Pertaining to this discussion: tolerance is not the same as acceptance according to Dr. Laura. I thought I might just throw that in here. It's true that just because we tolerate something doesn't mean we are accepting the situation regarding homosexual life style. To my view of the issue, homosexuality is more a life style than anything else. It comes with a variety of financial perks and less responsibility toward others. (Volunterism and community service is not the same as a wholehearted commitment to those we are dedicated to such as in a family with a father, mother, and their children who have so much to offer society in the long run).

By Roberto (205.188.192.167) on Friday, May 11, 2001 - 05:41 pm:

Frankie:

I agree with your statements. On your point of knowing the pain of discrimination regardless were it comes from is especially important in that succeeding generations tend to not know or forget the past.

I had a conversation with a young black male today who knew nothing of the legacy of Jim Crow, or why there was a great black migration from the south to the north. Who fault is that? Is it the schools, parenting, or the culture itself?

I remember reading a story sometime ago about the Steven Spielberg who made the movie "Schindler's List" was so troubled by the story he heard about the laughter, and joking of black teenagers viewing the film and some of the footage during a school history class that he personally had them brought to a seminar on the horrors of Nazism.

People tend to be provincial in their thinking. This can be said of us blacks as well. Any injustice anywhere in the world whether its gays in America or the aboriginals in Australia is an injustice to us all. ~ Roberto

By Frankie (128.164.161.253) on Friday, May 11, 2001 - 03:31 pm:

Roberto,

Actually, white Southern fears of black male sexuality really took off after abolition. During slavery, since slaves were legal property, there was a quiet understanding among whites that white women will sometimes have sex with black men. It was generally not talked about. Problems only arose if the woman got pregnant. But after slaves were freed, that's when white men became paranoid that white women would succumb to the perceived sexual charisma of black men.

I'll agree that the discrimination faced by gays comes nowhere near the level faced by blacks. I just believe that knowing all the pain that discrimination has caused should make us especially vigilant against other types as well.

By Roberto (152.163.204.74) on Thursday, May 10, 2001 - 11:53 pm:

Frankie:

Being paranoid has on more than one occasion saved my life. In this world of "Only the Strong Survive" and "Smiling Faces Telling Lies", remember Jerry Butler singing those hits, a little paranoia is a good prescription to live a long and healthy life. It is naivety that is not an option that can put you in the grave. I cannot afford to live in a fantasy world as so many people today live, who would be "the sheep" for the slaughter by the predators of this world.

Sorry, I do not believe in gay marriages. Allowing it like Hawaii and the "left coast" California, San Francisco specifically, would mean setting a dangerous precedent for futher moral decay of this society. Frankie, right now I'm reading in what little time I have "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" by Edward Gibbon, abridged by D.M. Low, 1968. I'm amazed by the parallels of our American Empire and that of Rome. The cancer of immorality that seeped into the Roman Empire was just one of the rots that eventually destroyed it from within along with other factors such as overextension of empire, illegal immigration, a myriad of enemies outside of its empire, and the lack of focus to deal with problems and dangers by its leaders, sounds familiar?

Your points about media depictions is valid. But, these stereotypes serve a purpose in not dealing with reality. It has been said that Americans in general do not want to deal with reality. That is why we saturate ourselves with sports, entertainment, create the demand for illegal drugs, drink ourselves to death, and are sex crazed to the point of obsession. Of course, the ways gays are portrayed, just as blacks were and are still are, is to attract an audience to "make the money". Stereotyping makes money. Even blacks play the game of stereotyping to make the money.

You think the American audience will tune into a reality show other than "Survival"?

On the statement I made about gays wanting younger and younger children. I stand by that as far as homosexual pedofiles are concern. Yes, it does parallel in the minds of many that this thinking is like that of Jim Crow era of keeping black men from wanting white women. Of course in those days white women secretly pursued black men for their percieved sexual power, because of the breeding system in which black males were used as steers. White men knew of this intense desire of white women to have black males, so hence the Jim Crow Laws came into being in the last century to keep white women from black men.

