34 Comments so far

1. Truthseeker58 March 20th, 2007 2:53 pm

   Larry: You obviously have not heard Dennis Kucinich. He is in support of Gay rights and openly says so. Go hear him speak. Ask him to his face in front of a crowd. He has nothing to hide.

   By the way, Dennis Kucinich IS running for President even though the media would like to keep that a secret from the American people.

2. kelmer March 20th, 2007 3:09 pm

   I think hatred is too strong a word in some cases.

   A majority of western negative attitudes towards homosexuality comes from the issues surrounding sex and child rearing. The norm has been heterosexuality(for better or worse). Obviously having two men or two women raising a child can be better than having a combative abusive husband and wife raising a child–but the “norm” still influences people’s thinking on the subject. You cannot escape it. How much you can change it is the question.

   Sex–brings about strong reactions. Passion, awkwardness, etc. Thus it should not be surprising that some react with revulsion or hostility towards something that contradicts their sexual preferences. To ignore this and try to paint all people as filled with hate is simply irrational and counter productive.

   And I think the natural link between sex and violence has to be factored in if one hopes to develop policies that prevent discrimination, in addition to the obvious ones concerning religion and supremacy beliefs.

3. uuwoman March 20th, 2007 3:09 pm

   Larry: John Edwards, also running for President, has publicly stated his support of gay rights.

4. bildad March 20th, 2007 5:07 pm

   Mr. Kramer:
   All of us, in one way or another, need to confront what Jung called the shadow. Even people who are generally self-aware, tolerant, accepting and progressive–who consciously abhor racism, sexism, homophobia, or whatever form of evil you care to name–need to be reminded that psychological growth is impossible without sincere confrontation with their repressed, unconscious evil. In that spirit, even though I consider myself to be a non-homophobic straight male,I thank you for the wake-up call. In the words of the song recorded by Ray Charles, “…none of us are free while one of us is chained, none of us are free.” We all need to be reminded of this on a regular basis, and to be pushed to keep expanding the limits of our compassion and understanding.

   That said, I must remind you that political movements cannot solve questions of love and hate, but they can address questions of social justice. The rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people have been included in the Green Party platform since we began running candidates for office and the “lavender caucus” has been an important part of the party since its inception. Green Party candidates for office in the United States have always reflected this position.

   P.S. From the 2004 platform:
   5. Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
   In keeping with the Green Key Values of diversity, social justice and feminism, we support full legal and political equality for all persons, regardless of sex, gender, or sexual orientation.
   a. The Green Party affirms the rights of all individuals to freely choose intimate partners, regardless of their sex, gender, or sexual orientation.
   b. We support the recognition of equal rights of persons gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender to housing, jobs, civil marriage, medical benefits, child custody, and in all areas of life provided to all other citizens.
   c. We support the inclusion of language in state and federal anti-discrimination law that ensures the rights of intersex individuals and prohibits discrimination based on gender identity, characteristics, and expression. We are opposed to intersex genital mutilation.
   d. We support the right of all persons to self-determination with regard to gender identity and sex. We therefore support the right of intersex and transgender individuals to be free from coercion and involuntary assignment of gender or sex. We support access to medical and surgical treatment for assignment or reassignment of gender or sex, based on informed consent.
   e. We support legislation against all forms of hate crimes, including those directed against people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, transgender, and intersex.

5. R Kostel March 20th, 2007 5:23 pm

   Today’s morons, as have those throughout history, all believe that you can legislate morality. You cannot. It cannot be done, indeed, it has never been successfully done in any culture or history on this planet of which I am aware.

6. panamahead March 20th, 2007 5:37 pm

   As a straight dude, I feel for you.

   Not that to garner sympathy is why you wrote the article, but the fact is the country isn’t ready to accept the reality that 1. Gays and Lesbians don’t wake up one day and choose their sexuality and 2. that Gay/Lesbian love is as real or authentic as love within straight relationships.

   Disturbing, but all too true. Straight people don’t see Gay love as legit or as deserving of the same care or attention. Unfortunatley, its still seen as a deliberate choice Gay people make. That some how they were just asking for trouble.

   In the past 50 years, we’ve seen significant progress in protecting and ensuring rights for Blacks in America and I think Gay/Lesbian rights is moving in the same direction.

   Maybe you won’t get there old timer, but I think you can see the mountaintop. The next generation will stand on your shoulders and maybe slap your ass on the way up. j.k.

