There's a growing political movement spreading in America led by and on behalf of people with a different sexual orientation than heterosexuals. No longer are the categories confined to gay men and lesbian women either. There are now considerations being given to bi-sexuals and transgender as well. Together, they have formed organizations around the country in the name of LGBT.

Although the private sector is slower to provide protection by assigning them the same civil rights as everyone else in this country, colleges and universities are becoming more relaxed in their view by implementing policies and procedures that prohibit unlawful forms of discrimination against people on the basis of their sexual orientation. This has been a growing trend for the past 20 years.

Now the growing debate at these institutions is whether to offfer members of the LGBT community same-sex partner benefits. What this does is recognizes relationships between same-sex partners the same as heterosexual couples. Members of LGBT not only have the right not to be discriminated against, but also the right to live together in university housing, receive the same benefits as legally married couples, etc. Some universities have already granted these privileges, others are in the midst of debating whether to do the same.

This is a movement being led by younger, more radical group of LGBT. As a result of this type of protection and social freedom, more and more are "coming out" and a great many are Black men and women. They are professionals, staff support and students and student-athletes. They are organized and have a clear political agenda and they are successfully pushing their agenda.

Question: Do you think this growing trend will spread eventually into the larger society?

There is evidence on college campuses that there is an increase in activity among this group which says to me its a growing movement. Often, social change on a large scale is incubated and borne at our colleges and universities. Generally in higher education, policy changes tend to occur in accordance with the saying, "the squeeky wheel gets the grease." This is evident when more programs were offered for women and "minorities" over the past 25-30 years at universities.

Marches, sit-ins, protests happen more frequently at universities than society as a whole. Do your research into the history of the civil rights movement in the late 1950s and 1960s and you'll find that the participants were primarily college students. There people have protested against injustices of all kinds and change has occurred as a result. Black and women students protesting against discrimination and unequal opportunities on campus; student protests against public institutions investing in South Africa and apartheid; students with disabilities demanding their right to attend any college in the U.S. by making them more accessible and accomodating to their special needs and the latest demonstrations around affirmative action--largely by students. Washington, D.C. will be flooded with students on April 1 when the Supreme Court addresses the University of Michigan case.

Change doesn't always occur naturally out of the goodness of people's heart. Regardless of how you think people in general might feel, appalled or not, the numbers and the voices of the LGBT community apparently are growing and becoming loudly sufficient to grab the attention of governing boards across the country.

So my question remains, do you think this is a movement that will have an impact on our larger society such that federal and state civil rights laws will include LGBT?

I do believe this trend will spread to main stream society. I think so because people are afraid to stand up for what they feel is right for fear of litigaion. I for one don't believe that it is right to be in a same sex relationship. The bible says it is wrong..therefore it is wrong. To allow the LGBT to succeed in their agenda to be recognized in the same manner as heterosexual marriages is equivilent to condoning other actions that undermine marriages...adultery for example. Is it going to be ok for adulterers to get together and say that it is unconstitional for them to lose equity in divorces? Where does it stop. Homosexuality threatens our very existence. How can it be OK? Does it mean that homosexuals are inherently evil? Probably not. Should they be mistreated or denied basic human rights because they choose to be wrong and sin? NO. But...should we CONDONE and honor their actions the same as we do heterosexual marriges simply because they become large in number and organized in purpose? Hell no!!! We should stand up as men and women and continue to say it is wrong just as we still say adultery is wrong.

Same-sex marriages...no...

Keme, I don't think there's any question that there will be a societal backlash as intense as there was when Blacks fought and died for their freedom in this country, pushed for their civil rights and the right to have the same opportunities as others in this society. That's the nature of a revolution...backlashes. But not all backlashes are successful in the long run as is evident by us as Blacks being where we are today. But I think that it's something that we will have to deal with eventually.

Don't be surprised that this group is larger than you realize. Not everyone of them has exposed their sexual orientation...yet. And, don't be surprised the number of them that are Black. They are our neighbors, co-workers, family members, friends and our sisters and brothers in the very churches we attend on Sunday and guess what..many of them worship the same God that we do. Heck, some are ordained ministers.

Gay couples are buying homes together and pooling other resources, they have the ability to have children and form a family unit. They can almost do anything that heterosexual couples do except be recognized in most states as legally married which doesn't give them the same benefits as a legally married couple. I do believe that there are some states already, i.e., Vermont, that do recognize such marriages already.

