BlogHer - Proposition 8 and the Black Community - Are We At Fault? - Comments

Not a Brilliant Chess Move

Liberal Sista — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:48:02 -0500

I found the results of Prop 8 to be morbidly disgusting! Although I am a Black heterosexual female, nevertheless I have always supported gay marriages, same-sex adoptions, as well as upholding the Supreme Court decision of Roe V Wade. Unfortunately, Christianity has a played a vital role in many Black communities. Many African Americans are physically liberal, but socially conservative. What went wrong with Prop 8 and the Black vote? A.S.S.U.M.P.T.I.O.N and BAD MARKETING! There is a smaller percentage of Blacks living in California than any other ethnicity group. There are more faith-based televised sermons advertised on BET, than MTV or VH1. There were no grassroots campaign pushing the opposition agenda of Prop 8 in Black and Hispanic urban/suburban areas. Kanye West, a rapper who has openly expressed his support for gay marriages would have been a great spokesperson for the Black community. Politics is a game of chess, and Prop 8 is just one of the 16 pieces! The Mormans understood their religious constituents. If you want to forward a faith based agenda among minorities, then target the Black churches. President Bush did this during his Presidential campaign. Trying to push Prop 8 right after the Presidential victory of President Obama {without gaining a favorable amount of attention to this subject from Blacks and Hispanics} was infantile. You want Prop 8 eradicated? Then reach out to the Black community. It's NEVER too late! I still support same sex marriages.

Here is a great chess move. According to DADI, 69% of births among Black women were to unwed mothers. Black women are the least likely to be married (more than any other women of any different ethnicity). Call the Black churches out on their hypocrisy. The older pre-Civil Rights generation do not believe that Gay-Marriage is a civil rights issue, so don't make it one! It's a losing battle! Instead create this argument, "Why are so many African-Americans concerned about respecting the institution of marriage, when so many children in Black communities are being born out of wedlock?" This would be a great debate to take on with Black pastors. A widely publicized debate on BET with pastors {like Creflo A. Dollar and TD Jakes}, would push the issue among many young voters in HBCUs (historically Black Colleges and Universities). Target the Black Gay Elite in Atlanta, Georgia to pull further resources. They are well connected to many other Black organizations and learning institutions. I hate to admit this, but the failure of Prop 8 did not lie with the Mormans or religious Blacks. The failure lied with the upper-middle class gay elite who refused to form allies with the Black and Hispanic communities. The Morman churches CAME PREPARED!

One very important thing

BrownImani — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:35:32 -0600

One very important thing most people here are not talking about (well Bill touched on it) is that Black people are extremely conservative and traditional. Even those that are unchurched and/or not religious. I don't know why America and white people in general do not recognize and understand this very fundamental "thing" about Black people. We have shown this side of ourselves time and time again. It goes across generations and lifestyles! We cling to our traditions !! Why do you (LGBTQ) assume that Black people will go along with anything. Do you think we are sheep? I find that assumption offensive and possibly racist.

And then come threats that since we didn't help you get your way then our 'ball' should be taken away !!

I think someone definitely has some work to do but it is not the African-American community. Sounds like we know where we stand.

Good Points

Bill Cammack — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 04:04:27 -0600

hmm... Thelea has some good points there. I don't live in California, so I don't know the answers to them.

Even if we assume (which we shouldn't) that 70% of blacks believe that marriage is only between a man and a woman, how many blacks ARE THERE in the entire zone where the votes were counted? What percentage do they make up? Would losing 100% of the black vote in this situation make a difference if the non-blacks wanted something different?

And then... How many of the 70% actually flipped the lever to vote on the issue? How much of an issue is this within the so-called "black community"? Does anybody know?

For example... Here in NYC, there was some extra thing off to the side when I went to vote. It was way off to the right, and the voting choices start from the left. The only reason I even looked over there is that I know a lot of people that were talking and blogging about propositions about marriage and parental notification for abortion, so I decided to see what we had on the table.

