Dear miffed GLBT DUers...

[UdoKier]

I understand your feelings. I really do. And they are not unfounded. But I also want to say that what you are seeing today is mostly NOT DUer homophobia. I'm certain that 99% of us would like to see GLBT people with full marriage and adoption rights, IE equal rights.

BUT - as a party we are in a horribly weakened position.

The rancor now and in the coming weeks is all about trying to find consensus on how to best achieve and protect gay rights in the future, and still appeal to enough of the mainstream to be relevant.

Lashing out at those of us WHO CONTINUE TO BE ON YOUR SIDE and calling us HOMOPHOBES for trying to hash this out is just as divisive and counterproductive as it would be to say "It's the gays' fault we lost" (something most of us have NOT been saying".

You may say I don't understand, but I do. I'm straight in practice, but I've been around the block a few times, and I've been called a faggot on MANY occasions just for being a democrat. AND I'm an atheist, which the christians find even MORE abominable than your "sin".

I despise homophobia, whether in the guise of the violent skinhead or the self-righteous housewife who says "hate the sin, love the sinner".

But we can't let this party die, we just cannot. I know about diebold, I know, but we need to win on a local level, and we need to win so big on a national level that it CAN'T be hacked.

Please don't kneejerk and call everybody homophobe that wants to reasess the party's approach to gay rights. Unless they actually call for discrimination of some kind, you have no reason to call them that, although you probably do have good reason for hypersensitivity at this point, especially since you are HUMAN BEINGS with lives and feelings, and yet you are being bandied and bounced about, treated as just an ISSUE - which is in and of itself insulting, and you don't deserve that.

I don't know if this post makes any sense at all. My basic hope is for peace between all of us on this thing, but I'm not always good at expressing myself, and end up getting flamed.

So if this post pisses you off for whatever reason - I'M SORRY IN ADVANCE!

[foreigncorrespondent]

1. Well the simple answer...

...to tell these people to stop kneejerking and blaming us for the election loss.

Not once have I come out and called anyone a homophobe during my rants in replies to the countless attacks we have faces since Tuesday night. And you are not one to talk either, because you are one of the people who began one of these threads.

Put yourself into our shoes for five minutes. A lot of the queer DUers worked their asses for this election campaign. They put their own feelings aside regardless of what we were facing from the right as well as from those on the left who truly do not support us and see us as something that costs them elections. In 2000 we copped this shit, and for the last four years we have put up with this shit coming up on DU and other progressive forums from time to time. Hell I remember not to long ago (and you should as well, because you were around back then under one of your other names) one certain member was going around constantly spouting how us gays cost the 2000 election.

Now it is 2004 and we are getting a repeat performance. Are we going to have to hear about this every other day for the next four years? Or wouldn't it be better than instead of dividing the democratic party even further apart, trying to pull us all back together, so we can work for the greater good? And that greater good is proving that election 2004 was a FRAUD!

Is it fair that after all the hard work we have done as well, that we must again be the victims, when we are the ones who face becoming federally sanctioned second class citizens next year? (BTW in my country, I am already a federally sanctioned second class citizen, I certainly don't want my partner being classed in the same boat as me, in her country.)

I don't know about you, but I know my partner and I are willing to do what ever the hell it would take to prove that, but if the attacks on us continue, then these people spouting their bullshit towards will get what they want in the end, and that is the loss of the gay vote for the democrats in the next election and so on.

[davepc]

2. I'll trade 500,000 votes in New York for 500,000 in Ohio

And if the gay constituency is so solidly in our corner how come a few million of them voted for Bush?

It works both ways.

If I had my way their would be gay marriage everywhere, but now I cant get anybody elected, so there isn't going to be gay marriage for anybody.

ideology drives the party, pragmatists get people elected who can implement it.

Right now we have too much ideology and too little pragmatism and we're losing election after election after election.

[foreigncorrespondent]

4. Bush*...

...only got what 22% of the gay vote? You got 78%. See the difference?

Don't throw that one up, because us queers don't have control over everyone in the entire community. If we did, we would be one hell of a political force.

[davepc]

6. yes, I see

and your support doesn't make up for the huge erosion of popular support from the south and mid-west, the onetime bulwark of this party.

Thats not YOUR fault, or the gay communities fault, but we have to respond to republican attacks on abortion and gay rights issues so often that we're playing defense when we should be attacking republicans on jobs and opportunity and advancement.

We're getting framed as being a certain way that we're not by these issues, and quite frankly we're so off the ball in the center of this country that we're getting slaughtered.

