Homophobic Heads Explode… In a Heartbeat

So a few days ago I watched a little animated short about a boy experiencing a crush… On another boy (it’s great! Watch it here!)  It was just a cute little story about something almost all of us have gone through at some point, but the fact that it involved a gay youth caused Conservatives collective heads to explode.  I stumbled upon an article (found here) linked on Reddit, that was written by one such Conservative.  I replied to the article in length on the blog, but I’m sure it will be deleted because of their very biased comment policy (it’s basically “we delete anything that doesn’t agree with us.”) The following is my response to the article (quotes from the article in blue, my responses follow):

“It will further undermine strong, healthy — extraordinarily necessary — male adolescent relationships.”

Why do you assume that? It’s not about those types of relationships.  In spite of what you may believe, young gay people exist.  You wailing and moaning and pretending they aren’t there doesn’t change that fact.  They are human beings born a little different than you, and you and yours frequently harm them with your diatribes, which aren’t based on any actual research, but on an ancient text written over 2000 years ago by farmers and nomads with no education.

“Once boys and adolescents are herded toward gayness”

Nobody is “herding” anyone “towards gayness.”  That’s not how it works.  You’re either gay, or you’re not.  Nobody can make you gay.  Do some people switch back and forth? Sure… Those people are called “bisexual.”  

“the very common experience of social anxiety”

Social anxiety is a real problem, but this film isn’t about that.  

“directed to question their sexual orientation, their sexuality risks becoming ‘re-wired.”

Nobody is telling boys to “question their sexuality.”  It’s you and those like you that are trying to force young gay kids to ignore their sexuality and pretend to be something they’re not (straight.)  The ideology that you spew into the world drives LGBT youth to suicide pretty much every day.  You may think you’re helping people, but really you’re just killing them or driving them into severe depression by making them feel like monsters.  

“And once ‘re-wired’ in that way, it’s hard to undo.”

You can’t “re-wire” your sexuality.  Why do you think conversion therapy has been banned in the U.S. and pretty much all other democratic societies? Answer:  It’s because it’s useless, harmful, and it just doesn’t work.  I get the idea from your statement that you believe your sexuality was “re-written”, but it’s more likely that you were bi-sexual and have chosen to deny attraction to the same-sex.  For those of us who are exclusively gay, that’s not an option.  

“The red-haired boy who is pictured is not a “closeted boy.”

Yes he is.  The writers decide what the character is or is not, not you.  If they state he’s a closeted boy, he’s a closeted boy.  It’s their story and it’s not up for your reinterpretation.  You can interpret it whatever way you want, but you’re wrong.  It’s as simple as that.

“They show us a boy who demonstrates an extremely high level of social anxiety.”

The boy suffers from anxiety about having a gay crush because we live in a society where people like you tell him he’s a monster. We live in a world where he might get bullied, beat up, or even murdered if boys raised by people like you find out he’s gay.  That’s why a majority of gay kids out there suffer from anxiety.  Because of people like you and the views that you vomit out into the world.  

“by so doing [he] demonstrates his debilitating discomfort and inability to relate to his male classmate.”

He has “debilitating discomfort” because of the reasons I stated above.  People like you and their hateful little children tell him he’s a monster deserving of eternal torture simply because he was born differently than them.  Of course he’s going to be nervous about showing his feelings to his crush.  In the real world there would be a very real possibility that he would be bullied, beaten, or killed for revealing his feelings to the wrong person.  

“The fact that the red-haired boy hides behind a tree to avoid him reveals just how unnerving his feeling of not being accepted by his male peers troubles him.”

Exactly.  Bullies and homophobes like you  (apparently a self-hating homophobe) drive LGBT youth to feel like they have to hide in shame rather than be comfortable with who they actually are.  That’s your fault, not theirs.

“Shy boys at that age aren’t searching for romance with their same-sex peers.”

At what age?  The video doesn’t specify what age the boys are.  By their appearance, they could be anywhere from 12 – 16, well into puberty, and yes boys that age are “searching for romance” with their opposite-sex or same-sex peers (depending on their sexuality.)  That’s generally how puberty works.  

‘They want just one thing and they want it desperately: acceptance.”

Yeah, kids want acceptance, but your ignorance on sexuality is blatantly obvious.  Teenagers are a mess of hormones, and pretty much all teenagers in existence do nothing but think about sex.  That’s how puberty works, unless you’re asexual (which is also a thing by the way.)  

“The red-haired boy is not romantically attracted to the second boy”

Yeah he is.  The writers wrote a story.  That’s what the story is about.  Did you not watch it?

“He’s attracted to a boy who is his opposite, self-confident and trouble-free.”

You’re right.  He’s romantically attracted to that other boy; who we don’t really know is his “opposite” based off of the 3 minute video. It could very well be in that world that the writers created that the red haired boy is extremely confident unless he’s around the boy he’s attracted to, which is very common for people (even adults) who have a crush on someone else.  

“The movie’s creators misinterpret their own character”

No they didn’t.  It’s their character that you are misinterpreting to fit your own homophobic agenda.  

