You are missing my point, Carl.

An organization which claims to represent all gays nationally is defending people who solicit and perform sex in public restrooms.

Fix THAT problem first, THEN worry about Coburn. Or be honest and admit that you don’t want to fix the problem because you DO want to be allowed to solicit and perform sex in public restrooms.

Same with HIV infection and drug use. You yourself have said that legislation or antigay comments do not directly affect both of these, but the vast majority of your efforts against HIV infection and drug use are focused on bashing people for legislation and antigay comments.

Fix the real problem first.

Of course, the reason that can’t be done is because victimization as a strategy completely unravels when it is admitted that even a portion of one’s problems are self-inflicted.

This is why HRC and the like get away with it — they know that, rather than admit gays could be wrong in any way, shape, or form, most gays will ignore the excesses and stupid behavior of the community.

OK seems to have a habit of electing wackos. JCWatts, former representative, was definitely a nut.

Unless there have been a lot of reports of gay sex in junior high or high school bathrooms, then I can say he’s wrong. If I remember correctly, when educators in that part of Oklahoma were asked if what he said was true, they said they’d never heard of anything like that happening. There are some conservatives who have said that because of the AIDS crisis, gays should be branded or put in camps. That doesn’t mean I think that validates the idea that all Republicans want to brand gays.

-

Right now my interpretation is that the vitriol throwing is more important than solving the problem of rampant drug use and STD infection among gay men. -

I don’t see how pointing out his record is throwing vitriol at him, or how not defending his long anti-gay history and statements is the same as not solving the problem of drug use or STD infection.

I guess I just don’t get why some gay conservatives are so willing to criticize the gay community for pointing figures or ducking responsibility, yet when the GOP supports legislation harmful to gays, or a GOP makes anti-gay comments, there is always a justification or rationalization which involves gays bringing this on themselves because they are too partisan, or they don’t live up to the right standards, or whatever. The GOP has control of most power centers in America, the gay community has little power, yet we’re supposed to believe the big bad gays are forcing the hand of the reluctant Republicans.

Hardly, Carl. I hold Coburn responsible for making his statement, and I hold Lambda responsible for validating it. My point to you has been that you can’t say Coburn is wrong about gays pushing sex in bathrooms because Lambda is doing it.

I don’t think it’s right to excuse them for all their problems, but I also don’t think it’s right to pretend there are no factors, or to justify politicians with anti-gay beliefs by trying to blame it on the gay community.

Here’s the issue, Carl:

Some people hate or fear gays based on reasons which are not caused by the gay community. These people will continue to hate us no matter what we do. We can change some minds and some hearts, but we can’t convince everyone. Someone who opposes domestic partnerships and who thinks lesbianism is taking over school bathrooms is probably beyond convincing.

So basically, you in one thread say Coburn is beyond changing, but then spend all your time hurling vitriol at him trying to change him. How am I supposed to interpret that?

Right now my interpretation is that the vitriol throwing is more important than solving the problem of rampant drug use and STD infection among gay men.

So you’re saying that HIV rates in New Jersey have gone up for gays since the domestic partnership bill was passed? Has the same happened in Vermont?

-

The problem here is not lack of rights or people being mean, Carl. The problem is that our community is unable to a) keep its pecker protected and b) its forearms clear of needle scars. Mainly, I think that’s because the number-one lesson of gay socialization is….drum roll, please…… it’s somebody else’s fault.-

But NDT, you are using the same argument. Just look at your argument about Coburn and the school bathrooms. You’re saying that it’s someone else’s fault (Lambda for wanting sex in public bathrooms). When Republicans support legislation that is harmful to gays, you usually say that it’s the fault of the liberal gay left for not being bipartisan. And how many times has the GOP in recent years said “it’s Clinton’s fault” or “it’s the Democrats’ fault” or “it’s the fault of a staffer” or “it’s the fault of the economy/the war on terror/the FBI” when they are questioned about a controversial event? Gays are not the only ones who play the blame game or play the victim.

