Gays Haven't Suffered Enough...

Thomathy
SuperfanBronze Member
Thomathy's picture
Posts: 1861
Joined: 2007-08-20
User is offlineOffline
Gays Haven't Suffered Enough...

VIDEO HERE

D.L. Hughley talks to Dan Savage, a gay rights activist, journalist and, incidentally, atheist.

I don't want to spoil any of the interview (Hughley makes some absolutely amazing remarks), but to intice you to watch till the end, look for the part where Hughley makes a particular comment about blacks and be prepared to gape when Hughley ends the discussion by saying that he doesn't think that gays have suffered enough to maybe get their rights.

Comments are appreciated.  If you can point out all of the fallacies employed by Hughley, you've got one up on me.  He commits at least as many as I've ever seen the fundies who post on these forums.

Questions I have for when you've completed watching:

Did Savage seem to hold back?  (For anyone who knows anything about him, he's usually not that pleasant when confronted with such stupidity.)

Does Hughley make any reasonable point?

Should Savage have argued more strongly in any aspect of his arguments?

What aspects of his arguments could use improvement or be dropped all together?

Enjoy the lulz (I can't believe I wrote that), it's like listening to a YECer, except it's a comedian on gay rights.

EDIT:  For those who don't want to watch, but would rather read I have found the transcript of the interview:

Hughley: On November 4, the same day Barack Obama was elected president, voters in California approved the measure that makes same-sex marriage illegal in the state of California. Seventy percent of blacks and 53 percent of Latinos voted to ban gay marriage. So is the gay community holding minorities responsible for this? Here with me now is syndicated sex columnist Dan Savage. How are you doing, Dan?

Savage: Good. I want to jump right in there, because minority communities and the gay community aren't two separate things. There are gay and lesbian African-Americans and gay and lesbian Latinos, who have really done the most disservice by those folks in the communities of color.

Hughley:
Now how do you feel? Election night, you campaigned hard for Obama, you worked hard for him. How did you feel after the election?

Savage: We were elated. I was ecstatic ... Barack Obama won. ... And then the next day, we had to sit down and open the papers and read about the approval of this measure. It was very, very bittersweet. And you know, my boyfriend and I, when George Bush won, we had a long conversation the day after. We talked very seriously about moving to Canada because we're just done with being attacked that way we're attacked in this country for our sexual orientation. And then we found ourselves having that exact same conversation the day after Barack Obama won the election because of what happened in California.

Hughley: Why do you think that so many -- the large percentage of African-Americans -- voted for Proposition 8, and Latinos?

Savage:
Well, there is a lot of outreach that has to be done -- that falls to the gay community, to do outreach to voters of color. But voters of color also have to step up and take some responsibility. It's the responsibility of white people not to be racist. It's the responsibility of men not to be sexist. And it is a responsibility of all of us not to be homophobic.

Hughley: I have to say, honestly, I don't -- I'm not particularly homophobic. But when I read the bill the way it was written, it was a little confusing. When I read it, it asked me to make a decision that didn't -- that I couldn't quantify on the ballot. I can't, for whatever reason, is it my religious upbringing, I don't condone a gay lifestyle, but I also don't condone the government being involved in two people's affairs. So there was no place for me to vote. And I think a lot of black people I talked to found themselves in the same quandary. Had I been more religious, maybe I would have voted yes to ban.

Savage: It needs to be articulated around religion and homosexuality is that you can have your theology and also sign off on gay and lesbian civil rights and full enfranchisement, including marriage. You know, a lot of Christians think Jews are going to hell. Right? And yet Jews can get married in our culture. No one's attempting to strip Jews of their civil rights in our dominant Christian culture. ... Because you know what? If you're going to hell for being gay, ain't that enough? Ain't you going to suffer enough when it's all over? Do you really need to be persecuted here on Earth too?

Hughley:
Here's what I think. I've seen a lot of people, gay activists, make the comparison of basically equating their struggle with the struggle of black people throughout the civil rights era. And that hits me even me kind of wrong.

Savage: And me too.

Hughley: Because historically, millions of people died and they were disenfranchised. Some of them couldn't have a name. This is about one segment, like to be married. And I think that that is none of my business. But I also think that what you asked -- I've never met a black atheist. I never have, because we are so rooted in theology, we are so rooted in all these things, that even me, who -- I'm not a regular churchgoer -- had a hard time going, this is -- this goes against what I was taught.

Savage:
Which is why it's up to the gay community to explain why we're not trying to challenge you on your theology. I think African-Americans will always have claim to the civil rights movement, capital "T," capital "C," capital "R," capital "M." Ours is not the civil rights movement. But ours is a civil rights movement, lower case C-R-M. It is a struggle. You get fired because you're gay, you get fired because you're black, you're still out of a job. If your house gets burned down because you're gay, burned down because you're black, you're still out of a house and maybe dead. Hate is hate. I'm not equating the experience with the history at all. But we are making a civil rights demand.

Hughley:
But I think what happens is that marriage, regardless of the legal aspects of it, are seen mostly religious. You stand before God and you vow to love and to cherish this woman or this man. And so I think people have a -- I know particularly people that I talked to -- had a hard time unhooking the religious component from the civil.

Savage:
But we've long unhooked the religious component from the civil component because you can go to city hall and get married and God will not be invoked. Those are the marriage licenses that we want. We don't want to storm into anybody's church and force anybody's preacher or any religious person to observe our wedding.

Hughley:
So you want to be married. But what about the compromise which people put forth, which is civil unions?

Savage: Right, which no one was offering us until we pressed for marriage. So you asked for the moon and maybe you get the stars.