7. blessthebeasts March 20th, 2007 6:01 pm

   Anyone with an ounce of compassion has to confront the immorality of anti-gay bias. To discriminate against, make fun of and yes hate people because of their sexual orientation is just so cruel. When I think of what gay and lesbian youth have to contend with as they grow up, it really breaks my heart. Yes, people are threatened by any “deviation from the norm” but that is no excuse. The norm has been defined for us and is really nothing to aspire to anyway!

8. Vince Lawrence March 20th, 2007 8:13 pm

   Larry:

   Though I can’t offer a direct answer to your question, as the other posters above have noted, some are trying to find their courage to fight the hate. I submitted the following letter to my local newspaper and saw it published:

   August 2, 2005

   To The Editor

   I don’t wish to start a war of words and this is not a personal attack, but last Sunday’s letter by Mr. Ed Bednar points up a particular failure of our current electoral proceedings that cannot go unremarked. Though his letter was well written -eloquent in fact- his argument is none-the-less disingenuous. Mr. Bednar laments the fact that so many Americans base their vote on party loyalty or shallow personality considerations rather than the actual voting records of the candidates. I agree, but I would guess that he ends his own search when he finds out how those candidates stand on issues concerning abortion. That in fact, is the problem. Conscientious voters will support candidates that agree with their personal positions on issues that are nearest to their hearts, but many apparently have not yet figured out that single issue voting has helped empower those who have other, more sinister interests in mind.

   The candidates have it figured. Promise a certain constituency that, if elected, they will work to overturn Roe vs. Wade and these consistent voters will punch their ballot every time then turn a blind eye to mountains of lies for an illegal invasion and a bloody, cruel occupation. Not to worry though because the elected are hard at work restoring the moral and ethical standards so long abandoned in this country. I’m sure the thousands of Iraqi mothers and fathers who have lost their children to our bombs and bullets will find comfort in our quest for such high moral standards, championed by the same cynical murderers that have visited this war upon them.

   We don’t have to look too far to find proof of the point I’m trying to make. On the same page as Mr. Bednar’s was a letter from Mr. Boyd Townsend questioning Mr. Bush’s lack of action on his promise to ban gay marriage. He closes by surmising that Mr. Bush no longer needs any votes. It doesn’t sound like Mr. Townsend voted for Bush for this or any other reason, but I know there were plenty others that did. I’m not gay and my wife and I have been married for twenty-five years, and if fortune smiles upon us we will be married for another twenty-five, but I have a real problem when we begin to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens based on their sexual orientation.

   I suspect that a person’s sexual orientation is something that chooses them rather than vice-versa, and you are not going to make someone who is not a heterosexual suddenly become one. In closing I’ll paraphrase a poem by a German pastor who lived through Nazi totalitarianism.

   “First they came for the Jews but because I was not Jewish, I did nothing. Then they came for the communists, but because I was not a communist, I did nothing. When they came for the trade unionists I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. When they came for me there was no one left to speak out” I would start over thus: “First they came for the homosexuals…”

   Vince Lawrence

9. opeluboy March 20th, 2007 8:14 pm

   Oh, get over yourself, Kramer. I am a straight guy and don’t hate gays. My brother-in-law is gay. My keyboard player for 20 years is gay. Two of my best friends from college are gay. I roomed with one of them for a year. I have lesbian friends. not acquaintances. Friends. I do not judge people on their sexual orientation or even lack of thereof.

   Yes, there are lots of people who hate gays. And there is still violence and prejudice directed against gay and lesbian citizens. but it is hardly a goddamn epidemic. Try being a fucking Iraqi.

   Maybe part of the problem is you. I think your own biases are showing.

10. expatincebu March 20th, 2007 8:27 pm

    Is it hate or over sensitivity? It seems that Americans have become the most sensitive and easily hurt people in the world. What ever happened to sticks and stones but words will never hurt me?

    AS an expat in the Philippines I was surprised by the culture here. This is a very Christian, Roman Catholic country, but homosexuality is openly accepted. However, it is common to hear someone say, “I hate gays”, or “you are such a fagot”. Of course, Filipinos will also quickly tell you that you are fat, or ugly, or rather stupid.

    None of these statements are said as mean or hurtful, simply as facts. People are not offended by them either, they just laugh and usually agree. There is also no real discrimination against people.