I have never said that discrimination is the sole reason that some gays are too promiscuous or use drugs (although I don’t think it’s fair to say that a lot of gays have this problem – many do, but many just live quiet lives and don’t get attention because the media would much rather focus on the most garish elements). But I do think that in a society where gays are told they are garbage, and where they are constantly scapegoated and have laws passed against them, then sure, they are more likely to turn to self-destructive habits. I don’t think it’s right to excuse them for all their problems, but I also don’t think it’s right to pretend there are no factors, or to justify politicians with anti-gay beliefs by trying to blame it on the gay community.

-Here’s a clue….look up whether or not private schools are allowed to operate in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which clearly defines what constitutes a “public area” or “public building”.-

But Coburn did not mention any of what are discussing. He never said that gay groups were trying to say sex should be allowed in public bathrooms. This is like if someone said, “Bush is going to send troops to invade Scotland!!” and I said, “That won’t happen”, and the person responds, “He sent them to Iraq, so he’ll send them anywhere!!”

-
I mean, really. Think about the logic of lesbians and gays who claim they want children, but then go to rallies and give money to groups whose sole goal in life is aborting them. -

Coburn is an elected official. He represented a district, and now an entire state. These gay groups just represent those who want to be represented by them. I think that Coburn should be held to a different standard. HRC and NGLTF and all the rest have very little power today; for all the talk of the mammoth gay left, the gay left is just begging for scraps. Coburn is in the majority party and has plenty of power. When he supports laws that ban domestic partnerships or ban gay adoption, he is having a very real effect on lives.

Should we really hold our elected officials to the standard of, “Hey, it isn’t like (fill in the blank) is any better”? Or excuse them because someone else out there is bad?

You see, since you insist partnership cuts down on drug abuse, STDs, and other irresponsible behaviors among straights, it makes sense for the government to support it. Furthermore, the initiatives you mention are geared less towards promoting marriage itself and more as promoting marriage and abstinence as a means of avoiding single-parent households and teenage pregnancies.

However, as I’ve demonstrated, partnership does NOT do the same for gays — indeed, it appears that irresponsible behaviors INCREASE (trust me, you don’t want to look up New Jersey’s ranking in terms of HIV/AIDS cases).

The problem here is not lack of rights or people being mean, Carl. The problem is that our community is unable to a) keep its pecker protected and b) its forearms clear of needle scars. Mainly, I think that’s because the number-one lesson of gay socialization is….drum roll, please…… it’s somebody else’s fault. You can whine “victim” all you want, but at the end of the day, no one put the gun to your head and made you have unprotected sex or use drugs. You chose to do it, and blaming it on others is proof that you ARE irresponsible. And that’s all the “gay community does”.

Now can you tell me where Coburn referred to the Lambda Legal efforts, or where he said that only public schools were affected?

Here’s a clue….look up whether or not private schools are allowed to operate in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which clearly defines what constitutes a “public area” or “public building”.

By saying homosexuality is the biggest threat to America? By talking about girls in school bathrooms? By trying to ban partnerships or adoption for gays?

Why not? NGLTF, HRC, and the other “gay groups” support unlimited abortion, underage minors having sex and making major medical decisions as a result, soliciting and performing sex in public restrooms, legalization of drugs, and the nine gazillion other “progressive” causes that have very little to nothing to do with gay rights.

I mean, really. Think about the logic of lesbians and gays who claim they want children, but then go to rallies and give money to groups whose sole goal in life is aborting them.

NDT, you quoted something I said after your initial claims. So apparently I never said anything in my earlier comments that go along with what you said.

