SOUNDBITES — We are really counting on New York to get on the buses and trains and come down. We need New York. This isn’t Lollapalooza or a circuit party. It’s a political march and rally. We’ve got some brilliant speakers and the whole thing should be over by 5pm so that folks from New York can get home without having to spend money on hotels. If people do come down the day before there will be training and workshops.” —National Equality March organizer Cleve Jones on NYC’s make-it-or-break-it status [via Next]
psa
Remember, the Nat’l Equality March Is Not a Circuit Party
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
Cancel anytime · Proudly LGBTQ+ owned and operated
Jason
First he appoints himself as some sort of gay messiah.
Then he tells me that if I can afford to go out once in a while and don’t go to his badly planned, poorly executed gay confab in DC that I should be ashamed of myself.
Now I get told that it’s NOT Lollapalooza or a circuit party (do they still have those?) and that I should march past the White House and wave even though the President will not be there.
Did I get it all.
I would like to make sure I feel guilty for the right reasons.
Josh
@Jason: “Did I get it all?”
Well, he did say “this was are only chance for Equality.” And, we can’t have a “movement without moving.” So, a small crowd “moving” slowly through a vacant DC should do the trick.
We’re all staying in Philly and creating some real results. Cleve’s little party is only going to embarrassing to our Community. Thankfully, it will be his last bit of “activism.”
HayYall
@Jason: You get a gold star.
jason
Keep your leather harnesses at home, guys. This ain’t the time to trivialize your movement.
Sharky
Race baiting Queerty gets their wish – where’s the headline? They love to get bent out of shape about the lack of support of Bond and the NAACP….now that you’ve got it-why are you so silent?!
Board Chairman of the NAACP and civil rights leader Julian Bond, will be one of the featured speakers. Bond likens the National Equality March to the Civil Rights March of 1963. ‘We had a dream and marched on Washington to demand our rights; I am proud to stand with the LGBT community as they march for theirs,’ he said.
Jason
@Sharky:
“Race baiting Queerty gets their wish../”
Have you lost your mind if you had one in the first place?
Dinosaur
Don’t knock those big parties of past years CJ. For many of us they were our coming out experience tied in with the MOW93 weekend of our life – something we might never forget.
If you were not at the POST OFFICE party during MOW 93, shut up and don’t knock it.
It was absolutely amazing.
Andrew
@Sharky: “Board Chairman of the NAACP and civil rights leader Julian Bond, will be one of the featured speakers. Bond likens the National Equality March to the Civil Rights March of 1963. ‘We had a dream and marched on Washington to demand our rights; I am proud to stand with the LGBT community as they march for theirs,’ he said.”
Tell Julian there is a big difference – blacks were oppressed, we are hated. We have to end the “hate.” That isn’t done by Marching in Washington because “Washington” doesn’t hate us – Religion does. It can only be done by dealing with religion – the source of the hatred of gays and lesbians.
It’s a lot different than what blacks had to deal with and overcome. We aren’t dealing with our problem. Until we end the traditional Christian belief that we’re “wrong,” we will never be equal.
Charles Merrill
I am not going. Even though I donated $5,000.00 I didn’t realize it would be a Marxist “Rosie the Riveter” event with silly religious prayer events leading queers to the mountain top “set my people free”. Socialism is not cool. Workshops scheduled are Union leader Cleve Jones and Sherry Wolf who is a leading socialist activist, writer, and public speaker; is an associate editor of the International Socialist Review; and is a member of the National Equality March Steering Committee..I respect Julian Bond, but I don’t know what he expected. I certainly didn’t know.
Josh
@Charles Merrill: I think you’re correct. this will make Obama distance himself from our Community even more.
Who let Cleve get away with this?
Sharky
@Andrew You don’t think blacks were hated!? WHAT?!? A lot of people hated blacks during the CRM. They were both hated and oppressed-just like gays are today. Can a group be oppressed and not hated? Give me an example of a group that was oppressed and loved!
However, the sources of hate and oppression are different. From what I gather, you’re saying instead of marching on Washington there should be a march on Religion (let’s say) since religion is the/a source of the hate towards the LBGT community. I agree something needs to be done to tackle this. However, once/if that matter is resolved, Washington(voting) will determine our rights, not the church.