As far as the gay pedofiles are concern, there are no laws (yet) that systematically prevent them from accessing young children that is institutionalized to the point where it becomes a national apartheid system (like Jim Crow) that was enforced with violence and systematic discrimination. For that, I see no parallels in the true since of gays with blacks today on your point of the two being equal. ~ Roberto

By Ishvara (4.54.118.189) on Thursday, May 10, 2001 - 05:39 pm:

Roberto you are so right I thank you for your clarification. The language used was strong and gave me the wrong impression. Blacks have had it the worse. It makes me want to weep at the injustices heaped upon such strong and beautiful people, I feel a helpless sort of rage. It irritates me. I think they get so much abuse b/c others are jealous. Continuosly they are robbed of dignity, culture and self respect to highlight a few. In no way do I see a correlation between what it is to be black and what it is to be gay. These are two separate distinct issues and need to remain so.

By Roberto (64.12.105.54) on Thursday, May 10, 2001 - 05:31 pm:

Melirosa:

NAMBLA (National Association for Man and Boy Love) is a horrific organization of pedofiles. They are bold and arrogant in their desire to live out their perverted existence. I will never forget the photo I once saw of one of them who proudly displayed himself lying beside a young boy about eight years old in a fully erected state. These people are evil. Efforts on the part of religious and conservative organizations to legaly put these people out of business is ongoing. I must thank the conservative talk shows like Micheal Savage, Micheal Reagan (son of President Reagan), Ken Hamblin, Dr. Laura, and Rush Limbaugh for exposing this organization. ~ Roberto

By Roberto (64.12.105.54) on Thursday, May 10, 2001 - 05:17 pm:

"I find it funny that those who were persecuted for so long hold the same sort of views of those who persecuted them". ~ Ishvara

How true. It shows our frailties as humans, we all tend to be monsters like those who would oppress us, or at least have the potential to be. No one has a monopoly on evil, and no one is a saint.

I will not say in that old tired phrase, "some of my best friends are". I realize that all gay men are not molesters of children, anymore than all black men are rapist and thiefs. Same gender sexual relations is not on par with that of a man and woman. It does not sustain the human existence to continue in its creation.

I'm in favor of rights for everyone. I do not want to see lesbians and gays persecuted, because if they are put to the stake, its just a matter of time when the forces that tries to silence them will come after me. I do believe in "Live and Let Live", just do not try to impose your will on me or as they use to say in Colonial Revolutionary Times , "Do Not Thread On Me".

Blacks have suffered an injustice in this country that gays have never and will never experience. How many thousands of gays have you heard were castrated or lynch for their perceived sexual attention to the opposite sex. ~ Roberto

By Ishvara (38.163.112.41) on Thursday, May 10, 2001 - 10:25 am:

I have never heard of such stuff. There really is a group out their actively and publically promoting the sexual use of children?!?!?! That's for real?! How can and do they get away with it. God help them speaking that kind of trash around babies, children are the innocent how could they expose them to that?

By Frankie (128.164.161.248) on Thursday, May 10, 2001 - 10:20 am:

Roberto,

You asked me if I think you’re a bit paranoid, and I’m afraid I would have to say that it certainly seems that way. Gays are no more or no less likely to be pedophiles than straight people. Yes, they are a generally wealthier and better-educated minority, but that doesn’t mean that their behavior behind closed doors means that they give up something as basic as marriage. In fact, allowing gays to marry would discourage some of the reckless behavior by some elements of that group. If they believe that they should marry and settle down, it would discourage promiscuity.

The nuclear family really came about with the advent of modern transportation and the Industrial Revolution. Prior to that, the requirments of an agrarian economy often required several generations under one roof. My parents were the first generation to have their own home after they married. I think nuclear families are probably best suited to raise children, cause man and women bring different skill sets to parenting. As for gays adopting kids - there are so many kids who need to be adopted, it seems wrong to deny a willing couple because they are gay.

As far as the media goes, my main qualm is how they depict lesbians. On TV or the movies, they are almost always depicted as lipstick lesbians - cute, leggy creatures who just happen to have sex with women. Most of the lesbians I’ve met and worked with lean more towards the butch side. The film “Chasing Amy” had a great scene where a young gay black man spoke about this, and how straight men have these preconceptions of gays.