-Let’s see…..you insist that STD rates and drug use rates are held down in straights because they have partnerships, but refuse to acknowledge that STD rates and drug use rates have increased in populations of gays that have partnerships available to them — exactly the reverse of what should have happened if partnerships make gays responsible.-

That still doesn’t match what you claimed I said. I do think that if straight people had less responsibilities, they would be more involved with drugs and disease. Partnerships are not the same as marriage. Partnerships have been available for far fewer years than marriage. Gays grow up to believe that the only real relationships are between men and women. There is a whole other system gays are put under that straight people never go through.

You also included only SF and maybe one other city. Vermont has had civil unions since 2000. New Jersey has had partnerships since 2004. Have Vermont and New Jersey seen an increase in drug use or STDs among gays since these benefits became available?

-It should be obvious to ANYONE that partnerships do not make gays responsible. -

It should also be obvious that barring legal benefits and gay adoption don’t make gays responsible. We have seen the White House and Congress try to push “pro-marriage” funding to encourage straight people to marry. We have seen them say that teens should wait until marriage. So the government does believe that marriage makes people more responsible. When they work overtime to deny gay couples a similar (or even a much smaller) relationship, they are saying they don’t want gays to have the responsibility. Yet they constantly criticize gays for being irresponsible.

-And those cause gays to have unprotected sex and take drugs, HOW?-

They don’t directly cause gays to do any of this. But when they pass these laws, and when they constantly tell gays they are pedophiles, they’re going to hell, they all have AIDS, by encouraging gays to think the worst of themselves, I think they want gays to have this self-defeat and self-hatred which goes on to produce bad behavior.

-

If it’s so “obvious”, how is it that you so blatantly misread it (emphasis mine)?-

You got me. I misread it. I’m sorry I offended you.

Now can you tell me where Coburn referred to the Lambda Legal efforts, or where he said that only public schools were affected?

-They are treating gay groups as if they are responsible and mature. -

By saying homosexuality is the biggest threat to America? By talking about girls in school bathrooms? By trying to ban partnerships or adoption for gays?

-But then again, I’m nothing but a “Jewish Nazi”.-

I’ve never called you a Jewish Nazi. I’m trying to have an honest conversation with and you act like I have somehow insulted you. I don’t know why we have to get in all these semantics and word games just because I don’t think that Coburn’s anti-gay efforts are justified by what some gay groups might say or do.

-Even though I despise everything that emanates north of the Red River (thanks in part to being a loyal Longhorn), Coburn is getting the short end of the stick.-

Byrd also has a long anti-gay history; the difference is I don’t see gay Republicans defending Byrd.

You don’t hear blacks being so judgmental of former KKK Grand Dragon Sen. Robert Byrd for using the “N” word in a Fox News Sunday episode. In fact, Kweisi Mfume was downright apologetic for that old racist’s term…he said it was the way “an old man opined.”

God help the leftists in this country.

Regards,
Peter Hughes

#22 I think you got my annoyance with the govt. I have no idea about older single gays. I just think the govt has a misplaced emphasis. And people who spew the abstinence pill are at the top of my list of idiots.

BTW: I am all for people entering into multiple m/m, w/w, m/w. m/m/w, w/w/m relationships and having as much sex as they like, just be responsible. Jimmy free sex between consenting individuals should only occur in committed relationships.

Question: how is the rationalization for abortion a gay agenda item – last I checked you need a man and woman to make baby, so out of what m/m w/w union are abortions an issue (thus my singles stmt.)

Right here.

If straights were told that they can’t even have partnerships, or raise children, then you can bet that STD and drug use rates would be even higher amongst them.

Let’s see…..you insist that STD rates and drug use rates are held down in straights because they have partnerships, but refuse to acknowledge that STD rates and drug use rates have increased in populations of gays that have partnerships available to them — exactly the reverse of what should have happened if partnerships make gays responsible.

It should be obvious to ANYONE that partnerships do not make gays responsible. The data clearly shows it. What you are doing is making excuses and deflecting blame for irresponsible behavior and promiscuity.