Hughley:
Was that the point? You wanted something --

Savage:
No, I think we want full civil equality, we want full civil marriage rights. But in the meantime, maybe we would take half the loaf.

Hughley: Well I'll tell you what, being black, I can tell you, you got to march a little while longer and then it might happen. I promise. Look how long it took us to get a president. I hope it works out for you. One thing I don't understand is the government involvement in our bedroom. They can't even deliver my mail.

[Thank you, anonymous CNN transcriber.  Transcription at CNN HERE.]
 

BigUniverse wrote,

"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3704
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
 Oh, I get it.  Hughley

 Oh, I get it.  Hughley doesn't think gays have suffered enough to deserve "street cred" yet.  Whatever.

www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/misanthropy

"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." Rudyard Kipling


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
He's never met a black

He's never met a black atheist? We've had a couple on here. Might be like Christians who say they've never met an atheist period - they have but just didn't know. Not like most of us advertise it - and I'm guessing they don't want to face both racial AND religious bigotry. Not to mention anti-gay bigotry for the gay ones. Be great if he gets a bunch of e mails from black atheists. Maybe he needs to meet the Infidel Guy!

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


El Gato Negro
El Gato Negro's picture
Posts: 35
Joined: 2007-05-16
User is offlineOffline
I'm a huge D.L. Hughley he

I'm a huge D.L. Hughley fan, he is a brilliant comedian. As a political commentator he is really dull. He didn't make his case strong enough and only based his either/or opinion on his religious up bringing. Stick to what you know D.L. but I'm not mad at cha.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Dan Savage is a whore.

Dan Savage is a whore. He should be taken seriously the day after Anne Coulter gets laid...

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Nikolaj
Superfan
Nikolaj's picture
Posts: 503
Joined: 2008-04-27
User is offlineOffline
What AiGS?Firstly, what

What AiGS?

Firstly, what makes you think Ann Coulter doesn't get laid?

I wouldn't do her, maybe you wouldn't do her, but don't you think Limbaugh or Hannity might?

Secondly, if indeed Savage is as you say a whore, why should whores not be taken seriously?

What is it exactly about whorishness that invalidates arguments?

 

Well I was born an original sinner
I was spawned from original sin
And if I had a dollar bill for all the things I've done
There'd be a mountain of money piled up to my chin


AmericanIdle
Posts: 414
Joined: 2007-03-16
User is offlineOffline
What I find irritating is

What I find irritating is the notion that one's collective group must suffer to be granted equality.  So what sort of measure to we use to determine the necessary degree and the necessary time involved to constitute "suffering".  It's a bit absurd.

A more noble approach might be; "I hope no such group deserving of their civil rights has to suffer as we did".

Savage didn't seem as scrappy as he might have been w/ say someone from Faux news, but that doesn't surprise me here.  Savage is a bright guy. 

 

 

 

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10723
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

Dan Savage is a whore. He should be taken seriously the day after Anne Coulter gets laid...

 

Hopefully by Savage. Two birds, one stone. Eye-wink

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Nikolaj wrote:What AiGS?OK,

Nikolaj wrote:
What AiGS?



OK, that was done with all the grace and presence of a drive by shooting. Allow me to try again.


Nikolaj wrote:
Firstly, what makes you think Ann Coulter doesn't get laid?



An unmarried conservative christian? Opposed to condoms and abortion at the same time? Sounds like a large risk of political embarrassment to me. Since she in unabashedly political...well you do that math.


Nikolaj wrote:
I wouldn't do her, maybe you wouldn't do her, but don't you think Limbaugh or Hannity might?



Well, the whole stick figure thing is a bit of a turnoff to me. However, if it came down to Ann Coulter, Hillary Clinton and myself and a need to repopulate the world, then the equation is which of them is greater than 50% likely to still be fertile? As it happens, the answer to that is the same as which one does not look like she fell in a vat of sulfuric acid.


Nikolaj wrote:
Secondly, if indeed Savage is as you say a whore, why should whores not be taken seriously?


What is it exactly about whorishness that invalidates arguments?



Well, I am not saying that he does not have valid points that deserve to be responded to. Perhaps I will take that on in a later post.


For where I stand, I would rather see an end to the idea of marriage as a legal thing. Marriage arises from religion and it should remain there. If Dan Savage and his boyfriend want to meet up with Gene Robinson in Boston and get some form of blessing over their relationship, that is fine by me.


The matter should end there as far as special legal sanctions go. If the happy couple decides to move to California, then they need to abide by the laws of that state.


My point about him being a whore comes from his idea of using his own column to attempt to force his readers to buy his overpriced books. Advertising his books in his column is fine. But having a lengthy discussion with his readers about whether his adopted son is circumcised or not only to say “buy my book for $30 and you can find out” is not fine by me.
 

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
Religion started poking it's

Religion started poking it's nose in marriage after the Norman Conquest in 1066. Before then, it was more or less just a family thing.

 

What is going on in this country is sad. Everyone deserves equal rights, and providing unique legal benefits to marriage while at the same time preventing some people from having it is not going to sit well by anyone's terms of equality.

 

The pushers of the anti-gay movement are the same kinds of people that pushed for blacks not being able to marry (until the middle of this last century) and pushed againt other rights for minorities. I think it is more or less some people feel so inadequate with their lives, they want to feel they have something that makes them "unique" or "special", so they can feel superior to someone else.

 

At least my generation doesn't accept blanket intolerance as easily in their voting. It was mostly the elderly religious that filled the ballots on the side pushing for inequality.

 

Just wait 10-20 years for them to end and things will be in better shape. Assuming the courts don't make a blanket ruling before then.

Theism is why we can't have nice things.