Once again I have to thank Daily Queer News for information I had not seen elsewhere-since I can't view every website or blog.
First the link/article in Huffington Post discusses the issue of churches and the bible issues of slavery and homosexuality. The article si good but in fact misleading, as twice it says they re not the same when in fact they are exactly the same. The attempt to find ways to say they aren't is prejudice.
Second, the link from 365.com is important since I had not known the the military had in fact surveyed the men in the military in 1947 concerning integrating the military, plus a strange question about Jews. The results were not surprising, no matter what then or now you think of the intellgience of people serving inour Armed Forces. I found the views similar to the rest of society. But the vast majority opposed racial integration, and for some reason had a bad view of Jews.
President Truman ignored the results and integrated the military in 1948. We see the results gradually from then to today.
As the terrible treatment by the White house administration of the lady from Georgia shows, we need a leadership that goes by facts and is not diverted by ignorance, from the extreme left or right. And from the churches, and leaders of the NAACP we need leaders with the ability to be competent and ethical inspite of the Fox news idiots. What indeed would Jesus do?
Monday, July 26, 2010
Friday, July 23, 2010
Summer 2010 issue of (Evangelicals Concerned's) Review's-Book by University student on Liberty University
I think your reviewing the book by the Brown University student who went to Liberty University to see how it felt to be in such an environment is very interesting.
(And it is good that you some of your own educational background to show how you viewed the book)
The book is certainly a great contrast oto the current terrible tv news instant views of politics-such as the total mishanlding of the Sherrod speech.
So I hope we hear more from the author, Kevin Roose. And the title, The unlikely Disciple (A sinner's semester at America's holiest university) is what these lousy TV talk people should think about.
This young man saw that there was a difference among most students at some secular universities and others at religious universities, and thought it was his educational duty to learn about students who chose a religious school before he judged them. So he took time from Brown University to attend Liberty university. He found that he liked the students (I assume at Browdn too) at Liberty and that they were not that radical.
I wonder if we should not go to Tea Party meetings to see how they think before we think we "know" them. And that applies to conservatives and liberals, as there are 'conservatives' who don't like what we are hearing about the politics at these meetings. We assume liberals would not like them-the ideas, or people.
It is relevant, from my experience at ONE/HIC that if you are hosting an event YOU must be in control. Thus no posters should be there that are not relevant and any people trying to "use" your event to promote "their agenda' should be kicked out. So if Tea Party leaders are not racists, and i don't think they are, or even anti-gy, they need to get rid of the few bigots with posters giving a different voice.
I think this is what Roose is saying. We need to hear what people at Liberty University are saying and doing, so if we speak against them we are doing so accurately. and once you/I know someone I might not have as negative a view. (But I gather their racial views are still as hard to understand as those of the Tea party people, since both are interracial yet appear to have trouble with interracial couples, etc.)
One thought on the "News" section, I had not thought of Ed Koch that way, but if he defends the Pope he is being a hypocrite.
(And it is good that you some of your own educational background to show how you viewed the book)
The book is certainly a great contrast oto the current terrible tv news instant views of politics-such as the total mishanlding of the Sherrod speech.
So I hope we hear more from the author, Kevin Roose. And the title, The unlikely Disciple (A sinner's semester at America's holiest university) is what these lousy TV talk people should think about.
This young man saw that there was a difference among most students at some secular universities and others at religious universities, and thought it was his educational duty to learn about students who chose a religious school before he judged them. So he took time from Brown University to attend Liberty university. He found that he liked the students (I assume at Browdn too) at Liberty and that they were not that radical.
I wonder if we should not go to Tea Party meetings to see how they think before we think we "know" them. And that applies to conservatives and liberals, as there are 'conservatives' who don't like what we are hearing about the politics at these meetings. We assume liberals would not like them-the ideas, or people.
It is relevant, from my experience at ONE/HIC that if you are hosting an event YOU must be in control. Thus no posters should be there that are not relevant and any people trying to "use" your event to promote "their agenda' should be kicked out. So if Tea Party leaders are not racists, and i don't think they are, or even anti-gy, they need to get rid of the few bigots with posters giving a different voice.
I think this is what Roose is saying. We need to hear what people at Liberty University are saying and doing, so if we speak against them we are doing so accurately. and once you/I know someone I might not have as negative a view. (But I gather their racial views are still as hard to understand as those of the Tea party people, since both are interracial yet appear to have trouble with interracial couples, etc.)