    However in America you cannot say anything to anyone that might hurt their feelings. Now do not get me wrong, violence and discrimination are vile and evil and the U.S. has a definite problem with both. But this constant harping on politically correct speech and not hurting anyones feelings is stupid and an anchor on the progressive movement.

    Stick and stones should be illegal and quickly punished, but words should never hurt anyone.

11. montemerrick March 20th, 2007 8:57 pm

    to the above = yes being an iraqi is hard, but to compare suffering is itself disingenuous and i bet every person in america knows someone beaten up because he was suspected of being a “fag” and has seen a hate crime committed in their hometown, a bottle thrown at a couple, etc, not to mention matthew shepard. rather than try to convince larry kramer that his 72 years of experience is wrong, or one-sided, maybe it would be better to stand in his accusation for half a minute, or even better, his shoes.

12. sosaysme March 20th, 2007 9:40 pm

    This reads like an overreaction to feeling hated. There’s less hate toward gays all the time. So we’re making progress. Larry, sometimes we can be especially sensitive to feeling rejected, devalued, or even hated–and use different opportunities to relive those old feelings.

13. marilynb21 March 20th, 2007 9:55 pm

    I work in the floral trade…I know many gays, they are my friends, all of them. They are just people, like you and me. They want love and compassion, and, most of all, peace. They want to know that they have ‘family’…that they will be cared for at the end of their lives…just like you and me. If they have children…they want to be able to care for those children…just like you and me. I am tired of saying “they”…we are all the same. We want the same things…family. Love. Compassion. I have taught my children that we are all the same, and, I feel pretty sure that things are changing. I live in Florida. Our new governor is gay. He has not come out officially yet, so don’t tell anyone. Our previous gov. was JebBush. I can officially tell you that things have changed very much in these last few months. I believe that our Gov. being gay has made all the difference. I look foward to the day when gays can adopt children. Watch for it!!!!

14. cutbankid March 20th, 2007 10:59 pm

    Straight men are scared and why wouldn’t we be? After all, we set up a world in which women are the enemy. We define ourselves, as men, by what we are not: not-women. We deny ourselves the very feminine attributes which could make us strong, viable males. Naturally it’s very scary trying to go through life half-assed, pretending to be cardboard cut-outs of John Wayne. That’s why we want everyone on the same bus. We don’t want gay men showing us up: showing us the folly of our lives, demonstrating a happier, healthier way to live. They do not hide or run from their feminine side. That’s why we hate them. We’re jealous. And naturally we want to kill the messenger. Our lives, such as they are, depend on it.

15. shz March 21st, 2007 3:50 am

    I’m a 75 year old straight woman….didn’t choose it….was just born that way. And no amount of proselytizing could change that.

    Common sense tells me that we’re all born “some way”, whatever way that is. I wouldn’t pretend to know what being gay or lesbian feels like, and I also wouldn’t pretend to know what being a straight male feels like. I only have a vague feeling of what other straight women feel.

    And none of that means a thing in my relationships with friends and relatives who are sexually different. We’ve all had fun teasing about our various stereotypes ……and believe me, the typical picture of a little old white haired lady provides plenty of laughs. The jokes are about the stereotypes…..we all know how far we are from the accepted pictures.

    I do think there is a greater acceptance of differences these days. People who don’t define themselves soley on their sexuality have an easier time fitting in, as do people with a sense of humor about themselves.

    It seems to me that gays would be better served by quietly voting for Democrats. To put the issue before the Dem party before an election just gives the Repugs a topic that they know will bring them votes. Their constituency has been solidly programmed to vote on the issues of God, Gays, Guns, and Abortion. They won’t even consider what else is going on as long as they have that litany going through their heads. Once the Dems really come back into power is the time to press gay issues.

16. rjhuntington March 21st, 2007 4:43 am

    cutbankid answers Kramer’s question perfectly.

    Give it another generation — maybe two. I don’t mean to sound dismissive; it’s a serious societal problem that must be resolved favorably if “the land of the free” and “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” will ever be more than empty slogans, but I do believe we are moving in that direction. There are developed countries much more enlightened on this than America.

    To those straight people who claim that homosexuality is a choice, I say, “Tell us about the day you chose to be straight.” The fact is, you can’t. That’s because you didn’t choose, and neither do gay people.

    To those who say that gay people can’t be good parents, I say read the above because you don’t know what you’re talking about. Gay and Bi parents raise perfectly normal straight kids all the time. That’s because one’s sexual orientation is not a choice.