I think that the religious right actually wants gays to be promiscuous and to take drugs; they want images that live up to their worst fears, their stereotypes, and help them get more money and political clout. So they actively work to create laws that will allow doctors or insurers to refuse treatment to those they think are gay, they try to create laws that will bar gays from certain jobs, bar gays from raising children or having legal contracts. They want homosexuality to be a stigma.

And those cause gays to have unprotected sex and take drugs, HOW?Gays whine about how the right wing forces us to stick needles in your arm and fuck people bareback, and then wonder why a) we get no sympathy and b) over half of Americans still think gays are “immoral”.

Next:

The only “obvious” statement he made is that girls in Southeast Oklahoma can’t go to the bathroom by themselves.

If it’s so “obvious”, how is it that you so blatantly misread it (emphasis mine)?

In the tape released by the campaign of Brad Carson, the Democratic candidate, Coburn says a campaign worker from Coalgate told him that “lesbianism is so rampant in some of the schools in southeast Oklahoma that they’ll only let one girl go to the bathroom. Now think about it. Think about that issue. How is it that that’s happened to us?”

It has nothing to do with going to the bathroom alone. They WANT girls to go to the bathroom alone because, if two go together, they’ll engage in sex, or so the belief is.

Next:

You can point that out as much as you want, but I don’t think a major elected official should be excused just because of what one gay group said. If the whole point of conservatism is these people are supposed to be so much more responsible and mature than liberal gay groups, then they should show some of that maturity.

They are treating gay groups as if they are responsible and mature. Feel free to enlighten them otherwise; I certainly have. But then again, I’m nothing but a “Jewish Nazi”.

Gee, guess I have to go get some meth and HIV….

Can you tell me where I said STD and drug rates among gays would end if gay partnerships were legal (I think that STD, or at least HIV, rates in San Francisco are falling, BTW)? What I said was, and if you have an answer for this let me know — if people like Tom Coburn are so concerned about the immorality of homosexuals, then why has he spent years and years working to block avenues which encourage responsibility and monogamy amongst gay men?

If straights were told that they can’t even have partnerships, or raise children, then you can bet that STD and drug use rates would be even higher amongst them. I think that the religious right actually wants gays to be promiscuous and to take drugs; they want images that live up to their worst fears, their stereotypes, and help them get more money and political clout. So they actively work to create laws that will allow doctors or insurers to refuse treatment to those they think are gay, they try to create laws that will bar gays from certain jobs, bar gays from raising children or having legal contracts. They want homosexuality to be a stigma.

-

We don’t. But, as I pointed out, a national gay organization defends and protects sex in public restrooms. Coburn is well within his rights to make his statement based on that fact. If you don’t like it, tell Lambda to quit defending stupid perverts, and quit blaming Coburn for pointing out the obvious.-

But NDT, that isn’t what Coburn pointed out. He never mentioned Lambda Legal. He never said gay activists were trying to legalize sex in public bathrooms. The only “obvious” statement he made is that girls in Southeast Oklahoma can’t go to the bathroom by themselves. If he was talking about what you’re talking about, wouldn’t he say girls AND boys? Wouldn’t he say ONLY public school bathrooms, since these laws would not apply to private or religious schools?

-

I don’t. But I will continue to point out the irony of the fact that gay leftists are squealing like stuck pigs when conservative politicians take them at their word. -

You can point that out as much as you want, but I don’t think a major elected official should be excused just because of what one gay group said. If the whole point of conservatism is these people are supposed to be so much more responsible and mature than liberal gay groups, then they should show some of that maturity.

Really pathetic, Carl. You know full well I oppose that. But the reason you’re bringing it up is to deflect the attention I brought to your statement that allowing gays to form partnerships will make them “more responsible”. Gays in San Francisco and the rest of California have had the ability to form partnerships for YEARS, and the drug addiction and STD rates among gays there are still skyrocketing. According to your logic, that’s impossible.