One thought on the "News" section, I had not thought of Ed Koch that way, but if he defends the Pope he is being a hypocrite.
Timeline of ONE and its various parts
I think it is difficult to follow our history, even when there is no added agenda or who was right or wrong. And if we were/are homophile, homosexual or gay.
For instance, I am not sure I would say ONE (Institute) started in 1942, yet I see the idea that part of the library started then, as the private library of Jim Kepner. And it may be irrelevant that he first lent it to ONE and then took it back, as he then became an archive, changed the name to IGLA and then his part and Dorr's part joined, so it is confusing and should not be an issue of who was first but how it came to be.
Certainly ONE Institute and HIC have material no one else can have as we were first. But others now have material, such as Tretter at the University of Minnesota, and certainly the material in San Francisco at the GLHS. I assume Lambda Archives in San Diego has material from the time that city became active in the cause. And Stonewall in Fort Lauderdale has much good material, probably from Jack nichols, et al. Lesbian Herstory in New Yorkhas good lesbian material (is it natiolnal or East Coast) , as do ONE and Mazer. Gerber Hart in Chicago says it collects mainly material from the Midwest.
And the discussion about Gulf Coast Archives and Museum in Houston shows the difficulty that some of us have. First, it is still not really available and protected-from vandals and from nature. And apparently, surprise, it has personality problems, with leaders who did good work but hurt their own cause by being diffuclt and over-protective, etc.
I am sure you can talk about the issues of whether or not we should retain full control, or risk losing some to gain the protection of a university library, even though there is the political danger, especially in difficult economical times, that the bureaucrats might try to hide or censor the material when budgets are threatened by bigots' complaints.
I think we are the first generation dealing with this issue, so we are traveling a path no one else has-but then the issue may be generic, with black history facing th same thing.
But time forces us to start asking for funding to preserve materil before they are lost forever.
And while we have "primary sources," such as living pioneers, such as Frank Kameny.
For instance, I am not sure I would say ONE (Institute) started in 1942, yet I see the idea that part of the library started then, as the private library of Jim Kepner. And it may be irrelevant that he first lent it to ONE and then took it back, as he then became an archive, changed the name to IGLA and then his part and Dorr's part joined, so it is confusing and should not be an issue of who was first but how it came to be.
Certainly ONE Institute and HIC have material no one else can have as we were first. But others now have material, such as Tretter at the University of Minnesota, and certainly the material in San Francisco at the GLHS. I assume Lambda Archives in San Diego has material from the time that city became active in the cause. And Stonewall in Fort Lauderdale has much good material, probably from Jack nichols, et al. Lesbian Herstory in New Yorkhas good lesbian material (is it natiolnal or East Coast) , as do ONE and Mazer. Gerber Hart in Chicago says it collects mainly material from the Midwest.
And the discussion about Gulf Coast Archives and Museum in Houston shows the difficulty that some of us have. First, it is still not really available and protected-from vandals and from nature. And apparently, surprise, it has personality problems, with leaders who did good work but hurt their own cause by being diffuclt and over-protective, etc.
I am sure you can talk about the issues of whether or not we should retain full control, or risk losing some to gain the protection of a university library, even though there is the political danger, especially in difficult economical times, that the bureaucrats might try to hide or censor the material when budgets are threatened by bigots' complaints.
I think we are the first generation dealing with this issue, so we are traveling a path no one else has-but then the issue may be generic, with black history facing th same thing.
But time forces us to start asking for funding to preserve materil before they are lost forever.
And while we have "primary sources," such as living pioneers, such as Frank Kameny.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Articles in the August issue of OUT Magazine/Christopher Hitchens, etc
I am glad I was at the bookstore and glanced at the glbt publications, as I saws two items in the August issue of OUT Magazine that I think are worth people thinking about.
First, why has no one else, at least that I have heard, discussed Christopher Hitchen’s new book? He discusses, as you mention, his sexuality, including the already known sex among young men in England's/UK schools. Why is no one interested-is it because, (he won't like this but says so himself) he is not young and cute?
If ever there was a need for an excuse for discussing bisexuality, he has added one, and it is time to try to learn about humans. The irony is that he gives a different version, and one that many women use for becoming lesbians. He says he may be heterosexual today because he, as he grew older, became less sexually attractive to men, and women did find him attractive.