    To those who say that scripture condemns homosexuality, I say, “Show me where Jesus said that.” He didn’t. He didn’t even recommend reading the old testament. He announced himself as the new testament. For anyone who claims to be his follower, that should have settled the issue right there. Why do you “christian” folks listen to men of questionable intent instead of your savior, oh ye of little faith? How much better to live by what he did say: Love one another.

17. optimismwill March 21st, 2007 7:40 am

    I don’t understand why anyone liberal, let alone Left, would take comments like those of Larry Kramer seriously. If as he implies all heterosexuals hate gays, there is not much hope for the cause of gays, is there? If on the other hand Kramer simply wants to guilt trip all heterosexuals for the actions for ruling class politicians like Hilary Clinton, some of the more masochistic among “us” might fall for it and beat their breasts. It doesn’t accomplish very much, however. What we need to do is to figure out how homophobia is based on the capitalist economic system and ruling class agenda, rather than engage in invidious petty moralism.

18. LeeAnnG March 21st, 2007 7:55 am

    In answer to R Kostel, who states that old Republican mantra “you can’t legislate morality,” that is blatently nonsense. Of course you can, and every government does, legislate morality. Virtually every bit of legislation is about morality. Theft, murder, perjury, battery - these are all moral issues. You may not legally take something that does not belong to you, you are not permitted to kill someone who has wronged you, you can’t legally beat someone who makes you angry. What is this if not morality? What you really mean is “you can’t legislate equality” or “you can’t legislate sexuality.” And of course, these statements aren’t true either.

    A government certainly can ensure that all citizens have the same legal rights under the law concerning economic issues, including those granted through marriage or civil unions. A government can also ensure equal protection from violence or abuse to all its citizens. And whether or not I agree with it, prostitution is illegal, mostly because of the sexual, moral issues involved. (I get all the arguments about how prostitution hurts women, but nothing hurts young men more than boxing, and it’s not illegal because violence is a more acceptable way to damage people than sex in our culture.)

    I don’t know if R. Kostel is a Republican or not, but the only people I’ve known who love to repeat the “you can’t legislate morality” line have been the Republican “government is the problem” types. It’s a load of bull in every context in which I’ve heard it before, and it still is.

19. jp March 21st, 2007 8:47 am

    Issues of identity and prejudice have to be historically contextualized to make sense. How hatred is constructed changes under different historical conditions; it’s shape and dimension are contingent.
    My take on the current manifestation of gay hatred is that we are in a period when identity issues are central: us against them, good versus bad, the West versus the Muslims. This is part of the neocon worldview of consolidating power by simplification. Moreover, when reproducing “us” so that “they” don’t mulitiply faster and present an even greater threat, then sexual issues becomes central.
    Women who don’t want to be “mothers of the nation” and gays who don’t add to the population are superfluous, even subversive. They must be eliminated.

20. peachmcd March 21st, 2007 8:51 am

    Thank you, Mr. Kramer. It’s impossible for me, as a younger married woman, to imagine what it would feel like to be an elder gay man - to have watched friends die on all sides of a vicious plague while the government did nothing but ally itself with the expressed opinion that it was all the fault of the dying, to face the dissolution of a household that one has worked a lifetime to build.

    Your anger doesn’t surprise me. The pain you’ve lived with all your life, for no good reason, is unimaginable for me. I’m bisexual, but I married a guy, so I guess I’m stuck enjoying the privileges of heterosexuality. I won’t forget, tho, how I felt in high school when I couldn’t even hold hands with my beloved while ’straight’ couples necked in the hallways. I felt angry and sad and hurt. Kramer’s piece is one way that ’straights’ can be given a window into, and be made aware of, the pain that legalized bigotry causes every day. Hurt people, and they get angry.

    But Kramer’s broadbrush sees no difference between a politician that sucks up to big money and the constituents that politician fails to represent. So the anger has gone in a definitely non-constructive direction, one that alienates potential allies and stalls the change Kramer so obviously desires. Many comments show a reactive, defensive posture that is perfectly natural when someone feels attacked.

    Mr. Kramer’s life is on its last lap, and he’s sad and angry that he won’t see the ‘Promised Land’ of just, equitable treatment for himself and his partner. Any of us would be, in his shoes. But is Mr. Kramer open to working with non-homosexual people to advance the hopes of the next generation of queer youth? Or is his bitterness too great to continue the struggle?