There was this questions about war veterans this and that... The wording wasn't clear as far as what a "yes" would mean and what a "no" would mean. Knowing nothing about the situation AT ALL, I just read it, thought about it, and then didn't vote on it at all, because it doesn't make sense to vote blindly on something that doesn't affect you at all. Personally, I think that war veterans have sacrificed for our country, so I'd like them to get all the help they can get with PTSD or whatever's wrong with them when they come back. Since I couldn't figure out on the spot whether I would be helping them or not, I didn't vote at all.

Similarly, what would be (and this doesn't really have to do with "the black community", but rather everyone, in general) the motivation for someone to vote on this proposition one way or the other, if they see it as a complete non-issue? The "who cares?" non-vote is as important as the "yes" or "no" vote. This is one of the reasons why Barack Obama trounced John McCain in the election. So many people from the "who cares?" camp decided to make their voices heard and made sure they voted, even if that meant standing on lines for three hours.

So, the key, getting back to Lainad's friend's dilemma isn't to get upset and throw temper tantrums. What he needs to do is start campaigning, not only to pull the people that voted "yes" over to the "no" side, but to convince the people (and there were probably a lot of them) that just.don't.give.a.damn because it has nothing to do with their lives at all, to see things his way and joing him in the next voting opportunity.

~ Bill
I blog at billcammack.com

Divisive Rhetoric Re: Prop 8

thelea — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 00:17:53 -0600

I am upset about this erroneous finger pointing at African-Americans regarding Proposition 8. Why are you so quick to believe whatever you hear? If someone told me 70 percent of gay people voted against Obama my first thought would be, I don't believe it! This political year was fraught with right wing lies. Bear that in mind.

"Religious organizations that support Proposition 8 include the Roman Catholic Church], Knights of Columbus, Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) a group of Evangelical Christians led by Jim Garlow and Miles McPherson, American Family Association, Focus on the Family[and the National Organization for Marriage Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church, California's largest, has also endorsed the measure. The Bishops of the California Catholic Conference released a statement supporting the proposition. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) has publicly supported the proposition and encouraged their membership to support it, by asking its members to donate money and volunteer time. The First Presidency of the church announced its support for Proposition 8 in a letter read in every congregation. Latter-day Saints have provided a significant source for financial donations in support of the proposition, both inside and outside the State of California. About 45% of out-of-state contributions to Protect Marriage.com has come from Utah, over three times more than any other state.

Still, even though gays were fighting to preserve a basic right, it was the anti-equality side in California that seemed to have the most fervor. A symbolic low point for the gay side came on Oct. 13, when the Sacramento Bee ran a remarkable story about Rick and Pam Patterson, a Mormon couple of modest means - he drives a 10-year-old Honda Civic, she raises their five boys - who had withdrawn $50,000 from their savings account and given it to the pro-8 campaign. "It was a decision we made very prayerfully," Pam Patterson, 48, told the Bee's Jennifer Garza. "Was it an easy decision? No. But it was a clear decision, one that had so much potential to benefit our children and their children.”

This is the real enemy. Don't trust exit polls. I think they are pitting one group against the other. African-Americans are less than 7% of the state population, do the math. Many more Whites voted and they put this over, not Blacks. What are the total numbers of each group that voted. Someone dug into the data and found that we're just now learning is that the exit poll was based on less than 2,300 people. If you take into account that blacks in California only make up about 6.2%, we get roughly 224 blacks who were polled. 224 blacks to blame an entire race! The original percentage of black voters who were expected to say yes to Prop 8 was only around 52-58%. Anytime you get a vote that much higher over the projected vote, something went wrong.

I know someone who watches C-Span and they said most Blacks did not even address the question at all. And they do not have the money to fund a tens of millions of dollars Proposition 8 campaign. Note that they also targeted affirmative action for eradication in another state.