In the process, all the work we have made on gay rights and abortion and all the rest is now going to die next year. Chief Justice Anthony Scalia is going to be the executioner.

As far as I see it, I have a choice. I can hold onto the principles of equality and gay rights as a civil right (which costs me some of my African American base in the process) and watch as the blue gets sliced off the map even more, or I can free myself from gay issues and abortion and turn that red blue. And once that red is blue I can put progressive judges on the bench, pass progressive laws, and advance EVERYBODY'S rights, not just the narrow base they gets a leg up under the republicans.

So if I separate myself from your causes a little bit to save them, I'm a bigot racist homophobe, but if we embrace each other as we're hauled off to political and economic and social oblivion, then we'll at least I didn't compromise.

[RafterMan]

11. I see the point, but

I don't think that's how the math works.

The fundies came out to vote for the anti-gay measures on their own merit -- not because they were tied to the Democrats. Once they were there at the polls, there were a host of other reasons for them to vote for Bush over Kerry. Bush piggybacked on the anti-gay marriage turnout, not on an anti-Democrat turnout.

I agree it's a hot potato and the Dems are not handling it well. But dropping it isn't going to help them either.

[davepc]

12. not drop, de-emphasize

[RafterMan]

14. Again, the Dems weren't the ones doing the emphasizing

The people who proposed the gay marriage initiatives were not gay activists -- they were Rove activists in a GOTV effort. And the people who turned out to vote aginst gay marriage were not going to vote for Kerry, no matter what his policy on gays was. They are too close to Bush in too many other ways.

Yes, it's a problem. But I haven't seen the solution yet.

[davepc]

16. explain the million vote difference in Oregon

a lot of those people voted for kerry AND the ban.

We stay our current course we're going to lose Wisconsin and Michigan next time.

Something has to change.

3 straight elections cycles of getting pummeled is not a good track record.

[RafterMan]

20. People voting for Kerry and the ban

refutes your point that the Dems are too closely tied to gays.

I'm not arguing that someone who goes to vote for president might go either way on an initiative, I'm arguing that the people who specifically turn out to vote against gay marriage aren't Democrats, and they never will be.

[foreigncorrespondent]

27. Well gee...

and your support doesn't make up for the huge erosion of popular support from the south and mid-west, the onetime bulwark of this party.

...thanks so much for telling us how you really feel.

Guess you don't want our votes after all!

So who are you going to blame when the queers leave the dems, and you still lose '06 and '08 because you were too busy here bitching about queers, rather than getting out there trying to help prove election fraud?

By the way, I didn't call you a bigot or homophobe or anything else. Believe me, you will know it if I do

[UdoKier]

8. 22% voted for Bush? That's disgusting.

I had no idea that many gays were assholes.

[AlienGirl]

22. Should we give up on freedom of religion too? After all...

24% of Jews voted for *.

Tucker

[bushisanidiot]

25. So we drop the gays and all the sudden anti-choice, gun toting

racists are going to come over to our side? who are you kidding?? the repukes HATE us for many reasons.. the gay issue is just icing on the cake for them. are we going to give up the fight to protect a woman's right to choose??? i honestly think that issue is a lot more polarizing.. and i'd like you to show me ONE repuke homophobe who is also pro-choice.

[tedzbear]

3. Count me in...or I should say out.

I am "out" and I ain't going back in. This is all I have to say to the DLC: Don't blame me for losing your fucking election! You shouldn't have courted my vote and my money for the last 4 years while promising me you'll stand up for my civil rights.

Fuck all you stealth bigots in the Democratic Party! I'm turning Green!

:bounce:

[foreigncorrespondent]

5. Hi, tedthebear!!!

I'm not teling you to change your party affiliation. What I am saying is, basically we have put up with the shit for the last four years, and now it begins again. If they push too hard, then yeah, they will end up seeing a mass exodus of queers going over to the Greenies. That's a lot of votes for them to lose!

BTW, I so love your name, and I am so glad you are out. :) The more of us who are out, the better off we will all be.

[UdoKier]

7. Nothing is ever simple in politics...

"...to tell these people to stop kneejerking and blaming us for the election loss. "

I agree. You're not at all to blame. Kerry himself in his non-response to the flip-flop smears alone deserves more blame.

Not once have I come out and called anyone a homophobe...And you are not one to talk either, because you are one of the people who began one of these threads.

My gripe was with my mayor, Gavin Newsom, and him alone. I never blamed any of the good people he used as props for his own purposes. Some posters compared that event to Rosa Parks, but it was totally different. Rosa Parks sat in the front of the bus on her own. She didn't have some slick rich guy telling her when and where to do it while bathing in the spotlight for himself, right after taking office.