J. Clarence
@Andrew: Oh Andrew. Blacks like gays were hated, and in both cases fringe, or what became fringe, religious ideology contributed to that. However, in the case of African-American, and as it will be with us, over toppling religion won’t fix the discrimination.
People in this country are entitled to hold whatever beliefs they want–there are some people today that do not think women should have the right to vote–however, we have laws in place to protect a minority, or a group that is not in power, from the tyranny of the masses.
I could care less whether or not a fundamentalist Christian who listen Phelps thinks I’m destined for eternity in Hell. As long as I have my constitutional rights that’s all that should matter to anyone.
James
@Andrew:
Your history lesson is sort of loopy. I guess when blacks were lynched it had nothing to do with hatred.
Andrew
@Sharky: “From what I gather, you’re saying instead of marching on Washington there should be a march on Religion (let’s say) since religion is the/a source of the hate towards the LBGT community. I agree something needs to be done to tackle this. However, once/if that matter is resolved, Washington(voting) will determine our rights, not the church.”
Ahhh, Washington, you know those “elected officials,” they are religious. America is 75% religious – the Congress is 97% religious. Politicians vote their beliefs.
Andrew
@James: I probably should have said “Blacks were hated and oppressed.” I don’t believe gays are “oppressed,” just hated. The source of that hate is religion. Every other person we meet believes we are wrong, sinful and deviant because that’s what religion taught them.
Andrew
@J. Clarence: “Blacks like gays were hated, and in both cases fringe, or what became fringe, religious ideology contributed to that. However, in the case of African-American, and as it will be with us, over toppling religion won’t fix the discrimination.”
We don’t have to end religion, we have to end the belief and teaching that homosexuals are wrong. Religion is dividing into two groups – Conservative and Liberal. Conservative Christians will continue to teach/preach homosexuals are wrong. Liberal Churches will end that belief and put equality before religion.
It’s already happening with Episcopalians, Lutherans and a few other denominations.
In order for religion to survive they must attract young people. That have lost membership (especially the young) for decades. Unless they change, they will eventually go out of business.
You attribute the hatred to the religious “fringe,” although it’s hard to tell who they actually are. Half the Catholics think we’re wrong, so are Catholics “half fringe.”
In the future we’ll be able to easily identify those that cling to the belief that LGBT people are wrong. We’re not wrong.
J. Clarence
@Andrew: Random Question: Why are elected officials in quotations?
Yes the majority of them do say they are adherents of a particular faith; for the most part, aside from most of the GOP, they have been largely secular in their legislation. A decent chunk of them are in favor of marriage-equality, and in the past the majority of them defeated an effort to put discrimination into our constitution with the Federal Marriage Amendment. So I don’t think what you are alluded to is in fact factual.
Oppression, my dear Andrew, is often the manifestation of someone’s hatred for someone else. And gays are oppressed, much less than they were before (when we were accused of being communist among other things) but still today. Just look at the past stories here on Queerty about the police in NYT either not doing their job or the raid on the bars in Atlanta.
And again I question that the argument that source of the hatred is religion. If the majority of Americans are Christians, why do we only see violence and hatred coming from a particular group who share in common not always necessarily a religious belief, but surely a particular ideology?
Andrew
@J. Clarence: “And again I question that the argument that source of the hatred is religion. If the majority of Americans are Christians, why do we only see violence and hatred coming from a particular group who share in common not always necessarily a religious belief, but surely a particular ideology?”
Because Religion is the only institution that teaches “homosexuals are wrong.” That is the single source of that belief. That belief causes the bigotry and hatred. There isn’t another “source.” NO Christian organization has ever rejected that belief – none.
To simply suggest that it is the “Republicans,” or the “Far Right” misses the reality that it is in fact “religion.” 75% of America is religious, 98% of Congress is religious.
DOMA was supported by both Republicans and Democrats (95% voted Yes) – because of their religious beliefs.
J. Clarence
@Andrew: Religion isn’t an institution first of all, but more importantly you are making the (incorrect) assumption that people have to be taught to be homophobic. If that is the case can you explain the first homophobe?
There is another ‘source’, if you will, such as our misogynistic mentality, fear of things that are different, cultural norms and mores, etc.
