Are “you” (and for the moment, let’s assume the “gay movement” really is a monolithic movement with a cohesive goal) trying to get accepted as equals in this country? Because the whole “gay marriage” thing is a sign that you just might be.
Just curious. And taking an opportunity to point out that this sort of thing probably isn’t going to do you much good:
A controversial advertisement for a San Francisco festival that depicts the Last Supper as a sadomasochism party falls within the First Amendment and is not harmful to Christianity, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Friday. [Note to Rep. Pelosi – “well, duh” regarding the First Amendment – and while Christianity has also survived much worse, I will defer to much better sources than you – Ed.] The ad for the Folsom Street Fair [possibly NSFW] – to be held in Pelosi’s district on Sunday and which is partly funded by San Francisco’s Grants for the Arts program, which is funded by the city’s hotel tax – sparked outrage from Christian groups because it mirrors Leonardo Da Vinci’s famous painting of “The Last Supper” but replaces Jesus and his apostles with scantily leather-clad men and women sitting at a table adorned with sex toys.
Yeah, I know – let the artists romp and play. No biggie.
But the whole thing reminds me of this.
“The parade, organized by the Los Angeles Gay And Lesbian And Bisexual And Transvestite And Transgender Alliance (LAGALABATATA)…” There went my mouthful of Diet Coke. 😀
Wonder if RT Rybik is going there to do some float diving.
But depict Mohammed with a bomb turban. . .
Really? Reminds Angryclown more of this:
http://snipurl.com/1rdx8
Mitch, you know how you hate it when the media lumps legitimate gun owners with school shooters and common hoodlums? It’s kinda the same thing here.
PeterH. Are you saying the gay crowd in San Francisco isn’t mainstream? Right, and Packer fans in Wisconsin aren’t representative of all Packer fans.
AC, you plan on dragging (heh) out every one of the Harvard hasty pudding members picture should some of them achieve public office, or just the Republican ones?
Mitch, you know how you hate it when the media lumps legitimate gun owners with school shooters and common hoodlums? It’s kinda the same thing here.
“Kinda” the same is right! Hoods and murderers are criminals; every legit gun owner wants to see them put away for a long time. The people who turned “The Last Supper” into an S&M parody are operating with not only government approval, but funding. BIG difference.
But I think I disclaimed that pretty well in my first ‘graf.
No, I’m not suggesting that the mainstream of the gay movement is the same as these freaks in San Francisco. But if a “straight group” were to photoshop a pic of the Stonewall Riot (peace be upon its name) to give all the particpants, say, “700 Club” T-shirts, would the “gay movement” have a right to complain?
The Onion-Moving closer to reality every day, since 1988.
Or rather Reality-moving closer and closer to The Onion.
Some days, its like the Onion completely took over the regular newspaper.
buzzkill wondered: “AC, you plan on dragging (heh) out every one of the Harvard hasty pudding members picture should some of them achieve public office, or just the Republican ones?”
Hasty, yes. Pudding? No. That was when Ru-Rudy was mayor.
Yes, I know. I also know that every year Harvard Hasty pudding members dress up in drag, and being from Harvard and all, much too high of their numbers will eventually end up in elected office. Hence my question. While I know you can currently make the excuse that it only counts if they were elected or holding office BEFORE the dressing in drag, I know how easy those requirements might change for you should one of said Harvard alumni take office as a Republican.
Mitch, a friend of mine is active in the gay rights movement. According to him, the push toward marriage came from outside the traditional gay rights movement. Many of the gay rights establishment are either ambivalent to the idea of same sex marriage or are outright hostile to it.
Andrew Sullivan writes about some of this. He received a lot of hate mail from the gays for promoting marriage back in the 90s. Other places, I have read “queer theorists” complain that the push for same sex marriage threatens to alienate the bisexuals, polys, transgender, and other queer folk.
As to the “kinda,” yes, I know that legit gun owners are working within the law. But those who’s like to limit their rights like to hold up examples of school shooters and random gun violence in order to promote their point of view, even though legit gun owners are not the ones shooting students or kids walking home from a party.
By the way, the “Rudy dressed in drag so the conservatives should hate him” is another example of liberals exploiting bigotry to further partisan aims. The goal of liberals ought to be to reduce bigotry, not to promote it.
PeterH,
A better – certainly more apt – comparison among gunnies would be guys in camouflage.
That’s one of the things that makes anti-gunners and gun agnostics the most uncomfortable about the gun movement; guys in camo, especially the ones that look like they just came down from the hill country with the wild tangly beards and missing teeth (and having worked a few gun shows with CCRN, I know there are a few of ’em out there).
One of CCRN’s rules for lobbying – and *strong* suggestion for coming to rallies and legislative hearings – was “no camo”. Dress up. Don’t fill anyone’s stereotype for them. Make ’em WORK to marginalize you.
Ipso this piece.
Peter, interesting take (on the gay marriage thing). My view is somewhat similiar…..I see much of that as the latest cause for the hard liberals. When they start comparing Rosa Parks to Judy Garland impersonators…..
Peter projected: “By the way, the `Rudy dressed in drag so the conservatives should hate him’ is another example of liberals exploiting bigotry to further partisan aims.”
Or maybe it just makes him look like a buffoon, Petey. But I don’t want to tell you your business. If there’s one thing wingnuts know, it’s bigotry.
Upchuck barfed: “When they start comparing Rosa Parks to Judy Garland impersonators….. ”
There we go!
I’d love to see a thread on when we think Polygamist marriage will become the next big liberal cause. I say 2012. So far even many on the left are still Polyphobic.
Angryclown, I suppose you out-liberal me, but I’m not usually confused with the wingnuts.
A sure-fire way to get confused with wingnuts is to post an illogical criticism of liberals, Peter. If in fact you are not a wingnut, but a normal American, than I regret the error and rejoice for your mental health.
It is illogical to portray liberals as being bigoted because they believe a man wearing a dress cannot be president. In a few months time they will choose Hillary Clinton as their presidential candidate.
angryclown has a difficult time distinguishing between a ‘wingnuts’ and a ‘normal American’?
Say it isn’t so! 😉
Mitch, I agree that the camo guys make for a better analogy.
Clown feltched, “Argha, aelouth uryly mluphough snneh.”
Whatever.
I have a hard time distinguishing between Jeff Gannon/Guckert, and the average wingnut blogger too.