My problem with this is the same as with 1970s sitcoms like All in the Family, Good Times, etc, where black people were depicted as being oh so nice and polite if you only got to know them. Well, then white people met black people in real life, and guess what, they’re not like TV characters. Sure, some are nice, but like the population at large, plenty are annoying, obnoxious, and rude. On TV now, gays are shown as charming, witty, and urbane. Some probably are - but I’m sure there are plenty that are not. The constant repition of such images sets up false impressions. When I first started dating my old African-Am girlfriend, I thought I would make some small talk about music, and I mentioned how I like hip-hop (along with other types of music). She told me she abhored hip-hop/rap music because of how many of the acts depict women and the incessant cursing. There are quite a few black people that cannot stand that music, but their voices are usually muffled, because pop culture and the media likes nice generalizations. It’s been done with racial minorities, and now its being done to homosexuals.

And your statement that gays want younger and younger boys, how is that any different from the bigoted view of Jim Crow era white southerners opposing civil rights, since they believed that was one step from black men preying upon innocent and pure white women?

- Frankie

By Melirosa (208.48.12.163) on Thursday, May 10, 2001 - 09:57 am:

i see what you are saying. but when roberto was talking about homosexuals wanting access to young children he was speaking of a very real, very scary group called NAMBLA which is the national association for men and boy love. this is a group of pedophiles that make it their mission to go around recruiting young boys, as young as they possibly can, into the homosexual lifestyle and use them for their own sick, twisted, disgusting needs. i am absolutely in total agreeance with you, that homosexuals for the majority of the time are not pedophiles. but this group does exist and i have read things and seen things about them that would horify you. i had the unfortunate experience to come in contact with many of them proudly advertising who they were on their t-shirts while in an enviroment which was very child oriented. i can tell you it caused quite a problem and almost a riot with some of the fathers of children who happened to be there. this groups behavior was flamboyant and disrespectful. they purposely chose an atmosphere geared to children to blatenly voice their sick beliefs, and i can tell you they did not hold anything back. i am not a homophobic person and i am not offended by other peoples lifestyle's, as long as it is not forced down my throat. this group of which roberto was speaking , and others like them, is something that all of us with children should worry about and keep an eye out for. i do not view homomsexuals as "bad people" and i most certainly do not think that they are all pedophiles, nor do i hate them just because i do not agree with their lifestyle. i would never deliberately turn a crooked eye at a gay couple or say anything out of sorts to them if i saw them walking down the street. i just don't think they have a place in civil rights........but that is just my opinion.

By Ishvara (38.163.112.41) on Thursday, May 10, 2001 - 09:01 am:

Melli, I do agree with Wyatt you and Roberto about separation from the Civil Rights movement, I just find it funny that those who were presecuted for so long hold the same sort of views of those who presecuted them. "They want to have complete access to young children (for them the younger the bettet, especially in this era of AIDS)." I found that very offensive, so all gays are pedophiles?

By Kansascity (209.242.125.8) on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 - 10:31 pm:

FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL......on the web. I transposed the name of the organization in post before this one.

By Kansascity (209.242.125.184) on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 - 10:27 pm:

Discernment is what we do when deciding wether or not something or someone etc. is good for us or our loved ones. Values and morals mean we stand for something.
There is a song that goes something like this: If you do not stand for something you'll go for anything. It is a good thing to use judgement and common sense with charity. It isn't wrong to protect and defend yourself and loved ones from harmful practices and so forth.
I do not go around bashing homosexuals, but when I see them tearing up my domain and denegrating everything that I hold dear well then it is time for defending traditional family values. I am not going to just stand by and act as if what they are doing to erode the sacred is ok ....it is not ok.
It would be a mistake to stand by and do nothing, but that is exactly what many people are doing because of their fear of being not politically correct.
Check out the RESEARCH FAMILY COUNCIL on the web. They generally do a pretty good job of keeping up with legislation that effects traditional families. If you want to get active and oppose what you do not think is right then that is a place to start.