Second, and in a sense the same issue, being young and sexual, is a mention of an older and pioneer book on young homosexual males. I don't even remember reading the book, although ONE/HIC has it, and it was an important beginning on dealing with boys and homosexuality—so I wonder how many men then and young men today have read such a book as I'll get There? (Hope it's worth the price)
I think OUT is either getting better, or I am seeing things better—a challenge at 79.
First, why has no one else, at least that I have heard, discussed Christopher Hitchen’s new book? He discusses, as you mention, his sexuality, including the already known sex among young men in England's/UK schools. Why is no one interested-is it because, (he won't like this but says so himself) he is not young and cute?
If ever there was a need for an excuse for discussing bisexuality, he has added one, and it is time to try to learn about humans. The irony is that he gives a different version, and one that many women use for becoming lesbians. He says he may be heterosexual today because he, as he grew older, became less sexually attractive to men, and women did find him attractive.
Second, and in a sense the same issue, being young and sexual, is a mention of an older and pioneer book on young homosexual males. I don't even remember reading the book, although ONE/HIC has it, and it was an important beginning on dealing with boys and homosexuality—so I wonder how many men then and young men today have read such a book as I'll get There? (Hope it's worth the price)
I think OUT is either getting better, or I am seeing things better—a challenge at 79.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Hate Crime victims blamed—Op/Ed in July issue of Liberty Press/and glbt archives in KU
Sadly we have to remember what is discussed in the opinion article (Kristi Parker) about the comments blaming the man who was viciously attacked by 4 men in Lawrence. Some of us think of Lawrence as beign, like most large cities, a more enlightened space for glbt people. But what happened to the man there happened the same month in several large cities still.
And yet our efforts to educate are not always liked, as is discussed in Edtorially Speaking (Sheryl LeSage) when some parents oppose telling children about the real world, including homosexuality. as if talking about it it will make kids homosexual. In this case being lesbian in a sense kept someone from getting pregnant as happens, accidentaly, to too many young girls.
And it is good to read of the progress on the McKinney Collection of glbt material at the Spencer Research Library at the University of Kansas. It is luck that someone like Susan Thomas got the job of preparing the material for use. And had help from Tami Albin, and support from the library. There is now discussion in the community/movement for saving our history while we can-as is pointed out, that material came close to being thrown in the garbage.
And yet our efforts to educate are not always liked, as is discussed in Edtorially Speaking (Sheryl LeSage) when some parents oppose telling children about the real world, including homosexuality. as if talking about it it will make kids homosexual. In this case being lesbian in a sense kept someone from getting pregnant as happens, accidentaly, to too many young girls.
And it is good to read of the progress on the McKinney Collection of glbt material at the Spencer Research Library at the University of Kansas. It is luck that someone like Susan Thomas got the job of preparing the material for use. And had help from Tami Albin, and support from the library. There is now discussion in the community/movement for saving our history while we can-as is pointed out, that material came close to being thrown in the garbage.
Friday, July 9, 2010
ONE homosexual American thinks about the movement to found America and the movement to gain civil rights for glbt citizens
There is talk about getting mentor/elder programs going in the glbt community/movement because in a sense this is the first time there have been lgbt people who have been in a movement to gain civil/equal rights for homosexual/glbt citizens and have lived/experienced life as "out" citizens. (Don Kilhefner and others in L. A. is an example.)
What do young people need to hear from elders/mentors to help them understand how America came to be as it is for lgbt citizens?
I think there is a parallel between how our nation started and is today and how the glbt movement started and how it is today. It is not necessary to give a list of dates, names and events to say that in 1776 some people got together, in secret in a sense, to form a nation and to get rid of the domination of England, or any other country. It was not a great time to do this and there seemed little hope of defeating the military of England. And each generation since has had to work, fight and (many had to) die, to keep what those founders started and left for us.
In 1950 a group of homosexual citizens met in secret in Los Angeles and started an effort to educate themselves and then the rest of society on understanding homosexuality and trying to change society and the views of medicine, religion and legal professionals. It also was not a great time for such an undertaking- this was the McCarthy era. And just as there was a question of loyalty of some early Americans and if they supported England or the new efforts to become a separate nation among the people in 1776, there was a question of the loyalty of homosexual public officials in the 1950s. And yet the founders of this movement were successful, from the start, winning a historic, some say a "Rosa Parks" moment in this civil rights movement (Dale Jenning's victory in court, the first time someone had challenged the entrapment arrests of police) and then the U. S. Supreme Court victory in the ONE Magazine case. And each generation since has found more and more citizens, glbt and allies, who stepped forward to join the work.
