Considering the large percentage of Black Men who are on the Down Low,  ‘gay’ marriage shouldn’t be an issue in the black ‘community’.

To argue that the principles and details of the argument against SSM and interracial marriage are almost identical {they are} isn’t making any comparison in any other aspect. The details and personal experiences may be vastly different but that doesn’t change the fact that it is still an equality and civil rights issue.
Women couldn’t vote at one point. Was that not a civil rights and equality issue because they were white women?
An emotional reaction may be understandable, but it’s still wrong.

in other words the black community is overwhelmingly homophobic.

You have two articles based off one interview how lazy are you?

 The Down Low????…..ohhhhhhhhh do you mean like the arizona sheriff that was sneaking and having gay sex with the mexican immigrant and was whoring himself out privately on Gay pick-up websites….or does white folks Down Low work differently than that???

Listening to a conservative* trying to make sense on this is just cringeworthy. Michael Steele sounds like an imbecile the way he can’t stay on-topic, relevant, measured, and reasoned. He is clearly trying to avoid actually addressing the merits of the issue: he has no confidence he can win such an argument. So, Steele deflects.

* note: not that I think this is a conservative trait. Anti-gay marriage and anti-contraception and life-at-conception big, intrusive government legislation has spread like wildfire in the Republican leadership recently (and in Colorado, Mississippi, Virginia, …). If you reasonable conservatives don’t want conservatism painted with such broad brushes, my sympathies, but please take back your party from the lunatics. We reasonable liberals and independents are getting tired and unhealthy from having no rational opposition party to govern with.

Actually it IS somewhat different.

 The % of black.’men’ who are on the Down Low is higher than any other demographic. But, here is the Real Laugh Riot. Black men go out and do this, bring STD’s back home to Shawnisha and Don’t Consider Themselves to be kweer.

 There is a book on the subject (written by a black man) and there was a feature article in  the Sunday NYT  Magazine, a couple of years ago. Sorry I don’t have links, but a sassy smart-mouthed little goo gobbler like you shouldn’t have any trouble Googling it up.

The issue of marriage equality continues to gain steam in the political
media, with every Republican presidential candidate proposing a
Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage,

Ron Paul is proposing a marriage amendment? Does he know this?

Steele looks like a Black (African American) Penguin.  

there was no marriage equality bill……there was a gay marriage bill

As a gay man, I have never compared the civil rights struggle between blacks and gays. What exactly would I say in that regard, that gays were slaves and were considered 3/5th of a person? It’s a stupid argument. Of course the situations aren’t the same.

The only comparison I’ve ever made has to do with interracial marriage and same-sex marriage. The scenarios are almost exactly the same. At one time, 30 out of 48 states had bans on interracial marriage. Does that sound familiar? During that time, 92% of the public disapproved of race-mixing; and people back then used the Bible to validate their position. When the Supreme Court forced interracial marriage on the entire country, 72% still disapproved of it. Had the Supreme Court bowed to the “will of the people” and let them decide the matter, it would have taken an additional 24 years until it was approved. I wonder if Mr. Steele would have been okay with waiting decades for that type of bigotry to be abolished? I sincerely doubt it. Of course, had interracial marriage been left to a public referendum, President Obama wouldn’t be president because his parents wouldn’t have been able to marry.

That’s why Gov. Christie’s call for a referendum on same-sex marriage rings so hollow. Because the majority seldom (if ever) supports the rights of a disfavored minority. The public should never be permitted to vote on civil rights issues. — Yes, the Supreme Court has said numerous times that marriage is a civil right. So much so, that even (straight) murderers that have life-sentences in prison have the right to marry. I’d love to hear Mr. Steele defend the civil rights of a murderer over those of gay citizens.

“I do not support gay marriage because of my own religious tenets and my faith tradition.”

I didn’t realize that our legal system and Constitution were based on his chosen religious beliefs? Oh, that’s right, they’re not. The United States is a secular society (for the time being); and someone might want to inform Mr. Steele that NON-religious straight couples are permitted to marry in our country. So why isn’t Michael (or any GOP candidate) opposed to those un-Godly marriages? This has less to do with marriage, and more to do with his chosen belief that gay people are immoral and shouldn’t be thought of as equal members of society. He’s entitled to his opinion. But he’s not entitled to use that opinion as justification to discriminate against other Americans.