By Wyatt (63.38.125.230) on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 - 08:02 pm:

We don't have to condone a immoral behavior, whether it be hate, greed or abominable sexual acts. Just becuase violence does not occur, doesn't mean it is not wrong, either. Non violent acts are equally harmful to the health and well being of a society as well. Their is no judgement in my words. I am talking about an act, not the person. I have great love for homosexuals. I love them as people and have many friends and acqauntances who are gay. But that doesn't mean that I condone their acts. I know and have friends who are addicts and know and work closely with people who have been gang members, ex cons, heterosexual deviants, liars, thieves, klans men, NOI members, murderers, and bigots. I love them all. I care for their health and souls. I don't wish them harm and I pray for them. I visit them when they are sick, I take meals with them and don't pass judgement. However, I do not agree with their behavior nor do I stand for the behavior in my midst. It may be acceptable to you and perhaps many other behaviors, but to me it is a negative and improper act.

By Roberto (152.163.194.177) on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 - 04:44 pm:

Frankie:

I forgot to ask.

What is your thoughts on traditional vs. non-traditional families? Now, you can include interracial couples as non-traditional along same race lines.

Do you think that the traditional model of birth and raising a family that existed for thousands of years should be radically altered?

What is your thoughts on the act of procreation that has defined us as a species? Should we have the "sperm banks" that the lesbians want to get the "cream of the crop" and the "boy farms" the homosexual can market from for selections?

Can you envision a world in which there is no true mother or fathers, because from the strictist sense these groups would rather not produce children from each other?

Frankie tell me, Am I just a paranoid colored guy. You see, I cannot fathom the thought of a "Pee Wee Herman kind of guy" making love to a "lumberjack kind of guy". ~ Roberto

By Melirosa (208.48.12.163) on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 - 04:28 pm:

ishvara~
you are correct in saying that we should never pass judgement on other people for the lives they lead as long as they are not hurting someone else. this goes without saying because the fact that we are in IR's makes us some of the most hated people to certain individuals. BUT, it doesn't mean that we have to agree with what other people do, it doesn't mean that we must willingly except their cause for the sake of being open minded. all of us have things that we agree with and things that we don't agree with, and that is all they are, opinions. i would never engage in anything that would protest or stand in the way of an individual's right to happiness. BUT don't try an place me and my situation in a category that has nothing to do with someone elses, that is just not fair. i agree with you ishvara, there is absolutely no room for more hate in this world.

By Roberto (152.163.194.177) on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 - 04:16 pm:

Frankie:

Let me say I respectfully disagree with you. Granted, what two people do behind close doors and if it does not kill anyone, its their business.

Like Melirosa and Kansascity have stated, I too do not agree with the Gay rights Movement's attempt to use the instruments and mechanisms that were hard fought mainly by blacks to claim the coveted rights and protections under the law. Since many gays and lesbians are from some of the wealthiest classes in America, and many are endowed with the privilege of having top flight educations, I say they need to find another venue and not hyjack what those with less can afford. I see a double standard by these "whatevers", when that gay man in Wyoming was beaten to death the gays organizations with their minnons in the media saturated the news coverage for months. Even the NAACP had a special mention (they are fool tools anyway). But when those homosexual killers raped and murdered that young boy in Arkansa last year there was hardly a mention. The gays shafted (no pun intended) that story.

No, I do not see gays as underpriviledge, I do not see them as largely uneducated, I do not see them threaten by the color of their skin (for those largly white), and I do not see them as allies. I know the intellectuals would have you and me take hold of the historical notes that homosexuality was accepted even in ancient times among the Greeks and Romans, and that it was widely practiced among the warriors of Sparta, Rome, and other warrior classes of the time, but the fact remains, there were codes of honor and behavior that was strictly enforced even in those days. Today the "girlie men and their manly sisters" want to force their way of life on us all for acceptance. They want to "feminize and weaken the boys and men of this country". They want access to the girl scouts and boys scouts. They want to have complete access to young children (for them the younger the bettet, especially in this era of AIDS) Through organizations such as MAMBA (Man Boy Association they would like to have legal access to your son someday (if you ever have one or have one). The lesbians and gays are an aberration from normalcy on this society. Their aim like all social despotic groups of past and present is to morally redefine what it means to be a masculine man and a feminine woman. They must be stopped ~ Roberto