Rather than be upset at the phantom African-American menace, fight like hell. I cannot believe that these larger groups who came out in droves to craft and fund this legislation get a pass and Blacks are being targeted for the blame game. There is no right wing black conspiracy against gay Americans. When they tried to align your struggle with that of Blacks they inherited their enemies. These same enemies are now trying to pit one against the other because they fear the combined numbers of both.How many gay activists supported the civil rights movement in the 1960’s? Then how do you automatically expect support in return? Have they asked Blacks to support them or did they just assume?

No one gave Obama anything and they will not give gays anything either. Obama stands on the shoulders of a lot of brave people who gave their lives for him to stand on that podium last night.

Never trust exits polls because in all my years of life, no one has ever been seen at a polling place asking anyone anything when they left.

Don't fall for the lies.

And the people have spoken. They have as much right not to want this as we did to want President Elect Obama. Fight this in the court of appeals and not the court of opinion by targeting Blacks for hatred and enmity.

Thanks Bill, Nordette, Gena and all the other Bloghers

lainad — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:27:25 -0600

Your comments are greatly appreciated.

Bill, you are right, life is reality but everyone's reality seems so vastly different and most of the time, they clash. I think one of the main issues is that there is this assumption that one's reality trumps other's and then the others fight back. We cannot accept sometimes that one person's life experiences are so vastly different from ours, but instead of accepting it, we lash out, I guess ( geez, I feel like I am talking in circles!)

TOQ, I hope you don't think that the premise of this post was to pit one 'group' against the other, but by not addressing Savage's article would not be a good thing, either. You probably know that in our society, it seems like blacks are not supposed to defend themselves or their percived triflin' behaviour. We are supposed to suck it up and take it.

I take offense to Savage's lump assumption that 'all' Black Americans are responsible for the overturning of Prop 8. I take offense that he has done what is commonly done whenever one person or a group of people do something that is offensive, which is to blame the entire population. More importantly, I know that people who are looking to add onto their reasons to hate and more importantly, discriminate against black folks love that shit. "See. See? I told you so." It justifies their beliefs and their behavour. We do not have the luxury to do that openly and get away with that. Sorry. That is my reality I guess!

Of course we should all look out for each other's civil rights, and maybe Obama is pissed, I dunno. but that is the reality we are all living in right now. A shared reality - maybe the only one we share. Maybe Obama's presidency will change that but you know what? I highly doubt it.

Contributing Editor - Race, Ethnicity & Culture

Writing is Fighting: www.lainad.typepad.com

Although...

Tonyo313 — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:18:10 -0600

Let me add, in the end, you are only bothered by gay marriage if you are bothered by gays!

Prop 8 and People of Color

Tonyo313 — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:14:28 -0600

As a queer person of color (multi-racial), I am a bit dismayed by some of the language here.

First, this is NOT an "either/or" situation. Most queer people are people of color, and many people of color are queer in some way or another.

Second, I do not think that President Elect Barack Obama would actually approve of the vitriolic nature of some of the statements here.

Third, we all can only succeed by looking out for EVERYONE'S civil rights, and it is not the African-American community's fault that LGBTQ people lack certain rights and access, nor is it gay white males' fault that people of color lack certain rights and access. This is playing into the hands of those who would divide and conquer, and is counter-productive to the goal of freedom and equal rights for all!

Thank you and peace,

T.O.Q.

Life is Reality

Bill Cammack — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:13:41 -0600

Excellent article, Lainad... However, life is reality. Everybody can't win every time.

There are lots of Americans that wanted John McCain to be the next President. Unfortunately for them, they live in states with ZERO electoral votes while Barack Obama was picking up 20 and 30 at a time. That's Life.

Same thing with this particular vote. Just because someone thinks that "no" should get the most votes doesn't mean that's going to happen. That's the system. The whole idea is that the people that live in an area get to vote for what THEY think is right. If that's opposed to what YOU think is right, that's just too bad, and better luck next time.

Your friend happens to be an idiot. Just because he's upset that this vote didn't go his way, that doesn't mean he gets to remove any black rights. He doesn't get to lower the drinking age. He doesn't get to raise the age for consensual sex. He doesn't get his team another chance to win the World Series.