    Gay-Straight Alliances in high schools and colleges all over the country are growing. My step-son and his girlfriend belong to one at their school, and marched in the Gay Pride parade alongside folk they didn’t know at all, in simple solidarity.

    Rev. Katherine Jefferts-Schori, the new Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church of the USA, is unequivocal and unapologetic in her call for full inclusion of GBLTQ folk, and makes compelling theological argument for the same.

    So there is some light at the end of the dark tunnel you’ve lived through, Mr. Kramer. If you are too hurt and angry to embrace it, who can blame you? But I’m confident the youngsters, with less scars and baggage, will seek and struggle long after we’ve gotten tired and turned our faces to the wall.

    Requiescat in pace, Mr. Kramer.

21. Vince Lawrence March 21st, 2007 8:51 am

    LeeAnnG: excellent post. Sometime with in the last year PBS ran a special entitled “Three Religions, One Faith.” In it a Muslim religious scholar held forth that the Ten Commandments were God’s contract with man. How can someone who has devoted his career to studying matters religious be so clueless? The Ten Commandments was the common contract that Moses wanted the members of his tribe to accept among themselves. All of the forbiddens were forbidden because they caused social instability, disease, etc.

22. gem March 21st, 2007 9:30 am

    When I was growing up I didn’t know there were people who were not related who liked and loved people of the same sex. I was so very innocent.

    My awakening occurred in the early 1980’s when I was teaching graduate students host/parasite relationships. In some short period of time I came across information about the young men in SF and LA who were dying from an unusual pneumonia. I told my graduate students this was going to be one of the biggest social and microbiological events in our lives. And, we must pay attention.

    Soon many young men were returning to Texas to die the arms of their families, except it didn’t turn out quite like that. What they did meet was hate, rejection, fear, anger, guilt, gross neglect from the medical community and their families.

    The response from the gay community was quite the opposite. I went to the men who were working with these young med dying from AIDS and I asked to help.

    They, knowing immediately I was absolutely a green horn, said I needed to be socialized into the gay community. So I attended classes and they were right. I had some serious thinking to do and I did some very serious research. I then went to work for them for the next 5 years…and I did patient care to community education.

    It is clear from all the research and from my personal experience one never makes a choice to be gay, straight or bisexual. It is genetic like eye color. When you think about it, nobody choses to be hated and despised.

    Frankly, I think the reason heterosexuals are so intolerant is because they cannot face their own sexual interest in their own sex. Our cultural mores disallow open discussion and make it a punishable by horrible penalties the “crime” to be homosexual.

    If Kinsey and the other sexologists are correct, only 10-20% of all people are totally heterosexual and never had a sexual interest in another same sex person. That means fully 80% of all people are bisexual to some degree or homosexual, period.

    That is the conflict: to have the interest and not be able to satisfy the curiosity and to know “you’ll never go to heaven” if you do explore. Old cultures and even the Catholic Church in ancient times were quite tolerant of homosexual men and women. So what caused the huge intolerance we see now?

    Personally, I think it was the rise of the Paulist Christian church. And that is another story for another day.

    Nemaste

23. Dan March 21st, 2007 9:34 am

    Why do ______ hate _____ ?

    global human overpopulation!
    All forms of social discrimination worldwide are the direct social consequences of too many people on planet earth.

    Why do Straights hate Gays?
    Karl Rove has very skillfully used gay marriage as a political means to rally support of their base- Machiavelli would be amazed at Rove’s abilities! (and Western Cultures very generally speaking have historically demonized homosexuality along with the Jewish People and Gypsies)

24. stonecutter March 21st, 2007 10:15 am

    Larry, you’re an aging curmudgeon. Your article reeks of self-pity, even though much of what you say may be true regarding the more neanderthal, under-educated elements of straight American society–morons unfortunately embedded in both red and blue states–but certainly not all of us. It’s grossly unjust to claim that all straights hate gays…it has the ominous tone of intolerance and blanket condemnation that you’re criticizing…the pot calling the kettle gay. I’m a straight, native New Yorker pushing 60, and I’ve had several openly gay friends in my life and work, whom I accepted as human beings. Have I occasionally been uncomfortable with aggressive gay behavior in various forms? Yes, I admit that. But no more so than I’m uncomfortable with other political or cultural expressions that sometimes feel threatening or press the boundaries of my own comfort zone, like having to walk through a group of gang bangers coming toward me on a sidewalk. Does it mean I’m a racist if I recoil from their presence? I don’t think so. I’m merely apprehensive for a few moments until they pass me by. Do I view every black person I meet or know through that prism? Absolutely not. Context is crucial, and to deny that reality is to deny human nature. I may initially recoil at sensationalized visions of drag queens and flamboyant gay activists screaming in televised protests, demanding equal rights, but do I HATE them? No way. In fact, my mind tells me that while their tactics may be obnoxious to some, including me, their goals are understandable, and I can support them. The hate may be emanating from the media machine that continually shows them in the harsh light of inflammatory protest or outrageous public behavior, without any coounterbalancing context, making them objects of derision for a largely ignorant population of psuedo-religious bigots hiding behind the Bible and it’s putative anti-gay teachings. Larry, this is a seriously fucked up society on so many levels that gay-bashing, however chronically contemptible, is nowhere near the top of the list.