A lot of the queer DUers worked their asses for this election campaign.

And you have my sincere gratitude for that, as do our brothers and sisters of every color and creed who did likewise.

They put their own feelings aside regardless of what we were facing from the right as well as from those on the left who truly do not support us and see us as something that costs them elections.

If there was this big block of democrats who really felt that way, don't you think the party would have put the DOMA in our platform? There are differences of opinion in how to get there and whether or not to call it "gay marriages" or "civil unions", but the vast majority of democrats support equal rights for GLBT people. Can you honestly say that for the GOP, except for their tiny libertarian leaning minority?

one certain member was going around constantly spouting how us gays cost the 2000 election. I'm not sure who you mean, but I know it wasn't me. 2000 was 100% full-on Florid voter fraud. The results this year were much more disturbing. There was fraud, but probably not 4 million votes worth. We are out of touch with too many of the electorate. I don't know what issue or combination of issues it is, but we need to figure that out, and these discussions are a part of that. The mainstream media decided early on that "God Guns and Gays" was the reason for our defeat, so expecting it to not come into the conversation at all is a bit unrealistic.

Are we going to have to hear about this every other day for the next four years?

Doubtful. hopefully, as a party we will find a new approach that everybody is happy with well before 2006. Even Dumbya has endorsed the idea of civil unions, so that should be seeen as the farthest-right position acceptable within the democratic party, IMO.

Or wouldn't it be better than instead of dividing the democratic party even further apart, trying to pull us all back together, so we can work for the greater good? And that greater good is proving that election 2004 was a FRAUD!

Yes and yes. Again, anybody that blames this mess ON GAYS is a pig. But talking about trying to approach GLBT issues in a different way should not be divisive. For example, if the consensus of the party is that we should push even more forcefully for gay marriage, fine. But we should all be on the same page about it. Newsom pulled his little stunt, annd then there were plenty of gays popping up on TV to express their disagreement with it. I think we really need to work on getting a more uniform message out there.

Is it fair that after all the hard work we have done as well, that we must again be the victims, when we are the ones who face becoming federally sanctioned second class citizens next year?

No, and it's not fair to the millions of blacks who have been treated as 2nd class citizens since they were "freed". At least you have a choice of whether or not to make your status as such known when you apply for a job, etc. I'm a straight white married male. Apparently that means I'm a part of the "power elite". And yet, I work my ass off to make only 30K per year and barely get by. I really don't feel very empowered.

if the attacks on us continue, then these people spouting their bullshit towards will get what they want in the end, and that is the loss of the gay vote for the democrats in the next election and so on.

I don't think that is what they want, and no - they SHOULD NOT take the gay vvote for granted. But let's say the position of the party becomes support for civil unions and full equal rights otherwise - and let the ACLU challenge the gay marriage bans in the court - would that make you want to leave the party? It is still progress from where we were only 12 years ago, you know. Gays flocking en masse to the green party would not be enough to make IT a relevant party, so you would essentially be a constituency without representation - and the further weakening of the democratic party would undoubtedly mean an end to overtime, social security, enforcement of civil rights laws and labor laws- IE we all slide into poverty, which equals political impotence, which equals further weakening of the party and so on...

So if you think going on exactly as we've been doing will work, fine. If you think merely getting printouts on the diebold machines will be enough, fine.

But I've seen the face of these people, and they are not playing. Of the 11 anti-gay initiatives, most of them passed by 70% margins. That's a pretty resounding message. Are we as a party to simply write off those states forever because their populations are overwhelmingly religio-nuts?

Which brings me back to my header - nothing is ever simple in politics - and this surre as hell isn't. You try to boil it down to a matter of right and wrong - and sure, not compromising on this in any way would be "right", but cchrist, we have to compromise on TONS of things to get things done. Hell, 40% of Americans have NO HEALTH insurance, and a ton of them can't affford to see a doctor. I personally believe health care should be a right, but I still voted for Kerry with his sad, watered-down, corporate-contaminated health plan, in hopes that it could eventually become something better. What you are doing, is essentially demanding the equivalent of single payer, NOW.

[jukes]

9. i'll stand back>back w/ any

gay libs. time to make ourselves heard.

time to fight, by whatever means necessary.

[killbotfactory]

10. It's the women's fault. If not for our pro-choicers, we would have won.

We need to just stop with the pro-choice crap.
...
Doesn't that sound ridiculous to you?