What he needs to do is state his case to people that live in that area so that he convinces them NEXT TIME to vote the way he wants them to vote. If he can't do that, he's going to lose again, and he needs to not bitch and moan about other people's rights that he has nothing to do with and no say over.

As far as the black community, everybody knows that the vote is going to be HEAVILY skewed towards marriage being between a man and a woman. No reason to cry about it... Find ways to convince black people otherwise, and the next time, the result might be different. Your friend certainly isn't going to GAIN support for his ideas by coming up with wacko premises about what should happen if he doesn't get his way. All he's doing is alienating people who might have carried the banner for him into their communities and spoken up for what he's trying to achieve in his lifetime.

~ Bill
I blog at billcammack.com

Then let's change the Domestic Partnership Laws!

Teresah — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:51:29 -0600

Wouldn't that be easier than trying to drag people kicking and screaming to change the marriage definition? I am certain that the people in defense of the current definition of marriage would happily endorse the changing of the DP laws. Even if not all of them come on board for that, you will certainly get a majority vote on it. In addition to that, you could certainly hold a marriage ceremony with your family and friends, after all that is what heterosexual couples do. The point of a ceremony is to witness the committment of a couple so that can not only celebrate that couple, but to say that they witnessed the committment and will do what they can to help hold that couple accountable to keep their committment. Admittedly, not many people realize this and if they did, they are not inclined to accept that responsibilty.

As for the other countries, I am certain that you are more informed on which countries have same-sex marriages more than I am, which is why I made the statement that I did. Thank you for the information, I will check it out.

All true

GreyDay — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:08:15 -0600

All true, but no one can deny the church has influenced positive change as well as negative.
How does anyone get rid of the bad without also getting rid of the good?

An entertainment & culture blog for women of color
http://GreyDaySoul.blogspot.com

My Celebrity blog - http://RoseRollinsFanBlog.blogspot.com

Maybe it's the delivery..

vandalgrrl — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 22:50:53 -0600

I am about twenty minutes South of San Francisco. A lot of people around here are blaming the "Newsom Effect" for the ban passing. I don't know how far the commercials reached but there is a clip from a speech he gave about gay marriage and made a bonehead declaration that people have to accept gay marriage "whether they like it or not" and if anyone was on he fence about it, that would have pushed them against gay marriage. You don't win support by rubbing people's noses in crap. The commercial also includes clips of first grade students at a lesbian wedding and I think that didn't help either. Hopefully in the future the topic will be addressed with a more gentle attitude instead of ramming it down people's throats.

Whatever the reason, it's all pretty sad. Homosexuals should have every right to be happy.

-Tiff

I've thought on this deeply before

Nordette — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 22:38:59 -0600

The reasoning that Martin Luther King, Jr., was a Christian minister and the Civil Rights movement, which worked largely through the black church, encroached the separation of church and state is the same logic some politically active white fundamentalists have used, in part, to justify their motivating their members to get involved and push a Christian agenda on the nation. What they ignore is that southern churches were active as well during the Civil Rights movement speaking against Dr. King and integration, declaring the mixing of the races to be an abomination. So, many traditional churches were on the wrong side of civil rights.

It's probable today that some black ministers think that urging their members to vote against a specific proposition that will result in stripping another group's right to marry in the name of God is proper too because they believe to be gay is a choice and not a state from birth. It's hard to convince them otherwise just as some Catholic priests died after Columbus sailed to America still believing the earth is flat, some Christian pastors will die believing it's impossible that anyone is born gay.

If they were to accept that people may be born gay, then they would have to consider the possibility that God cursed something God created. I don't see a conflict because from what I can see there are quite a few natural states that God in the Bible calls sin, and most of us commit these sins each day and there's no worldly law against them. So, if I err, then let it be on the side mercy and the humility that says I do not know humans' hearts as God does. I will chose to reflect mercy and not the mask of the Pharisee. It's not my job to tell someone else how he or she is supposed to live. It's my job to be an example of how to love, an area in which most of us fall short.