And if no Christian body has rejected that belief, how come there are gay clergy or individual churches that are willing to recognize same-sex couples. It seems you are waiting for the Pope or Archbishop of Canterbury to issue a pro-marriage-equality statement when it doesn’t always work that way, particularly for non-Catholic denomination which are not bureaucratic.
Just as we have seen in regards to the states, individual states are likely to move quicker on marriage-equality ahead of the national level. That’s typically how these reforms work. Similarly individual churches, where it actually matters, will move faster–which they have been doing for some time.
And sense you are such a fan of statistics, if 75% of Americans are religious (and even that is debatable as there is difference between being religious and being an adherent of a particular faith) but only 48% of Americans think homosexuality is morally apprehensible what does that tell you about your overall argument?
Andrew
@J. Clarence: “And if no Christian body has rejected that belief, how come there are gay clergy or individual churches that are willing to recognize same-sex couples.”
That’s merely “acceptance,” not undoing the belief that homosexuals are wrong. That’s not good enough.
Religion is an institution and it is the only source of the “belief” that we’re wrong. Just because a few Churches are “gay friendly,” (actually less than 1% of all churches) doesn’t change the fact that the idea comes from religion.
None of us are born with ideas about sexuality or right and wrong – we get that from religion. We are taught that – usually beginning at a very young (impressionable) age.
If religion is not the source of that belief, what is? Meteorologists? Engineers? Scientists? Butchers, bakers and candlestick makers?
The traditional Christian belief is that “homosexuals are wrong, sinful and deviant.” To date, no Christian organization has formally rejected that belief. Muslims haven’t even “accepted” us.
You said: “And sense you are such a fan of statistics, if 75% of Americans are religious (and even that is debatable as there is difference between being religious and being an adherent of a particular faith) but only 48% of Americans think homosexuality is morally apprehensible what does that tell you about your overall argument?”
It tells me that 1/3 of the “religious” are willing to put equality before their religious beliefs. They are the “liberal” Christians. But, none of their denominations have ever formally rejected the belief that we are wrong and that’s what we need.
David
It is amazing, and tragic, to watch the faithophobes like Andrew use the very same arguments that homophobes use.
Like this one: “to survive they must attract young people”
As a community, GLBTQ people get rightfully angry when homophobes do the ‘gays recruit children’ song and dance, yet here is Andrew playing the same game.
Andrew is lying by over-simplification of course, for throughout the human history, people have joined religions at every stage of life, from childhood to extreme late adulthood. Andrew is simply using ‘won’t someone please think of the children’ tactic, aping one of tv’s classic controlling, busy-bodies, Mrs. Lovejoy from the Simpsons.
Here’s another: “The source of that hate is religion. ”
Andrew applies a single specific fault and applies to everyone and everything that falls within a enormous, broad, and diverse concept. Homophobes do the same of course, complaining about some excess or fault found in some GLBTQ people, and then attributing that to all GLBTQ people.
Andrew’s claim is false, of course, deliberately so in my opinion, on many levels.
Religion is not a monolithic institution with one unified belief about anything, much less homosexuality. There is tremendous diversity about sexuality within the religions of the world, and even more across the total history of religions of the world.
A specific belief, relatively recent, in the total scope of religious history, is used as the excuse for homophobia. That is a very different matter. There are more than enough religions, and enough deeply religious people, who are not homophobic, to disprove Andrew’s false claim of causation.
The fact is that there seems to be several sources (vs. excuses) for homophobia. Sexism, particularly misogyny, plays a role for many men. Insecurity and repressed homo-eroticism have been documented as correlating in a causative manner. There are non-religion based social customs, such as those in China, Japan and other Asian cultures, which hold reproduction as preeminent, that cause homophobia.
There are rarer, reactive types circumstances as well, for example, women who have been used and ultimately abandoned by a gay man who was trying to be heterosexual. While his behavior was a response to societal condemnation, her hate is the result of his behavior.
It is important to recognize the distinction between excuse and cause, and to recognize the various causes. Unless you understand how someone has acquired their bias, and recognize what elements are just excuses and what elements are genuine causes, it is very, very difficult to change a homophobe’s mind.