By Ishvara (38.163.112.125) on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 - 03:53 pm:

I see the point of views as quite valid. They should have their own forum. They would find more strength in that rather than it being splintered amongst issues which are not really related to their cause. I don't pass judgments, I could care less how people live their lives just as long as they are non violent in their activities. It does bother me to see ANYONEs civil rights violated, not getting a job because of their sexual persuasion etc. If they have these pressing concern they should address them in a manner best defining their cause. One point though I here so much censure in these posts, contempt, disgust, how can anyone even think to hold in contempt that which so easily could be themselves? Those that hate you and I find us just as equally disgusting if not more so b/c we are tainting the race. Talk about "immoral" or "specail rights that are not already in nature" those are the very arguements I have heard racists use.

By Melirosa (208.48.12.163) on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 - 11:43 am:

frankie-
i agree with you. i am not against gays being legally wed, i don't believe in it personally, but my opinion does not matter. if they are granted the right by the state to be recognized as a legal union, so be it. whether or not a homomsexual couple is legally married or not does not affect my life and i don't care enough about it to even pay attention to that particular issue. the only problem i have is when they start comparing their "problems" to that of an IR relationship so they can start a civil rights debate. their issues are not racially motivated and even though the gender factor is involved, it still can not be claimed as though their civil rights are being violated. they are not being discriminated against being male or female or black or white which disqualifies them from claiming the whole civil rights thing. if they want to marry, like i said, let them achieve what they want without involving unwilling participants such as myself.

By Frankie (128.164.161.248) on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 - 09:49 am:

While I can understand why some of you might be upset by the comparison made between IR marriages and gay marriages, I think they should be allowed to wed. Since the law grants certains rights and privileges to married couples (tax benefits, inheritance matters, etc), I can see no reason why gays should be barred from getting those privileges. I don't know whether being gay is genetic or learned, or a combination - but gays have been around since time immemorial, and will be around for a long time to come.

How about a compromise? They get the right to wed, and they stop having those leather-fests, AKA, Gay Pride Parade?

By Melirosa (208.48.12.163) on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 - 09:40 am:

kansascity-
i couldn't have said it better myself. "the civil rights movement has been hijacked by the gay movement" oh so true. we have absolutely NOTHING in common with these people and yet they are using the civil rights movement as a crutch for their acceptance. we also have animal rights activists, activists for the enviroment, right to lifers, etc.... if homomsexual individuals choose to be together and they want their unions to be recognized by the state, they should be activists for themselves such as these other groups and protest and lobby for themselves and their issues ONLY, instead of conveniently including themselves into the civil rights movement which has absolutely nothing at all to do with them. how dare they clutch onto an issue as serious and delicate as this and taint it for their own selfish reasons! i want no part of it. i do not want to be compared or considered associated with them because i love THE MAN that i love. i do not want to be looked upon angrily by society because of comments or protests constructed by these groups. i just want to co-exist peacefully and if i have to fight for my rights as being in a IR relationship, i will gladly do so but it damn sure won't be a fight sparked by the gay activists. i will not fight a battle for them because i do not believe in the issues they are fighting for. if they believed in their issues as much as they claim to, they would stop trying to use the civil rights movement as their commencing point and stop trying to impose their morals on us.

By Kansascity (209.242.125.148) on Tuesday, May 8, 2001 - 11:41 pm:

I agree about homosexuals stirring up.......How dare they compare themselves to IR couples? Because, they (organized homosexual activism) might be just a smoke screen for other entities with hidden agendas who wish to wreck this country by tearing down all that has made it great. Also, I do believe in conspiracy theories. That so-called homosexual couple at the school knew they would get the attention they want.
The Civil Rights Movement has been high-jacked by "the gay movement". They are copy-cats. They are riding on the backs of those who do want genuine Civil Rights and the RIGHT changes made. In addition, the ACLU is a lawyers organization? Not sure, but I listened to a speech given by MSSSSSSSSSSS Rosen who is the president of the ACLU and is touted as being one of the top 100 lawyers in the country. (How do you do that?) I always think of that organization as the devils advocate; but she did say that they have even represented a few Christian organizations (with a smirk). The following week after her visit she was instrumental in helping a few who did not want crucifixes or crosses on the bindery jackets on books in one of our local public libraries. Sure enough, the books with visible crosses on the shelves all had to be removed from the library shelves. I suspect the ACLU is somehow behind this removal of Mothers and Fathers days. It sounds just like the kind of thing they'd like to get their nose into. Jesus help us!!