But is being gay a choice or not? Is it a sin or not? Is any of this even important to the Prop 8 discussion? It seems to me the root of this discusssion is the right to choose how to live one's own life with the same opportunities as others and some churches seek to prevent that choice. Many Christians who adhere to the literal interpretation of scripture can't see that this is another choice issue, but even if they did, they'd probably still be against it the same way they are against a woman's right to choose abortion.

They strongly believe that to be gay is wrong and can't see that even if you believe that something is wrong or "against God" that if it is a personal matter, a deed that should be that person's decision alone, then Christians don't have the right as Americans or Christians to take away the opportunities and choices of others. But what they shout is that God's law is higher than man's law and tune out any suggestion that God has not given them the the right to force other people to live by whatever laws they believe God requires. Short of an Israelite theocracy, Christians may not push their beliefs, lifestyles, and practices upon other citizens.

To further make my point, I look at the example of Jesus. He didn't force himself on anyone. As I heard one pastor's wife say, "Jesus was very polite," when it came to asking people to follow him. He said behold I stand at the door and knock and left the choice up to the person to open the door. He did not say behold I stand at the door with a battering ram. So, however long Christians may wish to argue about whether anyone is born gay or chooses to be gay, or wheter to be gay is an abomination, their discourse has nothing to do with Proposition 8. Christians, if they are being Christlike, will allow their fellow citizens to make their own choices about lifestyle when that lifestyle does not injure others or force others to act against their own will.

The difference between what Martin Luther King, Jr., did and what some churches are doing today is that King called America to live up the ideals set forth in the Declaration of Independence in a way that was already compatible with Christian belief that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile, male nor female, that in the eyes of God all humans are equal. He wanted Americans to stop lying and start behaving like Americans. If that behavior ends up similar to how Christians should behave it's conincidental.

So, I don't see a conflict between church and state when churches work to help the nation live up to what its own constitution requires and what its own documents profess as ideals. The problem comes when the church's goal is to force the nation to live according to what the church requires.

SOME Evangelical and fundamentalist Christians follow Dominion Theology, the belief that Christians should take dominion over the world, and others go a step further and declare the founders of America were all Christians and so they aspired to see this nation "under God." These teachings are in direct opposition to the separation of church and state, which is that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," because Dominion Theology promotes seeing a Judeo-Christian theocracy manifest in this nation. Unfortunately, it's this type of doctrine that frequently spurs churches to political action. (Here is a link to one Christian's writing who has some insights into what I've just said, but I don't know what else he believes.)

Whew! I'm weary and worn out from discussing politics, sex, and religion, all topics my mother warned me never too discuss. Yet, as bloggers, we do it all the time. :-)

Nordette is a Contributing Editor with BlogHer.com whose personal blog is hosted on another site at this link.

Churches Are People In Pews

Gena Haskett — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 19:48:50 -0600

Some churches fully supported segregation, in the name of faith and found justification in the Bible to do so. Some Black churches teach the subjugation of women is the only path to being right with God.

Faith, to me, is my connection to Spirit. And I don't think I can ask to be delivered from one form of oppression to wish a similar form on another person.

If a law cannot be applied equally then it is an unjust law. No amount of money or fear can change that. Only when people stand to do the right thing is an unjust law corrected.

Gena - Out On The Stoop

I'm torn.

GreyDay — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 19:05:44 -0600

I'm torn about the issue of separation of church and state. Without the black church there would have never been a Civil Rights movement, Never a Rev. Martin Luther king, we wouldn't have an Obama now.
Even Malcom X came out of religion. Yes, I disagree with the Mormons, BUT where would black people be without our churches being involved in politics?

I don't know.