25. JasonGrant March 21st, 2007 10:29 am

    Ah, Larry … as I said thirty years ago (30), if we as gay people STOPPED paying out taxes … we would have our rights. The government cannot put at the very least 1/10th (30 million) of its population behind bars (300 million/10.) Oh, lets play by their corrupt rules which don’t even allow us at the table. Inferiority always seeks someone to escape goat that’s what gives them a measure of their “normality.”
    If we just said NO (with our taxes) we’d have equality tomorrow … then we might have to move on to the myth of JUSTICE FOR ALL.
    In the meantime … you’ll never convince me that they will do the right thing … we won’t, stand up for ourselves the most powerful way (civil unrest to an unjust society.) So we give them the power to scapegoat us. Complete people, whole people aren’t threatened by us … it’s all of the majority; but then again, wasn’t it the majority that voted to give Bush his way? And I don’t just mean citizens in an election … I mean well educated branches of government? Ah, education that can show you the bad … question is do you have a vested interest in keeping the bad? Are you a complete and whole person … some democrazy. I’d rather play the lotto at least if I pay I might (not really) have a “chance” of winning … in real life I never will. Divide and conquer, unite and win … STOP PAYING TAXES today … tomorrow we will have our rights but that is just my opinion and hopefully I still have the right to free speach … we’ll see.

26. activist3 March 21st, 2007 11:50 am

    Not to change the subject .BUT …the argument that one is homosexual due to genetics while true is not the only rational and natural argument one can make to defend gays. how about if someone chooses to be gay and straight or ascetic or paganistic or just platonic ? gays need to be defended and protected the same way one is or should be if one is black or jewish or a woman or a holder of views that are in conflict with conventional wisdoms of the majority. PERIOD!

27. alaskamaid March 21st, 2007 12:17 pm

    Oh my, all these politcally correct comments. It is sad that Larry is ending his years so bitterly and painfully. Too bad he can’t make a connection between that and his chosen lifestyle. I am not a gay hater, but I have a lot of knowledge learned the hard way as a straight female about the dark side (and yes there is a very dark side) of the gay lifestyle. How would you feel if your supposedly straight husband ran away with his gay lover while you were pregnant with his son, leaving you with your toddler daughter and a herd of pregnant cows ? While next door his mother, who knows all about her son’s behavior, secretly enjoys watching your struggle ?
    Grow up, guys : the real truth is that anal behavior is the mother of all addictions, whitewashed as ‘orientation’. And our entire realm is basically an acting out of that addiction. I mean, really, the whole thing about gays in the military is ludicrous. What is ungay about dressing up in different colored costumes and trying to put holes in the ‘enemy’ before he puts holes in you ? (All at the ongoing expense of the women and children who happen to be in the way.) If you don’t like what the world is mirroring back to you, maybe you should look at what you are projecting out. One of the big attractions of gay sex is that there is no fear of pregnancy. Ha ha. What makes you think that a force as potent as sexuality isn’t always about conceiving something? Just because we can’t perceive the results doesn’t mean they don’t exist on some other frequency level. I invite you to imagine what kind of frequencies are generated by gay sex. How would these ‘energy entities’ feel about the circumstances of their conception ? How would they maintain themselves, other than by parasitically draining human beings ? But we are not supposed to be aware of anything beyond our five-sense ‘reality’, so just don’t worry about the consequences of your behavior and keep paying your taxes so we can ‘meet the enemy over there instead of on our own shores.’ Never mind that we ourselves are generating the ‘enemy’ and blaming it on our ‘orientation’. Oh, it turned out that my husband was addicted to himself by a pedophile. And don’t tell me that there is not a strongly pedophilic component to gay male behavior, even between adults. I guess I would draw the line differently than most people — do what you want with whom you like, but unless you want to be a lifelong addict to a force stronger than heroin, stay the hell away from anal behavior. In the end, it will destroy your soul.