So, you can claim they are morally and spiritually wrong according to your beliefs but remember, not all of our politicians believe in or practice the same religion as you do AND some of them are gay as well.

we're having fun

ya'll take a break :lol:

peace

pd

:)

well put kemetstry

i could speak with a gay person and tell him or her
that it is unnatural for a man and another man vice versa
to be together and they would agree with me that it is an
abnormality

but as soon as I, kem, or anyone else decides to pass
judgement on them and tell them that being gay is wrong
then they find it unacceptable

whatever we choose to believe is fine

however, we must allow GOD instead of man to judge
and condemn people who are gay

besides, has there ever been a MAN successful in his
own attempt to turn a GAY woman or man str8 besides
GOD himself? I don't think so. Let GOD do his work.

peace

poeticd

:)

And naturally, every man (and woman) who believes in God, does everything that God has told man to do, right?

I agree with Kemestry on this. Why is gay america wants to equate their struggle with that of Black Americans? There is no equivalent.

Is it about the equivalency or comparison or is it about rights and equality?

It seems gay people want special rights instead of equal rights. I mean really, why does anyone have to know what goes on in your bedroom? And furthermore, why should it be jammed down anyone's throat, that infringes on some people's reliqious rights. For example, there was a lawyer in our clinic ( a male) that had a sex change. He returned to the office and grew offended when people still referred to him with male pronouns. Well my point of view and belief is that if the Y chromosome wasn't changed, he is still male. That is also based on my religion. Now why should my rights be infringed on because of his choice?

I believe this political movement will be recognized by mainstream society. But, given the still-intense dislike for gays, lesbians, bisexuals,etc., these people will undoubtedly suffer terribly. The United States is simply not that sexually tolerant.

Good point, ladyk.

All I have to say on this issue is " All things are lawfull for me, but not all things are advantageous." Coming from 1 Corinthians 6:12 Which in part says to me just because it is not against mans law don't make it right. I throw no stones but I do know how to read.

I found the following link to be very interesting. Keme, toward the end it speaks to much of what you express but it goes farther in the final analysis. Hopefully I'm not violating any forum rules by posting this link. If so, feel free to delete it.

http://hometown.aol.com/GraceEACA/chapter2.html

an interesting article to read.....

I was not suprised though to read that very little of the choices concerning homosexual experiences throughout these periods had nothing to do with x and y chromosomes, but instead had a lot ot do with personal or societal beliefs and a type of (for want of a better word) greed...

K

Elmo why are you apologizing for expressing your views? It isn't necessary imo. The is only a discussion on a topic where many points of view are given and received and yours in one. Thank you for responding.

i don't agree with the gay lifestyle at all, to tell you the truth, i really don't like being around them for the most part...but i do think that it is kinda harsh to say that God does not love them or understand their plight.how many of the 10 commandments have the average hetrosexual broken in their lifetime...does God love them any less if they truely repent?On the other hand, by no means should these gay individuals be given the same rights as hetrosexual bonded couples.julius ceaser was know as every womans husband and every mans wife; there has been studies on homosexual behavior in male sheep, this is not something that just humans do, call it a freak of nature, to tell you the truth i don't know what to call it.but i repeat, by no means should these individuals be given the same tax breaks and benifits of legally married couples.in my eyes their bond is a farse...this coming from someone who sits right next to a gay guy 5 days out of 7.
peace
khasm

Behavior and Being are two different things. Blacks in their Being are Black. Gays are only gay in their behavior.

One does not look at a baby and know that it is a gay baby. Thus being gay is a behavior.

This does Black People a disservice by comparing their Being to other people's behavior.

There is a danger in normalizing behavior. For instance some people have the behavior of having sex with animals. If we normalize homosexuality, why not normalize beastiality?

Why should employers be forced to pay for Gay behavior? Gays have diseases that are only known in the gay community, because the diseases relate to the types of diseases one would normally expect to get if they were constantly sucking, licking or kissing feces.

What about the employee who purposely went and got AIDS? Because many Gays now consider it cool to get AIDS? Should the employer be forced to pay for that?

Here is a story about that sick behavior amongst gays: http://www.rollingstone.com/news/newsarticle.asp?nid=17380

We can not normalize the behavior. And we certainly can not call this behavior the equivalent of the Black Civil Rights movement.

Elmo,

Could you please explain your point to me? I could not tell if you were being sarcastic and were PRO-GAY's, getting extra rights [i call them extra rights because as I said earlier, normal people do not have the right to get their boyfriend or girlfriend on their company health care>

Or if you were anti-extra rights for gays and just hate that gays do normal things [like neck in the park]?

I of course am against all public displays of affections between those who are generationally close in age.

By the way. I will not ban you. I have to agree with Kemet though, you mixed up so many issues, that I also think they are apples and rocks.

And by the way, if you wrote it as I suspect, meaning "so what Gays have been persecuted and murdered by varying countries, their still bad".

I disagree. The Bible says that God leaves "homosexuals" ALONE. Romans

If God leaves them alone, it is also my job to leave them ALONE.

It is a sad commentary on Christians that we are obsessed with Gays, when God is not. I think Christians do it because they get to be "excited" by the ideas of Gay sex.

I do not think you think Gay sex is "disgusting" at all.