NDT, why do we have to rationalize or justify every anti-gay remark a politician makes?

We don’t. But, as I pointed out, a national gay organization defends and protects sex in public restrooms. Coburn is well within his rights to make his statement based on that fact. If you don’t like it, tell Lambda to quit defending stupid perverts, and quit blaming Coburn for pointing out the obvious.

Then why should we have any respect or empathy for Tom Coburn, if he is so narrow-minded he dismisses millions of people based solely on HRC and NGLTF? How is he any better than the millions of people who dismiss the GOP because of Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson?

I don’t. But I will continue to point out the irony of the fact that gay leftists are squealing like stuck pigs when conservative politicians take them at their word.

Excuse me, but my “taking responsibility” has nothing to do with legalizing gay marriage or gay adoption.-

NDT, Tom Coburn did not simply oppose gay marriage. He opposes domestic partnerships. Even moreso he opposed DC’s right to set up their own domestic partnerships. He wanted Congress to intervene and ban them. Do you agree with this?

-

Now, that may sound odd at first, but when we have Lambda Legal, the national group which claims to represent all gays, trying to get overturned the convictions of glbts who solicit sex to be performed in a public restroom, it becomes completely plausible.-

If that’s the case then why didn’t he mention Lambda Legal or these laws? Have you ever heard of Lambda trying to legalize sex in junior high or high school bathrooms? He didn’t say “public school”. He said school. So these laws would not affect bathrooms in private or religious schools. Yet he thinks that lesbianism is in affect in any number of school bathrooms.

NDT, why do we have to rationalize or justify every anti-gay remark a politician makes? Some people hate or fear gays based on reasons which are not caused by the gay community. These people will continue to hate us no matter what we do. We can change some minds and some hearts, but we can’t convince everyone. Someone who opposes domestic partnerships and who thinks lesbianism is taking over school bathrooms is probably beyond convincing.

-

Of course they don’t. HRC, NGLTF, and the other so-called “nonpartisan” gay groups make it clear that people who don’t hold leftist views are “not gay”, “Jewish Nazis”, “self-loathing”, “crazy”, and other things.-

Then why should we have any respect or empathy for Tom Coburn, if he is so narrow-minded he dismisses millions of people based solely on HRC and NGLTF? How is he any better than the millions of people who dismiss the GOP because of Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson?

LOL – the full absurdity just hit me…

the gay community has infiltrated the very centers of power in every area across this country and they wield extreme power. That agenda is the greatest threat to our freedom we face today. Why do you think we see the rationalization for abortion and multiple sexual partners? That’s a gay agenda.

Gay issue aside, its a rather nutty thing for anyone to say. It sounds to me like he has bought into the victim mentality that many on the right have started to embrace, particularly the Evangelicals.

The “Homosexual Agenda” blurb that is mouthed so often now actually comes from a chapter in a book by former rep William Dannemeyer. I’ve been amused when occasionally I run into some anti-gay commenter who literally believes that there is an “agenda” as a written document created by and approved by all homosexuals.

I truly believe its cos they don’t know us. Don’t have gay friends and know us as people instead of “those gays”

Except quite a few very anti-gay politician DO have gay sons or daughters, Alan Keyes and California’s Pete Knight are two examples. Their views on the subject are strictly dictated by their religion. But the left suffers from the same strict, unthinking attitude concerning abortion. It is completely impossible to have a conversation on the topic of, say, parental notification, with some liberals. They argue against it so violently, you get the impression that to even consider this thought is tantamount to renouncing God.

In general I’m sympathetic to the argument that the gay rights advocacy establishment is dominated by liberals. But that seems fairly natural to me. People thrive in communities that make them feel welcome. Just as the anemia of the conservative gay movement is likely the result of having to work within a political party that has demanded you remain in the closet to keep your seat at the table.

So the left is out, proud and pushing the envelope, and the right publishes kranky blogs about it all.