“He’s not ‘closeted’ and he’s not “outed” by his own heart.’”  

Yeah he is.  That’s the story as written by the creators.  Do you not know how fiction works?  

“He simply experiences a very high degree of social anxiety.”


Yeah, around a boy he has a romantic crush on. Many people in that situation are awkward and nervous around their crush (I know I always was!).  

“And the answer for this young man is not ‘romance’ with another boy.”

Yeah it is.  That’s why the end shows them spending time together with the red-haired boy’s anxiety disappearing completely.  Again… Did you even watch the entire thing?

“The answer is acceptance”

I’d say we agree, but I’m sure your intentions for that statement aren’t how I would mean them.  He does need acceptance… He needs to be accepted for who he is; which is a boy discovering that he’s gay and falling in love with another boy at his school.  

“Romance between males is a mirage, always proving to be elusive.”

Ah, I think I get it now!  You’re a gay man who never found love, so you’ve convinced yourself that love between gay people is a “mirage”.  It all makes perfect sense! Here’s a reality check though;  love between members of the same-sex is completely possible and happens every day.  Maybe it wasn’t possible for you (which is probably because you’re a bitter, angry, self-hating homophobe…) but I’ve found it, and so have so many other happy gay couples in the world living in successful, long-term relationships.  Some of which span decades!

“The movie promotes escaping social anxiety disorder by “coming out” and being “gay.”

No, it promotes gay kids being accepted by those around them for who they are, not who homophobes think they should be.  It shows gay kids that it’s ok to be who they are and that their attractions are normal for them and nothing to be ashamed of, in spite of what hateful / ignorant people in society may say.  

“But this is an escape from the disorder, not a means of healing it”

A gay kid may very well get over his anxiety when he realizes his friends and family will accept him for who he is.  Once you realize your fear is unfounded (in this case, being rejected because he’s gay), it’s amazing how fast anxiety dissipates.  “I should know” (as you put it.)    

“Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, an expert on marital and child healing, told LifeSiteNews that the movie is “psychologically harmful to youth”


Your supposed “expert” is a religiously biased fraud who’s worldview convinces parents to throw their innocent LGBT kids out on the streets and drives LGBT youth to suicide every day.  He is outrageously guilty of allowing his religious views, born out of the dark ages, to influence his practice of medicine, rather than basing his practice of medicine on study, experience, and sound research methods.  His teachings on homosexuality are the equivalent of using leeches to cure the plague.  They just don’t work and actually cause more harm.   

“not helpful to kids experiencing social anxiety disorder.”

The film isn’t about social anxiety disorder.  It’s about a gay kid with a crush on a boy who he isn’t certain is gay also.  

“Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD) is the most prevalent of all anxiety disorders. A 2011 study of 10,000 American adolescents revealed that anxiety disorders were the most common disorder in youth, occurring in approximately one-third of adolescents.”

And yet… The film still isn’t about that.  

“Research has shown that youth suicide risk decreases by delaying self-identifying as a homosexual. One study demonstrated that suicide risk among youth with same-sex attractions decreases 20 percent each year they delay labeling themselves as gay.”

What research?  Where’s your source for this?  Even if it were true, it would most likely be because the kids aren’t experiencing bullying by other kids raised by homophobes like yourself.  It’s amazing how much lower the suicide rate is among kids who aren’t bullied every day by their homophobic peers! What a shock! /s

“Michael Glatze, now a Christian pastor and subject of the movie, I Am Michael, was a practicing homosexual and gay activist until he experienced conversion to Jesus Christ.”

…Who apologized for his anti-gay rhetoric and has stated he’s “perfectly fine being referred to as bisexual.”   That guy’s a mess psychologically (by his own admission) and isn’t the best example you could use (…but is probably the only one. I guess beggars can’t be choosers, right? )  

“We go from guy to guy, looking for someone to love us and make us feel OK”


The first mistake in that sentence was the word “We”.  That may be his personal experience (which he’s backtracked on) but it doesn’t define the experience of all gay people.  Before I met my boyfriend I was a virgin who had never been in a single relationship.  He’d only been in one.  Neither one of us have ever been the type to sleep around, as Glatze describes.  None of the other gay people I know are like that either.  Besides that, there are just as many straight people who sleep around like Glatze accuses gay people of.  Why do you think “dating” apps for straight people, like Tinder and bars are so popular? (Hint: It’s not because straight people want to find “wholesome” Christian relationships.)  Why do you think church leadership is plagued with sex scandals?  

“The world today, influenced heavily by the LGBT community and an undiscerning media,”

LOL! Yeah sure! The “world today [is] influenced heavily by the LGBT community!”  What a joke!  That’s why we have to constantly fight to keep what few hard-fought rights we have.  That’s why LGBT youth are constantly thrown out of their homes, LGBT people are constantly being murdered, that’s why it’s still legal to fire us from our jobs or kick us out of our home in so many states; and that’s just in the U.S.! In other parts of the world it’s perfectly legal to kill gay people in the streets or bust into their homes and beat them to death! But yep! The world today is “influenced heavily” by the LGBT community! Sheesh! It’s like you’re oblivious to what’s actually going on in the world!