6 or so verses about homosexuals.
1000's of verses about poverty and the poor and not oppressing people.

Sadly Christians have focused on the 6 or so verses of Homosexuality, and spent HUNDREDS of years OPPRESSING, STEALING, RAPING and PLUNDERING "poor" people.

That is a tradgedy that Christians will have to answer for.

Elmo,

What if a person said to you that White women face gender bias in this white dominated country [world], so thus Blacks should not be accepted until ALL whites get rights?

You seem to have observed that Gays and lesbians are more acceptable than Blacks in this country.

I submit that Blacks are the most wretched human beings on the earth. Everybody is more acceptable than Blacks in this country.

4 [approx> years ago. Black Gays walked out of a big Gay march on Washington. Because the majority white Gays were being really racist against them. Also I have heard personal stories from Gays [1 formerly Gay brother and 1 lesbian sister] about the fact that whites who are Gay are just as racist as other whites, the Gay changes nothing.

70 percent of Psychiatrists and Psychologists STILL believe that being Gay is a mental illness despite the fact that gay activists disturbed their meetings and gatherings so often that they were forced to remove that category of mental illness to get peace.

In medical circles the "Gay diseases" are talked about and they do not mean AIDS, they mean things like Hepatitus that is specific to Gay people, and other diseases that only Gays carry.

The Gay community also has a addicted to drugs or alcohol rate of 90+ percent.

Gay advocates and institutions and individuals admit that if a Gay person is in a relationship for 5 years, that is considered a lifetime. The fact is, it is well known that Gays generally do not stay in long term relationships to justify putting every current "boyfriend or girlfriend" on the employee health benefits roster.

To me these are the real issues that need to be addressed. We should not normalize something that the facts seem to indicate is bad for your mental and physical and spiritual health.

I just heard the term Apple and Rocks from Kemet. I do not know the history of the term.

For every argument there's a counter-argument.

CS...if you're going to compare sexual lifestyles, then you have to use equivalent factors. Homosexuality vs. heterosexuality. There's still debate as to whether a homosexual is born that way or makes a choice to be that way. In terms of discrimination and rights, the focus is on how people are treated--equity, equal opportunity--not what they do in the bedroom. But for gays who practice a gay lifestyle, that's what people will take into account. We can't pray in classrooms or public forums, can't display a nativity scene in a public building, about to remove "In God We Trust" from American currency, yet we can use a religious doctrine in the courtrooms and political arenas to deny a group of people equal rights. The U.S. Constitution--does it say that it applies to everyone EXCEPT homosexuals? If it does, I'd appreciate it if someone pointed out where.

Just as you believe there is "sick behavior" among gays, I'm sure that there are an equal number of examples of equally "sick behavior" that can be proven in the "straight" lifestyle.

Which diseases are you referring to that are only found in the gay community? AIDS? I disagree because sex is not the ONLY way that the disease can be transmitted. And, has anyone proven that the disease was first transmitted through sexual body fluid? Why couldn't it have been through drug use.

I also believe that "gay" is not solely confined to behavior because just because every gay person may not ACT on their feelings doesn't change who they are or how they feel. The same holds true for heterosexuals.

I wonder whether the depth of hatred leveled against homosexuals hurts them as much as the type of hatred that Blacks were (are) subjected to in this country just because their skin wasn't the "right" shade?

Elmo, why do you feel the need to insult and ridicule people when you post your messages? Even if you're teasing, it sounds harsh and extremely offensive. Is it necessary for you to express yourself with curse words? I would hope that you are just as capable of controlling your temper as you seem to be flying off the handle. You pretend as though you don't want to be banned from the forum, but your behavior certainly contradicts that. Please, don't exploit the privilege you have of sharing this community.

Peace!

Elmo: "These particular two groups make me sick simply because it's something our children shouldn't be subjected to in the near future and a practice that should've been abolished long ago."

What do you suggest be done to abolish homosexuality? ALSO, many states still have laws on the books that abolish certain sexual activity even in the privacy of homes and between consenting adults, that many heterosexuals practice. For example, sodomy is sodomy isn't it, regardless of whether it's done between two men or a man and a woman? Does the Bible speak to the act of sodomy?

Well I see you've exhausted your ability to handle intelligent discussion so feel free not to respond to my posts, Elmo. You won't offend me if you don't. But I'll reserve my right to respond to yours if I feel so inclined. :)

NNQueen,

I agree there is a counter argument for every argument. Gay persons have been able to use this as a weapon. Gay groups right now are asking for the right to have sex with children. [Men with boys] It does not matter how outraged and ludicrous the general population gets at the suggestion, it is only important that it gets debated.

So thus Gays have won, if they simply get it debated about whether they are born that way or not. Once we accept that sexual behavior is innate {sp} we may go a lot further than we intended too.

