supportive candidate. I’ve seen gay groups organize precint walking for a pro-choice candidate who then votes against us when we need them.
What do our “leaders” do? Generally make excuses.
Having dabbled in gay politics, I’ve learned that coalition politics hurt you as often as they help you. I’ve seen votes lost for gay causes because our community endorsed positions (not at all related to gay equality) and alienated potential friends.
In California, I saw a bi-partisan effective gay lobby group torn apart over the insistence by some that the group take a position on illegal immigration. This was a “coalition politics” decision. Our voice is Sacramento has never recovered. We now have a situation where every vote on gay issues is party line (with a few anti-gay democrats siding with the Republicans). We’ve lost votes simply because the two or three Republicans who would vote with us have trouble with a lobby that takes positions against them on every issue – gay or not.
As Tim said “…sometimes we can find an ally in the most unlikeliest place and we need to embrace that now more than ever.”
I definitely support the notion of allies. Thank God for ’em. But not coalitions. Coalitions often eliminate allies.
It is this insistance on coalition politics that has lead to the extreme entrenchment we currently have, turning the gentlemanly sport of politics (irony) into outright war.
The best way to win in the long run is to be principled. Believe what you believe and state it clearly. If you stick to your principles and refuse to sell out for the sake of an alliance, you will find that some folks aren’t there for you – but they wouldn’t be there anyway if it cost them anything. You will also find, though, that there will be people there for you because you have changed their heart and mind, not just their allegiance. Those folks will be there for you always, you’ve tied your cause into their sence of being.
I tend to agree with Timothy’s last post. It is not necessary for groups ostensibly advocating for equal rights for gay people to take a stand on every issue. It is strange to expect gay-rights groups to take stands on illegal immigration. There are immigration rights groups (pro and anti) that I’m sure would welcome participation by gay people. Why do the gay-rights groups themselves need to get involved?
A couple of years ago, I noted that some of these gay-rights groups feel a need to scratch every itch that comes their way. There is a gay-rights Democrat-oriented political group here in Boston that published an article in the local gay newspaper BayWindows that went something to the effect that
–abortion is a gay issue because some gays might want to get an abortion
–welfare is a gay issue because some gays might need to have access to welfare
–health care is a gay issue because some gays might need to have access to health care
and on and on and on. At some point, the article became ludicrous. These issues aren’t “gay” issues merely because a gay person might need to make use of them. And there are advocacy groups for all of these issues, so there was no need for the gay-rights group to weigh in on the issues.
Regarding Timothy’s The best way to win in the long run is to be principled I tend to doubt that many of these groups are principled. Their leaderships have their pet issues which extend beyond gay rights, and they induce the groups to support those pet issues. The people who don’t have any particular interest in those pet issues leave, and the people who disagree with them on those issues also leave.
Just testing. 123…
LOL
OK, Mike, I got it. I’ll not mention a******n again in this page.
Actually we do veer pretty far from just watching and commenting on the antics of the ex-gays here, and I’m as guilty as any.
🙂
I know it’s been off-topic (for this particular post at XGW), but I think it’s been a good discussion…I’ve actually rather enjoyed reading the different points of view expressed on this topic. I get tired of people assuming that all gays need to think alike on all issues…
If I might respond to RAJ and his list.
The reason abortion is a gay issue is that years ago it was quite common for Lesbians to be raped. This seems to have been some sort of method of promoting heterosexuality. Many Lesbians became pregnant and wanted it over with quickly. That is why, IMHO, abortion is a gay issue.
On welfare and health care, it perhaps has not been noticed much here, but we are in the 25th year of an epidemic. Hundreds of thousands of us are dead. Hello? Am I the only one here who sees the connection between the great AIDS nightmare and these concerns?
From the beginning of the AIDS pandemic, when it was centered in the gay community, gay men faced a problem accessing health care. I can personally remember a time when all single men in my zip code had their insurance canceled. Several people I knew exhausted their life time benefits in under a week. From these stories and problems, there arose an understanding among some gay men, the more activist types, that health care is an issue of concern to gay men.
And as gay men were diagnosed, they had to have a way of surviving. Which for most meant a turn to the welfare system. And we discovered that gay men have no role in the system, and generally were able to receive nothing. Beyond the pittance of disability. For years, gay men everywhere struggled with the problems. And worked out solutions. So, it seems to me, that welfare is very much a gay male issue.
Timothy, someday you may come to know a gay man here on a short term visa. And may fall in love with him. Then you will learn why immigration is a gay male issue.
I think in some ways the article RAJ references dealt with these issues in a sort of shorthand, drawing on the shared calamities and lessons of the Plague Years.
Raj, Kapo is an abbreviation for Kameradenpolizei. I’ve used it before on this blog to describe the nature of professional exgays. Quite frankly, even though it’s demonizing and not PC, it is an accurate analogy.