28. southernroadnc March 21st, 2007 1:12 pm

    alaskamaid, you are in serious need of some therapy

29. judi March 21st, 2007 5:14 pm

    The fight for equality is a world wide struggle that affects not only gays and lesbians,but women, racial minorities, etc. And don’t mistake the current homosexual rants that are being perpetrated by Republicans. To get people off the real issues like the war, and criminal activities of the present Administration, right-wing wackos are pushing the gay prejudice. Gays have made a lot of progress over the past 30 years, but like women and other scorned folk, their fight for equal rights must continue through education and patient but diligent action. Equally important question: Why do most folks think that people who live in trailer parks have low morals?

30. decrepittex March 22nd, 2007 12:22 am

    Some of the progress made over the past 30 years has suffered a setback under Bushco. (But then everything good about America has suffered a setback under Bushco.)
    Thinking gay marriage will destroy families makes about as much sense as thinking people in trailer parks have low morals or that every man in the South is a beer drinking, gun toten’, tobacco chewing redneck that married his first cousin. Larry, at your age you might not see equal rights for gays. It will come however. Maybe, just maybe our next President will really be a “uniter” who can bring people together.

31. johncpt March 22nd, 2007 3:14 am

    To suggest, as Larry Kramer does, that gays, or anyone sympathetic with their plight, should refuse to vote for “any of them,” by which he means any and all republican “and” democratic presidential candidates, is, frankly, quite stupid and suicidal. The whole issue hinges on the demands made by half-wit revolutionaries wanting change immediately, and the rest of us, willing to live with the fact that political and social change can only occur, more or less, gradually. Not because we want it to, but because society usually makes fundamental change at a glacial pace. But it can go at a slower than glacial pace, and can even go backward to earlier stages of anti-progress. Whether it does or doesn’t depends, to a great extent, on our vote. If a democrat gets the presidency, it will usually result in more favorable conditions for gay rights. That’s why it’s no brainer.
    jp

32. Essie March 22nd, 2007 9:31 am

    Larry, I disagree with your generalization that straights hate gays. I do not hate people just because they are gay. What turns you on is none of my business as much as what turns me on is none of yours. I hate the Chinese food sweet and sour, but I don’t hate someone who likes it. And I don’t hate Bill Clinton just because he may prefer fellaitio, as he allegedly did. One real problem is that you live in America that is basically a fundamentalist, closed society. You mentioned that some young gays were executed in Iran. There you have it. Iran now has a theocratic government, and they don’t hide it.

    You the people have only yourselves to blame. You have allowed your government to interfere with the most personal aspects of your private lives, such as Roe vs Wade. In most courtiers of the world (if not in the rest of the world) this is absolutely a non-issue. It is, however, a big issue in the U.S. because the government wants to distract you from real issues. They make a big campaign issue of abortion and stem cell research, but at the same time they dispatch thousands of young, breathing Americans to their death in Iraq, not to mention the murder of about half a million innocent Iraqis. Their claim about respecting human life vanishes like an ice cube in the sun. The hypocrisy is so obvious that one must be real dumb and blind not to see it. If you were raising chickens just to have them later slaughtered, would you feel sorry and cry over a broken egg?

    The so-called straight guys who either make fun of or discriminate against gays generally belong to the group that are not sure of themselves and want to pretend that they are he-men. Just ignore them, but feel pity for them, because they may look straight on the outside, but they are crooked where it counts—inside their minds. Come to think of it, it looks like gays are more of a so-called he-man than straight guys. I could never get aroused and perform at things they get aroused, if that is supposed to be a sign of manhood.

33. montemerrick March 22nd, 2007 2:32 pm

    johncpt March 22nd, 2007 3:14 am

    on the matter of patience in waiting for social change i might suggest the work of another famous “half-witted revolutionary” MLK Jr and his “letter from a birmingham jail”.

    Wait for what - ignorance to recoil form itself in terror - not likely -

34. Anansii April 7th, 2007 5:04 pm

    The exhortation to patience in any social movement isn’t (or shouldn’t be) an indication to sit back and wait for change to come. It’s a warning that as you continue to work for change, it’s not going to come easily or quickly, so the last thing you should do is give up. Ever.

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)