Fathers who have sex with their children, Maybe they are born that way?
Maybe people who like to have sex with animals are born that way?

Behavior cannot be normalized just because there is a suggestion that someone is born with it.

As far as the legal constitutional argument goes, benefits for the husband or wife is a priviledge not a right. As long as single people do not have the right to benefits for their boyfriend or girlfriend, then homosexuals having this right would make it an extra-right.

This sick behavior of heterosexuals is also illegal [i.e. having sex with your daughter or son, having sex with animals.] so in fact Gays have more sexual priviledges than sick heterosexuals. A father will go to jail [in most cases] if caught having sex with his daughter, a Gay will not be sent if caught with another man.

I was not referring to AIDS. I specifically stated that.

Scientist are pretty positive on who the first US person to get AIDS was, it seems he was a white man who frequented the South American community of 10 year old litte boys, and the African communitys of 10 year little boys, an international gay traveler. Drug use has been eliminated as the cause of AIDS from the first US resident with AIDS.

Gays like Blacks will have to accept that they will always be hated, and it will always hurt. No law will change that, at least for Blacks.

Elmo,

I had a sister, who told me about the terrible discrimination of a Gay employee. I began to question her about this "Gay" employee. She told me the story of how on her first day, she had to tell the "Gay" employee not to be so judgemental. The "Gay" employee was putting down another "first dayer". She judged his behavior to be really superficial and mean spirited. I asked her if the other employees, might know that the guy was a superficial jerk, since they had been working there with him. She agreed and saw that what she at first "that the gay guy was just being treated meanly because he was gay" was probably her being to quick to judge the other employees. As a matter of fact, she then admitted that her boss was Gay! So in fact the Gay faced no discrimination because of his Gayness, people just did not like him because he was "catty".

I tell this story to show why I myself detest "Flaming Gay" males. I do not enjoy being around normal people who are immature, petty, judgemental, self-centered, crass, sex-centered, etc. I have told this to Gays or former Gays and everyone of them to date has agreed that Gays are "catty". I actually got that word "catty" from them. Apparently that is what they call this behavior.

I also get angry at "Flaming Gay" males who dress like women or have surgery to get breasts or a vagina and then think they are a woman! I get outraged at the idea that women are nothing more than "tits" and "***". Women have fought that idea for thousands of years. Only a MAN would think this! Transgender men, show that they indeed are MEN, and have the same thinking as other MEN, when they do this. It outrages me that Gays, inadvertently are fighting against Women's rights, while trying to establish their own weird identity.

So you won't be offended if white people have a show called Amos and Andy and they paint their faces Black and act like they think Blacks act?

To me that is the same as a man putting on a dress and t's and a's and acting like a woman. Particularily with the "crass" behavior they use to show they are women.

By the way shooting some one because they are Gay is not discrimination, it's a hate crime plus murder.

CS, thank you for responding and so thoroughly. You share some interesting information. You're right, you did state your view on the AIDS issue and I noticed it later. Sorry about the oversight.

Peace.

Elmo,

You like me? You like me! Smile.

Nnqueen,

No big deal. AIDS is not directly caused by Homosexuals in Africa [possibly indirectly because the male prostitutes who turn tricks with white Americans and Europeans are not really homosexuals and return to women as soon as they are done getting money for the family from the "tourists".]

So I do not think of AIDS as being homosexual per se, because of course I think on the issue from an African point of view.

The whole premise about giving "rights" to people based on their sexuality is just as foolish for Gays, Lesbians, and Transexuals; as it is for people that screw themselves, children, or animals.

Image if your state allowed beastiality. If people went to a chicken house to get laid, in such a state you proberbly wouldn't complain much but. But, if you as a landlord, found out the lady with all of those cats ... well, .... How would you feel with that activity in your house. :(
As an employer, how would you feel knowing your gameful employ is paying for such activity.

The fact is, if you don't watch out, as soon as you turn your back that politically packed pervert will stick you with something you didn't want.

The focus of the thread is NOT about sex, sexual intercourse, sexually deviant behavior, sexual preferences, foreplay or orgasms. Is it illegal for people of the same-gender to have sex? These references pertain to "behaviors" and not "civil rights." When it comes to civil rights, the only groups whose sexual habits become an issue are gays, lesbians and transgender people. Why? LGBT want the same civil rights as heterosexual or opposite-gender partners. The focus here is, with the growing trend for domestic-partner benefits offered to LGBT couples that are faculty, staff and students at colleges and universities throughout the U.S., do you think this trend will spread to the population at-large?

miki, I find your comment here interesting, maybe you should start a new thread on this topic. I'd would like to know more about what you mean by this and be curious to see the responses:

"I also believe the system of racism promotes homsexuality in the Black community. Females are not subject to the same levels of agression as Black males. I believe this is sensed at an early age. During the era of outright racial violence, it was even dangerous for Black males to exhibit masculinity".