The black civil rights movement has such legal victories as Brown v Board, and the homosexual civil rights movement has Lawrence v Texas.
The question is how much young people want to know about the ideals in the Declaration of Independence and those of early those Mattachine and later ONE meetings and found in ONE Magazine, and later the Mattchine Review, The Ladder, etc.
There are three issues that cause our troubles and even though they are connected, they can be easily be confronted. The start is the belief that our Constitution and the Bible are perfect. Neither are perfect. Both accepted slavery. That alone makes them imperfect. The founders recognized the moral problem, but compromised to get a nation started. It is less easy to explain how preachers, especially in the American South for generations quoted the Bible to affirm that black Americans were not equal to white Americans, or why at one time there were separate branches of major Christian churches, only because those branches supported slavery-the Methodist Church South and Southern Baptist Convention are two examples.
They have apologized now and admit their error-which means they misused the Bible and made laws based solely on a religious teaching that was wrong.
The day will come when the current religious “leaders” and politicians will apologize for their views on glbt citizens.
Connected to the religious issue is the part about child molestation. Recently on NBCs Meet the Press, a guest was discussing why America has difficulty in dealing with Afghan citizens and said that even though most of them didn't like the Taliban, and its extreme religious—and thus government rules, they can't like the current “government” people who come to their area and rape their boys. There had already been a documentary on this issue, dealing with warlords, which contradicts this theory. There is boylove in that and other Islamic nations. And there is worldwide confrontation with the Roman Catholic Church over priests who have molested children and those who protected them. Yet it is our community that is the one constantly falsely accused on being child molesters. As usual, those who attack others for a “sin” are merely fighting the sin that is theirs-projecting on others their problem.
The last issue, “it is icky,” was also discussed on TV when Fox News, no surprise, allowed Governor Huckabee to “explain” his words talking about why homosexuality is icky. He defended himself by saying he was merely quoting something in Edge Magazine, apparently words by a University of Chicago Law School professor-perhaps Martha Nussbaum. She immediately said he was misquoting her. But the fact is that that is an issue. But again, one hard to understand, since the acts those bigots say they find “icky” are performed by heterosexuals. They also have anal and oral sex—so it is time to confront them with their hypocrisy.
While we need to get rid of DADT, DOMA, etc, it is the personal things that seem our major problem, and one that has all along been said the easiest to solve, since once we come “out” and our relatives, neighbors, friends, fellow workers know who we are, the lies go away and the vast majority of Americans will be comfortable dealing with us. That is what is happening with racial issues too.
It is hard for young people to know that at one time there were laws preventing interracial marriage, etc. And one of the main “arguments” against such marriages was “what it will do to the children.” That is the current argument in glbt discussions of marriage, adoption, etc. This argument has lost power in the racial arena since all you have to do is look not only at the White house, but around you. Soon most of us will be interracial. Problem solved-the fact is that now if there is a “problem” with being interracial, it is a problem everyone has.
So it seems to me that there is a good reason to celebrate, as an American and as a homosexual/lgbt American. And to hope that young people will join in the effort to make our nation even more perfect.
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with Hotmail. Get busy.
What do young people need to hear from elders/mentors to help them understand how America came to be as it is for lgbt citizens?
I think there is a parallel between how our nation started and is today and how the glbt movement started and how it is today. It is not necessary to give a list of dates, names and events to say that in 1776 some people got together, in secret in a sense, to form a nation and to get rid of the domination of England, or any other country. It was not a great time to do this and there seemed little hope of defeating the military of England. And each generation since has had to work, fight and (many had to) die, to keep what those founders started and left for us.
In 1950 a group of homosexual citizens met in secret in Los Angeles and started an effort to educate themselves and then the rest of society on understanding homosexuality and trying to change society and the views of medicine, religion and legal professionals. It also was not a great time for such an undertaking- this was the McCarthy era. And just as there was a question of loyalty of some early Americans and if they supported England or the new efforts to become a separate nation among the people in 1776, there was a question of the loyalty of homosexual public officials in the 1950s. And yet the founders of this movement were successful, from the start, winning a historic, some say a "Rosa Parks" moment in this civil rights movement (Dale Jenning's victory in court, the first time someone had challenged the entrapment arrests of police) and then the U. S. Supreme Court victory in the ONE Magazine case. And each generation since has found more and more citizens, glbt and allies, who stepped forward to join the work.