[davepc]

13. it does, because better then 60% of this country can live with abortion

but the Democratic party gets SLAUGHTERED on the partial birth and parental consent parts of the platform.

Since the hard-core abortionists wont let us back off those issues at all we take it on the chin.

And quite frankly I'm sick of losing because of it. We cant win nationally if we keep getting pegged with the partial birth and parental consent issue election after election after election.

We've had abortion for over 30 years in this country and it hasn't cause a riot in the streets because the VAST majority tolerate it, but when we have to push it to the wall we rapidly lose support for it in red state America.

I cant talk to people about their economic self interest if they think I'm a vicious baby killer because I support partial birth.

[killbotfactory]

15. It's because we let republicans define the debate

When they say partial birth abortion, people think about an innocent child getting halfway out of the womb and then it's head vaccumed out so it can be killed on a technicality.

That doesn't ever happen, but thanks to repubs, people think it does.

We needed our guys to explain the issue, not dodge it. They needed to take the airwaves and say "Imagine you and your wife are about to have a baby, when it's found out your child will have a fatal birth defect. The doctor presents you with the choice of abortion, or going through with the birth where the child will most certainly die in pain a day or two later, and you will possibly be injured severely. It's a horrible choice to make, but that's what happens. Do you want the government stepping in and making that choice for you?"

You know something like that.

[davepc]

18. we say this every year, and every year the SAME thing happens.

We need to change the entire fucking debate, not the terms.

[killbotfactory]

19. I didn't see our candidates, or any surrogates put out that arguement

And these aren't the issues most people come out and vote for. It's just the people Rove and Bush scared the shit out of to show up.

If Kerry had put out a convincing message and had a decent arguement for why he voted the way he did, he'd be in the White House. His stances on Iraq just weakened the case against Bush, and enough people were left shaking their heads wondering what he would do differently.

EDIT:

People don't need to agree with all our candidates stances, they just need to respect them. That's why Bush pulled off a victory, with his "consistancy" and "principled" bullshit, even though most of the country thought he was doing a piss poor job.

[foreigncorrespondent]

28. 60% of the country...

...can live with abortion, but do you also realize that it is something like 60% of the nation that can also live with civil unions for queer couples?

Unfortunately I have no link, and am too tired to go searching around now, but I listen to a very queer radio station here in Melbourne. Every hour they give us the news, which also includes any big gay news items.

As I was driving to work this morning, they were saying how a lot of people who voted in the 11 states to ban same sex marriages completely didn't realize they were also voting to ban civil unions. I am sure 365gay.com will have it on their site if you want to try and hunt it down.

Now, something else, go back and take a loo at queer history, and you will see that gaymarriages actually isn't a new concept, like the fundies would like you to believe.

On edit: Typo!

[UdoKier]

17. Sometimes I think we should do that

Get all the feminists in on it, and as a bluff - say "fine, let's have a constitutional amendment banning abortion except for rape, incest or danger to the life of the mother" The pregnant women will be compensated for the time they are FORCED to carry the child and the government will be fully responsible for the care and adoption service of any unwanted kids. WE will vote for it unanimously. What are YOU gonna do about it?"

Of course, the GOP has no intention of EVER banning abortion. What would they do without their most dependable wedge issue? But at the same time, their bible-nut supporters would insist they vote for it... It would be funny to watch the hijinx...

[Catfight]

26. Udo...you're the smartest post I've ever read! Great idea!

[terrya]

21. Thank you. I'm getting goddamned sick and tired of being scapegoated.

But can you understand how WE feel right now? This 4 years is going to be an unimaginable nightmare for gay and lesbian folks. I seriously expect a rash of hate crimes in this country...the Bush Adminstration has given fag bashers a green light because of the demonization of gay people. 2 new Supreme Court Justices appointed by Bush could very well spell the end of Lawrence v Texas, and could bring about RE-criminalization of homosexuality in this country. And if (nor WHEN) that happens, fuck, there's no fucking need for the FMA now. ANY chance of gay marriage becoming a reality is finished. That door will be shut, locked, deadbolted and soldered over. Gay marriage will never, EVER happen then in this country.

Do you understand what we're dealing with in this country in the next 4 years? And seeing people at Democratic Underground who even indirectly traffic in homophobia is getting us more than a little pissed off.

[UdoKier]

23. I wish I had a response to your comment.

But I don't. I'm sorry for us all.

[Deja Q]

24. And the repukes are aiming for the kill w/ their claim of working with us.

BUT - as a party we are in a horribly weakened position.

Who needs a real civil war when they can manipulate the public's mindset?