I’ve often tried to figure out why people, mainly on the right side but at times on the left too, spend so much time bashing gays. Okay, perhaps
bash isn’t the correct word, but there is a definite negative emphasis on gays and their “lifestyles,” whatever the heck that is supposed to
mean. My question is, why? Why do people put so much time and effort into telling people that gays are inferior, or that something is wrong with them
and they are less of a person than “normal” heterosexuals.
On one side you’ve got the extreme religious right, and they’re views as to why gays are “bad.” The Westboro Baptist Church, owners of the
site www.godhatesfags.com, offers this explanation, “The only lawful sexual connection is the marriage bed. All other sex activity is whoremongery
and adultery, which will damn the soul forever in Hell. Heb. 13:4. Decadent, depraved, degenerate and debauched America, having bought the lie that
It's OK to be gay, has thereby changed the truth of God into a lie, and now worships and serves the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed
forever. Amen! Rom. 1:25. But the Word of God abides. Better to be a eunuch if the will of God be so, and make sure of Heaven. Mat. 19:12. Better to
be blind or lame, than to be cast into Hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched. Mk. 9:43-48. Abstain, you fools.”
As I stated, this is an extreme point of view in regard to religion, and is by no means the most common theme. One need only look at the activities of
The Westboro Baptist Church to see they put an extreme amount of time into preaching about “the certainty that all impenitent sodomites will
inevitably go to Hell.” By the way, by definition sodomy also includes oral, not just anal, sex. On their website I see countless picketing of high
schools, events, plays, and other such locations and activities because of fags and whorehouses. However, I see no information about charity drives,
helping the homeless, or helping the less fortunate (unless you consider gays the less fortunate).
There is something deeper here, something almost unnatural about the amount of anger towards gays. There is no offer of help, only hatred, and hate is
no easy emotion. Hate is a power that few should ever experience. I think it twists a mind, corrupts the soul, and makes people act in ways they
otherwise shouldn’t. It’s basically the opposite of love, which can really do sort of the same thing to a person. At any rate, that’s my view,
but there are other religious and philosophical views as to why hate is bad for you.
Getting back to my point, there is an underlying theme here, something deeper than this religious crusade. I think religion is just a cover, an excuse
for actions that without the cover of religion would be seen as bad, corrupt, or possibly illegal. It tarnishes religion as a whole when it is abused
in this manner. When you strip away religion exposing the hate, you can see a theme or a mentality that has reoccurred several times in American
history, European history, and world history as a whole. This theme is the need of some people to have the feeling and security that no matter how
they live their life, there is security knowing that there is an innate set of people who are lower than they, less human so to speak.
The title of this post is “Gays, the new black?” and I use blacks as my example, or case study so to speak. Gay marriage is bad because it
“destroys the sanctity of marriage,” and Bush said that a "constitutional amendment protecting marriage," needs to be established. But he
wasn’t the first to say marriage was “under attack” and the first argument wasn’t about gays, it was about blacks. In December 1912,
Representative Seaborn Roddenberry of Georgia proposed an amendment to the constitution banning interracial marriage because, "Intermarriage between
Negroes or persons of color and Caucasians . . . is forever prohibited." He took this action, he said, because some states were permitting marriages
that were "abhorrent and repugnant," and he aimed to "exterminate now this debasing, ultrademoralizing, un-American and inhuman leprosy." Sounds a
lot like the arguments against gay marriage, doesn’t it? Rep. Roddenberry has described blacks as “descended from the orangutan-trodden shores of
far-off Africa.” Sounds like someone needs to feel like they are superior to someone else doesn’t it? This early movement was the result of a
black boxer, Jack Johnson, having relations with white women.
Many states took up laws banning interracial marriage. But why? What aspect of this actually hurts people when you take away religious excuses? I
don’t know of any. As a matter of fact, on a genetic level, it’s probably more healthy for the human race to have more interracial marriages
(white/black, black/Asian, white/again, black/Persian, Asian/Persian, Arabic/Jew, whatever). Just like with animals, constant reproduction within a
limited set of genes will expose bad genetic traits in some offspring. Okay, I mean, I’m not geneticist, but I think you get my point, and yes, we
have millions of people on this earth, but you can see where I’m going. I always read that one type of person has a affinity against this type of
disease, this type of person is susceptible to this type of disease, whatever the case, I think if more of us white people, and more of the
“non-white” people maybe had kids we’d have a healthier set of humans all over the place. Okay, enough for this tangent.
So, if you want to bad interracial marriage, there must be a reason for it. In the case of Seaborn it was because he viewed blacks as inferior to
whites, or at least that they were the “lesser” of the two. But why lesser? What makes blacks inferior to whites? Why would he hate them so much
too outright ban the ability of a white person to marry a black, or a black to marry a white? What fuels this hate? A good argument I found is this,
“It's born from a belief that everyone wants to maintain a positive view of their selves. So when a person or group wrongs another unfairly, they
are forced into a state of cognitive dissonance. Either the offending group is unethical and wrong, or somehow the wronged party deserves this poor
behavior. Whenever the wronged party cries out for justice or fairness, the offending party is forced into a painful self-examination. So, rather than
go through that self-examination, the offending party gets angrier and angrier and focuses more and more on why the wronged party deserves what
happened.” This can be found at kilroy.blogspot.com...
When Kilroy said “Either the offending group is unethical and wrong, or somehow the wronged party deserves this poor behavior,” I really took
notice. That was it that was what I was looking for. I knew that if I looked that the history of whites hating blacks, it would open up a window to
why some people hates gays now. Those that hate gays not only believe that they are unethical, but also wrong, and they feel that gays deserve to be
attacked, deprived, and lobbied against. Once again, it also acknowledges my earlier theory that people want to maintain a positive view of
themselves, so to keep that self delusional image they project this negative view of the lesser onto the gays.
The fact of the matter is that since the civil rights movement, it is no longer “okay” to hate blacks. Does that mean people don’t hate them
anymore, heck no. I’m sure there are just as many whites that hate blacks today as there have ever been. It’s sad, but true, and it will take
hundreds of more years to further minimize that sentiment. However, due to recent political and religious movements, there is a new group that it is
“okay” to hate, that’s gays. So now this group takes the heat of all those that need to feel good about themselves by projecting their negative
views onto these people. The hate they have for themselves can be manifested once again onto a subset of persons.
So far, since gay marriage has been legalized in Massachusetts, I’ve not heard about men divorcing their wives in vast droves to go marry other men.
I’ve not heard about women divorcing their husbands to marry other women. I’ve not heard about an increase in divorce rates. So where is the
threat? How does gay marriage threaten the sanctity or security of straight marriage? It doesn’t, but that’s not the point of the argument people
have against gays. It’s an excuse, an excuse they have created to reinforce the negative projections they have placed on gays. The have allowed gays
to become the new inferior race, the new unacceptable low, and these gays are a threat to them now for some reason. They need this negative subset of
people to fight against so threats and violations of nature and religion are created. Gays are the new black, and it’s a sad reality.
Please feel free to add to this rambling set of thoughts. This is my viewpoint, and not one that I have necessarily finished researching or accepting.
My two key lines on interest are how gays threaten marriage, and how why it is acceptable to hate gays. I’ve went through great strides to show that
religion is being twisted here and used to justify peoples actions. I by no means am implying that all religious people to hate gays.
[edit on 28-5-2005 by The Big O]