The black civil rights movement has such legal victories as Brown v Board, and the homosexual civil rights movement has Lawrence v Texas.
The question is how much young people want to know about the ideals in the Declaration of Independence and those of early those Mattachine and later ONE meetings and found in ONE Magazine, and later the Mattchine Review, The Ladder, etc.
There are three issues that cause our troubles and even though they are connected, they can be easily be confronted. The start is the belief that our Constitution and the Bible are perfect. Neither are perfect. Both accepted slavery. That alone makes them imperfect. The founders recognized the moral problem, but compromised to get a nation started. It is less easy to explain how preachers, especially in the American South for generations quoted the Bible to affirm that black Americans were not equal to white Americans, or why at one time there were separate branches of major Christian churches, only because those branches supported slavery-the Methodist Church South and Southern Baptist Convention are two examples.
They have apologized now and admit their error-which means they misused the Bible and made laws based solely on a religious teaching that was wrong.
The day will come when the current religious “leaders” and politicians will apologize for their views on glbt citizens.
Connected to the religious issue is the part about child molestation. Recently on NBCs Meet the Press, a guest was discussing why America has difficulty in dealing with Afghan citizens and said that even though most of them didn't like the Taliban, and its extreme religious—and thus government rules, they can't like the current “government” people who come to their area and rape their boys. There had already been a documentary on this issue, dealing with warlords, which contradicts this theory. There is boylove in that and other Islamic nations. And there is worldwide confrontation with the Roman Catholic Church over priests who have molested children and those who protected them. Yet it is our community that is the one constantly falsely accused on being child molesters. As usual, those who attack others for a “sin” are merely fighting the sin that is theirs-projecting on others their problem.
The last issue, “it is icky,” was also discussed on TV when Fox News, no surprise, allowed Governor Huckabee to “explain” his words talking about why homosexuality is icky. He defended himself by saying he was merely quoting something in Edge Magazine, apparently words by a University of Chicago Law School professor-perhaps Martha Nussbaum. She immediately said he was misquoting her. But the fact is that that is an issue. But again, one hard to understand, since the acts those bigots say they find “icky” are performed by heterosexuals. They also have anal and oral sex—so it is time to confront them with their hypocrisy.
While we need to get rid of DADT, DOMA, etc, it is the personal things that seem our major problem, and one that has all along been said the easiest to solve, since once we come “out” and our relatives, neighbors, friends, fellow workers know who we are, the lies go away and the vast majority of Americans will be comfortable dealing with us. That is what is happening with racial issues too.
It is hard for young people to know that at one time there were laws preventing interracial marriage, etc. And one of the main “arguments” against such marriages was “what it will do to the children.” That is the current argument in glbt discussions of marriage, adoption, etc. This argument has lost power in the racial arena since all you have to do is look not only at the White house, but around you. Soon most of us will be interracial. Problem solved-the fact is that now if there is a “problem” with being interracial, it is a problem everyone has.
So it seems to me that there is a good reason to celebrate, as an American and as a homosexual/lgbt American. And to hope that young people will join in the effort to make our nation even more perfect.
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with Hotmail. Get busy.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
How ONE homosexual American feels about supporting/ celebrating the 4th of July and Pride events
There is talk about getting mentor/elder programs going in the glbt community/movement because in a sense this is the first time there have been lgbt people who have been in a movement to gain civil/equal rights for homosexual/glbt citizens and have lived/experienced life as "out" citizens. (Don Kilhefner (and others) in L. A. is an example.)
What do we old people think is important to tell young peope to help them understand how America/the unitd States came to be what it is today, for all Americans and for glbt Americans, and in sense Americans of minorities, such as black, even women, etc.
I think there is a parallel. It is not necessary to give a list of dates, names and events to say that in 1776 some people got together, in secret in a sense, to form a nation and to get rid of the domination of England, or any other country. It was not a great time to do this and there seemed little hope of defeating the military of England. And each generation since has had to work, fight and (many had to) die, to keep what those founders started and left for us.