An entertainment & culture blog for women of color
http://GreyDaySoul.blogspot.com

My Celebrity blog - http://RoseRollinsFanBlog.blogspot.com

A Sexual Jim Crow Law

Gena Haskett — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 17:15:29 -0600

Something that has been pounding in my head and will not let me alone with Prop 8. I will only speak for myself here. Yell at me and not the millions of other CA Black Voters. I voted no and nobody asked me anything about it.

I want to state upfront that I am trying to write a post about the history of marriage. It ain't what everyone think it is but not sure if I can pull it off effectively anytime soon.

Point 1. Marriage is a legal construction not a religious one. Yes, folks may have a ceremony in a church, temple or mosque but you need a legal license to get married and become married.

There are qualification: such as you don't marry a close relative that has to do with genetics and malformed children and that you understand what you are about to step into because it is a legal contract.

So when religious organization interfere in a legal process I get concerned.

You see, the Yes on 8 people don't give a rat's ass if an Atheist straight couple gets married. Well, they do but there are no law to prevent it. Why? It is not a church matter.

It is a decision between two consenting adults that are about to sign a legal document. It is not a gay right issue. It is an issue of prohibiting legal adults from exercising the right to obtain a license and deny the rights, privileges and perks that married people enjoy that I as a single women do not have access.

If you take tax dollars from gay people, if you market goods and services to those same people but you are prohibited from being married then it becomes a civil rights issue.

We have instituted a sexual Jim Crow law. Yes, I said "Jim Crow." I will equate this like not being able to drink or sit where you want. I equate this as it is "ok for you provide me goods, services and entertainment but I really don't want to know that exist in the society." Segregation protected white folks from too much contact with black folks.

How is this not segregation?

I am not deliberately trying to be simplistic but I do want be clear. I would submit that many of the Yes on 8 votes did not know what they were "protecting." That transcends race.

The fear of sex, sexual identity and fear based sex politics fuel by religion is noxious. It was a successful toxic presentation.

Point 2. Money was poured into California by religious organizations especially during the last three weeks of the election. The messages presented on television and were out and out lies, distortions and misleading.

The No on 8 campaign did not effectively counter those lies or perhaps did not have the funding to do so, I don't know.

Let's not leave out conservative talk radio as an agitating participant. The one local radio station that did speak about this KPFK, a Pacifica station, is not listened to in the Black community.

We forget that an effective ad campaign that simplifies a complicated issue using fear i.e. teach our children about gay marriage, will trump measured thought 7 out of 10 times.

The TV ads No On 8 had early in the campaign were too subtle. We needed to see gay men and lesbian women tell their stories on M$M. That happened on YouTube but the people that needed to hear the other side never saw them.

3. It does seem to me that when something does not go a certain groups way there needs someone to be blame for an issue. It does seem that it is so easy to look toward African-Americans.

It maybe true that a good percentage of black folks voted yes. Hells bells we were not the only people at the polls. Anybody pointing fingers at Orange county voters in affluent households?

I got photos of white people in Pasadena holding up signs with pride. Want to blame them? Anybody want to blame the Evangelicals, the Catholics, the Baptists or the Church of Latter Day Saints or any other group that pumped in money?

I have something I want to submit as a reason it failed. To this day we do not understand that there is a spectrum of healthy adult sexual identities and expressions. America is puritanical and sex information deprived.

It always comes back to the ongoing war between ignorance and education. Dan Savage, of all people should know that.

Gena - Out On The Stoop

Proposition 8 and the Black Community - Are We At Fault?

lainad — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 20:49:43 -0600

I was going to talk about the rather chilly racial climate in Toronto post-presidential election, but this piece caught my eye. Sex columnist Dan Savage opined over the demise of Proposition 8 in California -and guess who is accused of its downfall?

I’m not sure what to do with this. I’m thrilled that we’ve just elected our first African-American president. I wept last night. I wept reading the papers this morning. But I can’t help but feeling hurt that the love and support aren’t mutual.

I do know this, though: I’m done pretending that the handful of racist gay white men out there—and they’re out there, and I think they’re scum—are a bigger problem for African Americans, gay and straight, than the huge numbers of homophobic African Americans are for gay Americans, whatever their color.