By Roberto (152.163.213.212) on Tuesday, May 8, 2001 - 10:20 pm:

Wyatt and Melirosa:

Breaking News

The decision out of that Reformed Jewish elite private school in New York that set off the bombshell today in the media to ban Mothers Day and Fathers Day was the result of a gay couple (two men) forcing the school administrator to drop Mothers Day, because it does not represent their lifestyle to their child. If it starts here then other private schools will follow suit and then the public schools. Here again, we have 10 percent of the population who wish to force their views on 90 percent of the population to "accept them" and "be like them". ~ Roberto

By Roberto (152.163.213.212) on Tuesday, May 8, 2001 - 09:15 pm:

Wyatt and Melirosa:

This issue is just one of a range of issues that many are afraid to tackle like the banning of Mothers and Fathers Days by these same groups. You think more black men and white women would be up in arms over this by entering intelligent discussions here considering the number who sign up for the personal ads on this site. ~ Roberto

By Wyatt (63.20.199.89) on Tuesday, May 8, 2001 - 07:51 pm:

In total agreement with the both of you. It is riduculous to compare the unio between a man and a woman of different colors, with that of same sex couples. We have totally different histories and totally differnt concerns. Our relation is not based on sex at all, but it seems that alot of the agenda of the gay community is sexual in nature.

I belive in no special rights either, just stiffening the civil and equal rights already on the books. I want no special treatment for my kids, just justice and fairness that is alloted all citizens in this country. I do believe that as citizens, gays should have the same rights as other citizens. But we cannot create specail rights that are not already in nature. Other than that we have nothing in common. I don't want parades, festivals, workshops or group centers for my children. They are normal people with parents of different colors but the same culture--American!!!!!

By Melirosa (208.48.12.163) on Tuesday, May 8, 2001 - 05:10 pm:

roberto-
i totally agree with what you are saying. i, as a woman in an IR relationship, do not want any special attention called to my relationship as though it is an oddity. love between men and women is not an oddity and should not be treated as such. the difference in the color of our skin does not make it an unatural or immoral union. it angers me that homosexuals are using IR's as a form of getting acceptance for their marriages. IR's have enough to worry about and then here comes some radical group robbing us of our privacy and trying to make it sound as though we feel the need to have them as our backbone and sounding board for our rights. IR's have their own special circumstances in this country and we should never be lumped together with any other group seeking acceptance.

By Roberto (64.12.102.169) on Tuesday, May 8, 2001 - 02:39 pm:

I'm surprised that the interracial community is quiet and not objecting to attempts by the lesbians and homosexual community in making their case, that their "immoral unions" are no more different than black/white interracial marriages. I heard this absurd comment from a caller into Ken Hamblin's (the conservative black avenger) nationally syndicated talk show last week. Ken made an excellent point. "When has it become fashionable for lesbians and homosexuals to claim special status as a persecuted group like blacks, when it comes to violence against them, discrimination and now non-traditional marriages. If the right wing gestapo ever came looking for niggers and queers, the blacks cannot hide, the white lesbians and homosexuals, especially can quickly revert back to being straight".

This notion that lesbians and homosexuals are making themselves a special and protected group by stating that its their right to marry (woman to woman and man to man) just like an interracial union is nothing more than trying to make legitimate and to categorize their immoral unions along with interracial marriages.

This is just another way in which IR relations will be lumped with and stigmized as an odditiy with the lesbians and homosexuals in their own selfish attempts of jumping on the bandwagon for acceptance. ~ Roberto