In 1950 a group of homosexual citizens met in secret in Los Angeles and started an effort to educate themselves and then the rest of society on understanding homosexuality and trying to change society and the views of medicine, religion and legal professionals. It also was not a great time for such an undertaking- this was the McCarthy era. And just as there was a question of loyalty of some early Americans and if they supported England or the new efforts to become a separate nation among the people in 1776, there was a question of the loyalty of homosexual public officials in the 1950s. And yet the founders of this movement were successful, from the start, winning a historic, some say a "Rosa parks" moment in this civil rights movement (Dale Jenning's victory in court, the first time someone had challenged the entrapment arrests of police) and then the U. S. Supreme Court victory in the ONE Magazine case. And each generation since has found more and more citizens, glbt and allies, who stepped forward to join the work.
Most of us believe that life in America today is much better for all citizens, including minorities. The question is how much young people want to know how we got here and how best to keep making progress toward the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and the ideals discussed in those Mattachine and later ONE meetings and found in ONE Magazine, and later the Mattchine Review, The Ladder, etc. Or how much young people understand the need to know what is in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, and why there still is racism, sexism, nd bigotry in this nation.
It seems that no matter how often we hear of the enemies and the why heir thinking is wrong, we each generation have to remind citizens of why bigots must be defeated.
There are three issues that cause our troubles and even though they are connected, they can be easily be confronted. The start is the belief that our Constitution and the Bible are perfect. Neither are perfect. Both accepted slavery. That alone makes them imperfect. No one can say they believe in slavery today, but they did then. The founders recognized the moral problem, but compromised to get a nation started. It is less easy to explain how preachers, especially in the American South for generations quoted the Bible to affirm that black Americans were not equal to white Americans, or why at one time there were separate branches of major Christian churches, only because those branches supported slavery-the Methodist Church South and Southern Baptist Convention are two examples. Does anyone think they were right? They have apologized now and admit their error-which means they misused the Bible and made laws based solely on a religious teaching that was wrong.
The day will come when the current religious "leaders' and politicians will apologize for their views on glbt citizens.
Connected to the religious issue is the part about child molestation. Last Sunday on NBC/s Meet the press, a guest was discussing why America has difficulty in dealing with Afghan citizens and said that even though most of them didn't like the Taliban, and its extreme religious-and thus government rules, they can't like the current "government" people who come to their area and rape their boys. There had already been a documentary on this issue, dealing with warlords,which in a sense contradicts this statement. There is boylove in that and other islamic nations. And there is worldwide confrontation with the Roman Catholic Church over priests who have molested children and those who protected them. Yet it is our community that is the one constantly falsely accused on being child molesters. As usual, those who attack others for a "sin" are merely fighting the sine that is theirs-projecting on others there problem.
The last issue, "it is icky," was also discussed on tv last Sunday, when Fox News, no surprise, allowed Governor Huckabee to "explain" his words talking about why homosexuality is icky. He defended himself by saying he was merely quoting something in Edge Magazine, apparently words by a University of Chicago Law School professor-perhaps Martha Nussbaum. She immediately said he was misquoting her. But the fact is that that is an issue. But again, one hard to understand, since the acts those bigots say they find "icky" are performed by heterosexuals. They also have anl and oral sex. So it is time to confront them with their hypocrisy.
While we need to get rid of DADT, DOMA, etc, it is the personal things that seem our major problem, and one that has all along been said the easiest to solve, since once we come "out" and our relatives, neighbors, friends, fellow workers know who we are, the lies go away and the vast majority of Americans will be comfortable dealing with us. That is what is happening with racial issues too.
It is hard for young people to know that at one time there were laws preventing people from interracial marriage, etc. And one of the main "arguments' against such marriages was "what it will do to the children." That is the current argument in glbt discussions of marriage, adoption, etc. This argument has lost power in the racial arena since all you have to do is look not only at the White house, but around you. Soon, openly most of us will be interracial. Problem solved-the fact is that now if there is a "problem" with being interracial, it is a problem everyone has.
So it seems to me that there is a good reason to celebrate, as an American and as a homosexual/lgbt American. And to hope that young people will join in the effort to make our nation even more perfect.
What do we old people think is important to tell young peope to help them understand how America/the unitd States came to be what it is today, for all Americans and for glbt Americans, and in sense Americans of minorities, such as black, even women, etc.