Oh please. Yeah, I said it. Let me explain what has added to my fustration to Savage's belief: A couple of weeks ago I was chatting via IM with a male friend (white, gay) about Proposition 8. Admittedly, I had only a general knowledge that the issue would be raised during the election and my friend and I both expressed how disappointed we were. Then my friend says, ‘well, if gays do not have the right to marry, than Blacks should lose their civil rights.’ I was shocked. At first I tried to respond in a mature and civilized way that would not ruin our almost 15-year friendship, but later on, I was angry at myself for not responding the way I had immediately felt after he said that, which would have been to cuss him out. Did he think about the lack of logic to his argument before he said that, or was he simply lashing out in anger? And while I said that I thought his views were extreme and irrational, should I have called him a bigot? there was an insinuation that his rights as a gay man somehow trump my rights as a black woman and a dismisiveness to the rights that people died for just to be able to be treated as human beings. I resent those implications.

Yes, obviously discrimination against the LGBT community is abhorrent. Just like racism, sexism and ageism is. But what irked me was that my friend, whom if he chose to, can conceal his sexuality to his co-workers and family members, (which he has, BTW) - yet my blackness and my gender cannot be concealed and I cannot choose to hide it in the public eye when it is suitable for me. Regardless of his sexuality, he is a man, and because of patriarchy, has more privledge as a white man than people of color. But does this means that racism trumps homophobia? No, it does not. does that mean that the LGBT community should hide their partners and their social lives? Certainly not. But people who make those pronouncements ( and this is not the first time I had heard such an argument) have to realize that discrimination comes in a different form for people of colour and you cannot always equate one discriminatory act with another.

Secondly, while I resent the implication from Savage that 'all blacks are homophobic' I have to say that in my experience, I have met a number of black folks whom, under the guise of religion, are extremely homophobic. Danielle's at the Black Snob, writes,

Basically, "we" have a lot of nerve when we call for the limiting of someone else's rights. Especially when there are so many black people who are gays and lesbian who don't feel the love and support of our community. All because we are so wrapped up in one passage in Leviticus and not the numerous others we ignore (shellfish, anyone?), not the other parts of the Bible we ignore, not acknowledging that we cherry pick and interpret as we choose in an effort to do to others what was done to us.

Melissa Harris-Lacewell at The Kitchen Table tends to agree with Savage - or at least sides with Savage in the presumption that all blacks are homophobic:

Is this going to be our legacy as a people? Will African Americans prove to be little more than a selfish, regressive, identity group who snatch a symbolic victory for themselves while simultaneously denying full democratic equality to others? If so, then we are no better that the HRC supporters who now wave Sarah Palin banners because they are determined to have a uterus in the White House.

In Savage’s post, he insinuates that perhaps the California LGBT communities – and everyone non-black, for that matter – who voted for Obama was somehow doing blacks a favour. That they, despite the better policies that the Democrats put forth in relation to the Republicans, meant nothing. It was simply to show how liberal they are or to perhaps stop the race riot that of course would have ensued in Compton if McCain won. Adam Serwer from American Prospect’s blog Tapped writes:

Those in the LGBT community who voted for Obama voted for the same reason everyone else did: because voting for him was in their interest. Black folks don't owe white people anything because Obama is the president-elect. Period. You didn't elect him for us; you elected him because you thought he was the better candidate.

I do not beleive that the 'black vote' led to the demise of Proposition 8. But, hell, I'm a Canuck so what do I know? I do think that, just like all the racial crap that came out just before the election, this is a strategic plan to try and cut down the importance of the election, the not-so hidden resentment from some who think that Obama as President is somehow a 'victory' for all African-Americans at the expense of....well everyone else. The fear that because some have supposedly 'won' means that others will suffer. That was during the Republican era baby, y'all getting that messed up. It's a new day.

Don't beleive the hype. Just fight to try get this law re-enacted for the sake of all Americans.

For more info, please check out Pam's House Blend .