> As a friend of mine from Baltimore said, when he saw that interview.
‘I nearly went through my
> television because when was the last time you
were chained to a ship and shipped somewhere?
> When was the last time you
were separated from your mother or your father and your sister or
> your
brother because of the color of your skin?’”

Probably the same time as his. After all, in case you missed the news… there IS such a thing as black homosexuals.

Besides, that still doesn’t make the argument any less nonsensical. “When was the last time… that you were separated from your mother or your father… because of the color of your skin?” Ummm… would that be over a century and a half ago? Because odds are, that did not happen to you.. or your parents… or your grandparents… get my point?

If you want to talk about who it DID happen to, and who is still alive, you’d have to talk to the aboriginals in Canada. (Not that Americans were any better in how they treated their own aboriginals, now, were they?) They had that and worse happen to them, so you should be careful about doing comparisons.

How about two rules?

First, let’s stop comparing really bad injustice with unimaginably horrible injustice. Slavery is pretty much incomparable with anything short of genocide.

Second, let’s not take the position that anyone has to win a gold medal at the oppression Olympics to qualify for justice.

The similarity between interracial marriage and gay marriage is in the quality of the arguments against each. It is the bigotry that makes them analogous.

I find it amazing and, frankly, mind-boggling that people have an issue with comparing gay rights to black rights.  Let’s compare the history a bit.  The Black struggle for freedom started approximately 400 years ago with the slave trade.  Those who remained in their native lands were not subjected to the same problems as those who came to these shores.  The struggle for Black equality and freedom was an American issue and has been largely resolved today.  Now let’s look at homosexuals.  The animus against homosexuals goes far into the mists of history.  We are constantly confronted with passages (though misinterpreted) from the Bible condemning homosexuals and calling for the death penalty.  If we look at country by country over the last two millennia, we see the constant persecution of homosexuals including, torture, loss of life, loss of job, loss of housing etc.  This continues today with some African countries enacting NEW laws calling for the execution of homosexuals.  When people say we can’t compare the struggle for black rights with the struggle for homosexual rights, they are, in fact, correct in saying this, for how can 400 years in one country adequately be compared to thousands of years of persecution in hundreds of countries continuing to the present day?

It also ignores the reality of how many Gay children are thrown out of their homes for being Gay.  I guess that does not count as separation from parents and siblings. Maybe he should ask his friend how many black children are disowned for being black.

No it was a bill to grant gay people equal marriage rights. 

I’m still waiting for someone to explain to me why the term “homophobic” is used to reference those opposed to gay marriage. Or even those who are plainly bigoted against gays. They don’t fear gays in the same way an arachnophobic is afraid of spiders. We need a new word. Maybe homist. Or queerist.

That was the very first thing that ran thru my mind. TC just likes to make up his own facts when they are convenient to him.

As a straight man and a conservative, I completely agree. This issue just makes conservatives look stupid. Tell the government to get out of our bedrooms. Vote Ron Paul in 2012.

Wrong. Gay children being disowned by their family is not the same as families being torn apart by institutionalized slavery. Listen, I’m the last to play the race or slavery card, but you just can’t equate those two situations.

You would not feel that way if you were the kid being disowned. You are right in one thing you can’t compare the two read JKomar’s post above for a more realistic assessment. But then a straight man, who uses a tag name like the one you use, has no concept of injustices anyway.

How you can compare them is that citizens in this great country of ours were/are trying to make people a little less equal based on their own biases/prejudices.  Period.  It is time to stop.

Hey, sport, I’m on your side. I’m
just saying the parallel you are trying draw is way off. Both situations are bad. But you’re equating an issue regarding a family’s culture with an institutionalized issue. There just is no comparison.

As for my name, it’s just tongue in cheek. Don’t get your whiny, liberal, pc panties all in a wad.

Funny how the people who usually equate the “gay struggle” with civil rights are white.

exactly, grant gay people marriage rights……..not make marriage equal for everyone

I agree that gays should have the right to marry, but trying to attach that issue to black civil rights is a tricky thing. Many blacks either don’t support gay marriage or are uncomfortable with gays using the black civil rights movement as a benchmark for their own attempts at equal rights. Also, there are instances of people who used to be gay, but I have never met anyone who used to be black. Gays should stick to their own arguments and let it stand on its own merits.     