But, understanding the context a homophobe is in, makes a huge difference. For example, the woman left by a gay man – it is only after first recognizing that ‘religious belief’ is an excuse, that you’ll even find out about her ex. At which point one can begin by talking about blaming all gay men, or all men, for the misdeeds of one. And when she realizes that only one man deserves her anger, you can talk about how homophobia and excuses for it, including religious belief, cornered him, and while that doesn’t excuse his behavior, it should motivate her to work to end homophobia and reject all excuses for it, including religious beliefs.
The bias that Andrew is articulating sabotages the efforts others are making to change religious beliefs, to dis-empower th excuses.
“To date, no Christian organization has formally rejected that belief. ”
This is simply a lie. Many Christian organizations explicitly reject ‘homoexuality is sin’. They simply do not do so in the exact words, on the exact kind of paper, in the exact type face and font size, that Andrew and his peers demand.
When examples are provided, Andrew and his peers manufacture excuses, like homophobes do, to dismiss all examples as ‘not good enough’, even when those examples use explicit statements like “Homosexuality: Not a sin, not a sickness”. When provided a link, Andrew and his peers dismiss it: it is too old, its not on stationary, it is in the wrong format, it is too detailed, it has too much supporting arguments, etc. Andrew and his peers are not interested in the facts, but in perpetuating a lie, though that lie, if believed, supports anti-gay prejudice.
Interestingly though, I’ve been asking for even one example of an explicitly atheist organization that is actively working to create civil equality for GLBTQ people, the way so many religious organizations are working for our civil equality,
and no one has provided even one example. From the silence from Anthony and Brian and the rest, it looks like no atheist organization has formally rejected ‘homosexuality is wrong’.
Perhaps that is why they keep lying about the many religious organizations that do reject ‘homosexuality is wrong’.
J. Clarence
@Andrew: You have an obsession with quotation marks. It’s really convenient for you to disregard an individual Church’s decision to appoint/elect a gay clergyman as “acceptance”, as if that is not signs of progress and an indication that they do not think it is wrong.
If they indeed thought homosexuality was morally wrong as you claim, how do you explain them appointing someone who is gay to such a position of authority: a position where that person is the head of that church, a position where that person welcomes in the form of a baptism the parishioners’ children into their community, a position where that person is tasks with filling whatever spiritual needs of their community.
And how is acceptance not undoing the belief? Do you want them to physically redact those six verses from the Bible?
Religion is not an institution, it is not a physical body.
And again, if religion is the source explain the very first homophobic thought. If you back far enough you are eventually going to reach the point where someone must have had the idea to include their beliefs about sexuality into their religion’s sacred texts. Which goes to my point that there is something behind the veil of those six verses that you are refusing to see.
“None of us are born with ideas about sexuality or right and wrong – we get that from religion.”
Of course we aren’t. We are socialized to think certain ways about certain things, but socialization is simply the manifestation and manipulation of ideas and preconceived notions that we develop and then pass on to others. Based on what you are suggesting the reason we think murder is wrong is because it is part of the 10 Commandments. That is of course false. We are built to try and avoid killing another person unless we ourselves are in danger. We are community focused and a species that naturally mourns the death of others in our species. That natural evolutionary trait made it’s way into our religious beliefs.
Of course religion plays a role in that socialization, but ask yourself why is that you could have two devout Christian families both with gay children where one gets a nurturing background and the other is beaten and verbally abused. Don’t that say to you that there is something other than religious belief that is pushing one group of parents to act a certain way?
The source as I’ve said before is a result of various un-related norms and mores about the sex, sexuality, women, and sensitivity to things that are different that culminate into a homophobic ideology. Religion no doubt boosts it in some cases but is not the root cause.
If a church holds meetings for gay rights groups, protests along gay people at rallies, ordains gay ministers, oversees same-sex marriages, and much else; how is that not a formal rejection of the belief. What do you want a press release?
Apply your same argument to the United States. Even though on the federal level there is still a ban on same-sex marriages–which the current administration says it will repeal–five independent states have passed marriage-equality measures and there is more on the way. The majority of Americans believe that gays should be allowed to serve openly. This is the same country that took centuries to consider all men equal citizens, and even longer for women. The point is these things take time, and never happen fast enough; and these reforms happen from the ground up not the top down. So stop looking to the Vatican for an answer and instead the local parish or something, eventually it make it’s way to the pontiff