Black Churches Not Wedded to Gay Marriage

Cruise over to the Daily Caller for some off-the-cuff remarks on gay marriage by attendees at a meeting of the Conference of National Black Churches and the Congressional Black Caucus that was held on Wednesday.  Get ready to hear some strong viewpoints from men who are not intimidated by the gay gestapo and their use of the hate speech spamathon.

The best part of this man-on-the-street video occurs at the two-minute mark where the gentleman being asked whether he believes gay marriage is a civil rights issue voices his angry indignation at the comparison of the push for gay marriage with the Black Civil Rights movement.  Good stuff.

Advertisements

About lesbianoutsider

Home of the PushBack Patriot
This entry was posted in Lesbian/Gay, Political/Social and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Black Churches Not Wedded to Gay Marriage

  1. Perry Palmer says:

    In my 37 years working in one place, I was never discriminated against because I was gay; it was because I was female.
    I never felt that I had to hit someone over the head with my sexuality; so consequently, I was never refused service in a restaurant. I dressed up and looked nice. Maybe if today’s gays would just look at themselves they would see the real reason they are “discriminated” against; it’s more because they flaunt their sexuality perversely, make-out and worse in public and parade around as if they are the only ones in the world.

    We had a perfect world before the Liberals decided to name us LGBT. The Bs and the Ts shouldn’t even be included.

    Today’s gays are getting meaner and nastier by the week. Even I’m afraid of them. It seems as though they don’t have other interests except sex; seems pretty shallow to me.
    We are not a race, either. Black people can’t hide their blackness. I prefer to hide my gayness because it isn’t my identity.

    Only the wedding planners and lawyers will benefit from “gay marriage”. Be careful what you wish for.

    • erins1911 says:

      Perry – I used the term “race” in a tongue-in-cheek way, but in any event, I agree with some of what you say. I have not experienced “meanness or nastyness” from the gay community so I cannot comment on that – and I am new to all this, so I am still taking in information about what life as an out person will be like. I disagree to the extent that what you wrote could be read to encourage gay people to refrain from engaging in what is within the normal, expected array of public displays of affection between hetero’s. (I doubt that’s what you mean anyways and agree that no one has the right to be publicly vulgar.) Hiding affection in public seems to me to give credence to the point of view that what we feel is shameful and should remain out of view. Finally – having a transgender sibling I can attest that they need us and we need them; heck we need all the support we can get helping people broaden their understanding of issues around sexuality. Anyways, interesting discussion and thanks for listening.

      • I think there’s a big difference though between being out and getting in people’s faces. The first is simply being who you are; the second is a political act of aggressive posturing and meant as a thumb-the-nose gesture to the straight world.

        And as a strategy or indeed a way of life, the thumb-the-nose brand of out doesn’t ultimately bring acceptance; overtime, it brings backlash. People relate to others when they can see commonalities and shared values.

        I would guess that most Americans do not feel any solidarity whatsoever with the dick-waving, S/M leather hustlers riding on the Pride floats across America this June. And I count myself among them (‘them’ meaning most Americans, not the dick-waving S/M hustlers). 🙂

  2. erins1911 says:

    To the extent that individuals may be refused service in restaurants, denied employment and/or terminated, and suffer other indignities because they are gay, I do see a civil rights issue. Gay people should not be required to “hide” the fact that they are homosexual to avoid ill treatment, as the one speaker suggests they can. Fortunately, though, in practical terms, as Gays gain greater social acceptance (see, e.g., recent decision noting that being called “Gay” is no longer considered slanderous), at least in the US, such incidences may be becoming less and less common. The brave souls who live their lives out and well benefit us all. They are indeed a “credit” to our “race”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s