The problem with linking the two for many African-Americans, is the fact that one issue involves skin color, while the other deals with one’s sexual preferences and/or behavior. I’ve met people who used to be gay, and there are examples out there (Ann Hesch), but I have never met anyone who used to be black.

Not everyone who is afraid of spiders screams and runs away. {I do, bit not everyone does} 
Phobic just means an irrational fear or aversion. If you believe SSM will somehow harm society and the institution of marriage with absolutely no good reason to believe  such a thing, then homophobic applies. People understandably object to the term as they do being called a bigot because our society seems to interpret in extremes right now, however, the actual definitions mean that.

Guess I never thought of it in the context of aversion. Makes sense in that context.

It is a civil rights issue without a doubt. I don’t think gays are constantly comparing it to the civil rights movement of black Americans. I think that is done by default when calling it an equality or civil rights issue, but since that’s exactly what is is, that’s how it should be referred to. 2ndly; it’s understandable that it would be compared to the farily recent issue of interracial marriage. In fact if you look at the arguments presented agasint interracial marriage you’ll find they are nearly identical in nature. It’s agasint God and nature. It will lead to the downfall of society, and other stupidity we readily acknowledge as stupidity now, yet somehow repeat for SSM.

It’s certainly understandable andproper that interracial marriage would come up as part of the discussion of our current marriage issue. It has nothing at all to do with who suffered the most and you’d think those who have suffered the pain of inequality could find it in themsleves to defend others.

Not that it’s incredibly relevant but let’s look at the different ways bigotry has affected the two groups. With a few rare exceptions you can’t hide being black. Your friends and family know you’re black, are also black,  and you hopefully have a kin ship and supportive relationship with them. You can’t hide it from society as a whole so black Americans and society were forced to deal with it in a certain way.

OTOH, gays were  hated outcasts, sick and perverted, who could and did hide. In fact the concept of sick and perverted was so pervasive that many gays denied who they were to themselves, or often lived in fear of being found out. When people did come out they suffered the rejection, even hatred,  of friends and family. How can we say one is clearly far worse than the other?

What we do know is that innocent people suffered needlessly at the hands of their fellow humans for no other reason than some inherent quality of how they were born. Hopefully we can recognize how incredibly wrong that is and continue to work against that kind of thoughtless needless bigotry.

Certainly the two aren’t the same but can we say with certainty that one is far more painful than the other? Keep in mind that family members being sold away hasn’t happened for a few  generations, while gays are still experiencing being cast out and rejected by their own families.

Steele was chained on a ship and separated from his mother? Huh? I gotta say, I think we’re past the time when any living blacks were once slaves. It’s a little cheesy to be a well placed, wealthy black man and complaining about stuff that happened to your ancestors (maybe) but not to yourself. 

 Yes most of the earliest  Blacks were the only people who came to the US involuntarily.  Separated from their parents.  No other ethnic group can compare in this regard.  I say ethnic group on purpose since the physical differences between “races” are only superficial ie, literally only skin deep.  There may be no comparison however I still think there Homosexuals should be permitted to marry each other and divorce for that matter.  Love is love no matter what the sexual orientation.   I wonder how many who are not for gay marriage is because subconsciously they want to believe homosexuality exists?  They don’t want to confront the reality?  

Gays were being gassed and burned in concentration camps, right alongside of the Jews. There may have been far less of them, but that certainly doesn’t mean they suffered any less. Matthew Shepard was tied to a fence post, beaten and left to die. In other words, he was lynched. Yes, you can equate the two situations.

Except Ron Paul wants to be in your uterus. He doesn’t want you to have a right to choose.

The knee jerk reaction many African Americans have to the comparison of the black civil rights movement to the gay civil rights movement is very revealing. I think many African Americans don’t like the scrutiny they face as members of an oppressed group who are now advocating for the oppression of another group. Hypocrisy much?

So instead of facing that hypocrisy head on, and acknowledging it one way or the other, they attempt to deny that gays face discrimination at all, or that they play any part of perpetuating it. No, the discrimination I face as a gay man does not compare to the historical discrimination faced by the African American community overall. But the denial of my right to marry ABSOLUTELY does compare to the denial of marriage rights faced by mixed race couples before Loving vs. Virginia settled that in 1967.