I think there is a parallel. It is not necessary to give a list of dates, names and events to say that in 1776 some people got together, in secret in a sense, to form a nation and to get rid of the domination of England, or any other country. It was not a great time to do this and there seemed little hope of defeating the military of England. And each generation since has had to work, fight and (many had to) die, to keep what those founders started and left for us.
In 1950 a group of homosexual citizens met in secret in Los Angeles and started an effort to educate themselves and then the rest of society on understanding homosexuality and trying to change society and the views of medicine, religion and legal professionals. It also was not a great time for such an undertaking- this was the McCarthy era. And just as there was a question of loyalty of some early Americans and if they supported England or the new efforts to become a separate nation among the people in 1776, there was a question of the loyalty of homosexual public officials in the 1950s. And yet the founders of this movement were successful, from the start, winning a historic, some say a "Rosa parks" moment in this civil rights movement (Dale Jenning's victory in court, the first time someone had challenged the entrapment arrests of police) and then the U. S. Supreme Court victory in the ONE Magazine case. And each generation since has found more and more citizens, glbt and allies, who stepped forward to join the work.
Most of us believe that life in America today is much better for all citizens, including minorities. The question is how much young people want to know how we got here and how best to keep making progress toward the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and the ideals discussed in those Mattachine and later ONE meetings and found in ONE Magazine, and later the Mattchine Review, The Ladder, etc. Or how much young people understand the need to know what is in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, and why there still is racism, sexism, nd bigotry in this nation.
It seems that no matter how often we hear of the enemies and the why heir thinking is wrong, we each generation have to remind citizens of why bigots must be defeated.
There are three issues that cause our troubles and even though they are connected, they can be easily be confronted. The start is the belief that our Constitution and the Bible are perfect. Neither are perfect. Both accepted slavery. That alone makes them imperfect. No one can say they believe in slavery today, but they did then. The founders recognized the moral problem, but compromised to get a nation started. It is less easy to explain how preachers, especially in the American South for generations quoted the Bible to affirm that black Americans were not equal to white Americans, or why at one time there were separate branches of major Christian churches, only because those branches supported slavery-the Methodist Church South and Southern Baptist Convention are two examples. Does anyone think they were right? They have apologized now and admit their error-which means they misused the Bible and made laws based solely on a religious teaching that was wrong.
The day will come when the current religious "leaders' and politicians will apologize for their views on glbt citizens.
Connected to the religious issue is the part about child molestation. Last Sunday on NBC/s Meet the press, a guest was discussing why America has difficulty in dealing with Afghan citizens and said that even though most of them didn't like the Taliban, and its extreme religious-and thus government rules, they can't like the current "government" people who come to their area and rape their boys. There had already been a documentary on this issue, dealing with warlords,which in a sense contradicts this statement. There is boylove in that and other islamic nations. And there is worldwide confrontation with the Roman Catholic Church over priests who have molested children and those who protected them. Yet it is our community that is the one constantly falsely accused on being child molesters. As usual, those who attack others for a "sin" are merely fighting the sine that is theirs-projecting on others there problem.
The last issue, "it is icky," was also discussed on tv last Sunday, when Fox News, no surprise, allowed Governor Huckabee to "explain" his words talking about why homosexuality is icky. He defended himself by saying he was merely quoting something in Edge Magazine, apparently words by a University of Chicago Law School professor-perhaps Martha Nussbaum. She immediately said he was misquoting her. But the fact is that that is an issue. But again, one hard to understand, since the acts those bigots say they find "icky" are performed by heterosexuals. They also have anl and oral sex. So it is time to confront them with their hypocrisy.
While we need to get rid of DADT, DOMA, etc, it is the personal things that seem our major problem, and one that has all along been said the easiest to solve, since once we come "out" and our relatives, neighbors, friends, fellow workers know who we are, the lies go away and the vast majority of Americans will be comfortable dealing with us. That is what is happening with racial issues too.
It is hard for young people to know that at one time there were laws preventing people from interracial marriage, etc. And one of the main "arguments' against such marriages was "what it will do to the children." That is the current argument in glbt discussions of marriage, adoption, etc. This argument has lost power in the racial arena since all you have to do is look not only at the White house, but around you. Soon, openly most of us will be interracial. Problem solved-the fact is that now if there is a "problem" with being interracial, it is a problem everyone has.
So it seems to me that there is a good reason to celebrate, as an American and as a homosexual/lgbt American. And to hope that young people will join in the effort to make our nation even more perfect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