Jews have endured a significant amount of prejudice and bigotry here in the US.  Can we not compare another group’s struggles to overcome similar prejudices to theirs because of the Holocaust?  In Nazi Germany, there were anti-miscegenation laws prohibiting Jews from marrying Aryans.  Would Mr Steele have a problem with a comparison between those laws and the US anti-miscegenation laws targeted at black people?  Comparing different anti-miscegenation laws (and make no mistake, that’s what prohibiting gay marriage is) does not mean that we’re comparing all aspects of one group to another. 

Yes. And witches were burned at the stake in Salem and all over Europe. Guess we should lump wiccans in there, too. You guys are missing the point here. Blacks can rightfully argue that they were institutionally separated from their families through slavery. That is, the economic system and the political system of the time allowed for a child to be torn from his parents, a husband from his wife and kids with the stroke of a pen and the exchange of money. Gays cannot make the same argument. What you are talking about is disownment and estrangement. No one is out there taking gay children away from their parents. it is simply not an equal argument. And for the record, you can equate Matthew Shepard’s “lynching” as you put it once thousands of gays have been killed just for being gay. And just for the record, let me once again state that you are arguing with someone on your side. I support equal rights for gays. I just think that the idea of equating the way families were torn apart by slavery to the estrangement of gay people from their families is wrong. The situations are completely different.

Ron Paul has no desire to be in anyone’s uterus. If you listened to Dr. Paul you would realize that he clearly states the federal government has no place in dictating abortion laws. And based upon his principled record you should know that as president he would keep that view. He believes it’s a state’s rights issue. Just the same as how some states have laws on the books that say a murderer of a pregnant woman can be charged with two murders while other states would only allow for a single charge against the mother. Ron Paul is the only candidate for president in either major party that wouldn’t try to force his beliefs on abortion on anyone.

Actually Beau, you have NOT met anyone who “used” to be gay.  Ann Hesch is bi-sexual and she has an option of sexuality.  Obviously you never lived in the south or you would have known black people who used to “pass” for while because of their light skin.  In both cases the people have to hide their true identity.  Whether it’s gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity or religion (a preference) the comparisons are the same but thousands of years of discrimination can not be ignored.

Except for black people like Mrs. Martin Luther King, Jr. who was very outspoken and one of the first to compare the struggle for gay rights to that black people.

Then you don’t know much about the history of homosexuals.  Many were indeed taken from their families put in prison and/or executed.  Very recently, in Nazi Germany, homosexuals were taken from families and put in concentration camps as hard labor.  Most didn’t survive.

Persecution of gays in Nazi Germany is irrelevant to this conversation. We’re talking about gay rights in this country. What happened in another country over a half century ago is immaterial to this conversation.

So only persecution during the selected time limits and locations are now acceptable?  LOL  Well homosexuals have and continue to be persecuted in this country with little legal protection in many places.  Not to mention the bullying which has caused untold suicides. How many black kids have been bullied into suicide because they were black recently? How many black kids have been thrown out on the streets by their families because they were black? You can’t compare ongoing discrimination with ancient history very well, can you?

Thank you. You have finally ceded and reaffirmed my point. You just as much as admitted that you can’t compare the discrimination issues of gay with blacks. Thanks for finally coming around.

I never disagreed with the point that comparing 2000 years of continuing persecution of homosexuals can hardly compare with a few hundred years for blacks which ended sometimes ago.  Glad you agree!

True, it’s much worse. Few black kids are thrown out of their homes because they are black.

Ok. This is the last time I’m responding. We’re just going in circles now. Originally a point was made about blacks in this country being torn apart from their families through the slave trade being equal to parents of gay children disowning them. My only point of observation is that it is a false equivalency to compare the two. For blacks during the slave trade to be separated from their family was against the choice of all involved. In today’s modern family – the context the comment was originally made in – there is at least one willing member in the family that takes part in the action of separating the family. End of story.

I see your point.  It would be much worse to have your own family disown you.  If an outside force separates a family, there’s always the dim hope that you could be re-united one day, but when your own family discards you, there is no hope of going home.  That is far more brutal and I never thought of it that way.  You’re right.

The attempts to keep gay marriage illegal are identical to the attempts to keep interracial marriage illegal. The arguments used are exactly the same. If anybody has a problem with comparing the two, they need to get the hell over it.

There is reasonable correlation. How is the argument devalued by the opinions of a largely religious african american base? That’s a non-sequitur. IMHO this is a parallel to equal voting rights.