“undermines close relationships between adolescent males”

Gay people exist now, and have always existed.  They’ve never had a single effect on friendships between straight individuals of the same-sex and they never will.  The only men or women who are afraid people might think they’re gay if they’re friends with someone of the same-sex are homophobes far too concerned with what other people think about them.  They need to get over themselves.  Nobody cares who they’re friends with!

“causing them to question their romantic and sexual orientation.”

Puberty is a time when all youth discover their sexuality.  Their bodies change both inside and out.  Of course they’re going to have questions.  Unless they are gay or bisexual they don’t seriously wonder whether or not they should be attracted to the same-sex! That’s not how sexuality works! You’re either attracted to someone or you’re not.  It’s not a choice.  

“This is precisely what this video sets out to do and is why it is so dangerous.”

Kids asking questions about sex / sexuality isn’t “dangerous”.  That’s why schools have sex-ed.  It’s a necessary part of their journey into adulthood.  Keeping them in the dark and making sex seem like something evil or wrong is what is dangerous.  Keeping kids ignorant leads to them experimenting in unsafe ways, which leads to STDs and teenage pregnancy.  Sex and sexuality are both normal parts of being a human.  Just because you and yours repress your own sexuality (to your own detriment) doesn’t mean those who don’t are evil (except in your own deluded mind.)  

“Can’t a kid just really like another kid without it being interpreted as either romantic or sexual?”

Sure! But in the case of this story, the red-headed boy had a romantic crush on the other boy because he is gay; as the writers have said.  Gay people… gay youth… exist, in spite of how much you want to stomp your foot and pretend they don’t.  

“ALL boys want close friendships with other boys.”


…And some boys want romantic relationships with other boys.  Again… LGBT kids exist.  You plugging your ears, closing your eyes, and insisting otherwise doesn’t change that fact, and it never will.  Sorry to burst your religious bubble.  

-James Garcia (August 6, 2017)

The New Color of Pride?

Over the last week I’ve seen several articles regarding a change to the rainbow flag, the instantly recognizable symbol of unity for the LGBT+ community.  The change, while seemingly minor, has started a heated debate within the community, of which I found myself getting involved in.  The change is a simple addition of brown and black stripes to the top of the traditional rainbow flag, which is meant to represent people of color within the LGBT+ community.  Upon first reading about the change, I found myself completely against the idea, and I argued that way.  I even had a few arguments that I felt were quite logical, which I’ll go over now:

  1. The rainbow flag is meant as a symbol for sexuality / gender identity minorities.  It’s not about race.  Bigotry against both racial minorities and those of sexuality and gender identity is extremely prevalent in our society, but nevertheless they are still separate issues.  Combining the two will inevitably cause one issue to be overshadowed by the other, and due to the fact that a majority of those within the LGBT+ community are white, I can’t help but fear that it will be the racial minorities that are overshadowed and left out, with blatant racism being ignored.  
  2. We shouldn’t allow bigoted people to force LGBT+ people of color out of the community.  The rainbow flag is meant to be a sign of pride and equality for all LGBT+ people and creating a new symbol gives those that are hateful a big win.  It says “fine, take the rainbow flag, we’ll go make our own.”  
  3. Racism isn’t exclusive to the LGBT+ community, so only focusing on the racism within its boundaries is far too limited.  We should be attacking the plague of racism in all of our communities, and working to drive it out to change our society so that racism isn’t acceptable any longer.  

As I said, to me, these arguments seemed completely logical… They still seem completely logical, but they just aren’t strong enough arguments to deny that something needs to be done. If making even a small change makes people of color and other minorities feel more included, then why not make the change?  What’s the harm? The argument, my own argument, that began to make me rethink my stance was number 3.  Racism isn’t exclusive to the LGBT+ community.  It’s a problem that plagues the entire country, if not the world, as Donald Trump’s rise to power has shown us.  It definitely needs to be fought on a much larger scale, but that is an even better reason to start “small”, right here inside our own community.  Mahatma Ghandi said be the change you want to see in the world” and starting small, changing the way our community presents itself to those in the outside world, in order to make it a better place for everyone, is the best way to start.  If we can’t end racism within our own community how in the world can we expect to end racism in our states, our country, or the world?

Within the LGBT+ community almost all of us have fought our own personal battles; many have been driven to suicide or murdered by bigots, and LGBT+ people of color have had it harder than anyone else.  Not only have they had to deal with hatred against them because of their sexuality or gender identity, they’ve also had to deal with hatred against them because of their skin color on top of that. Even within our community, a community that is supposed to be “all inclusive”, they’ve been ridiculed and driven out.  But in spite of that, they have so often been the leaders in the LGBT+ movement.  From Bayard Rustin, fighting for Civil Rights and LGBT+ rights right alongside Martin Luther King Jr., to Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera, heroes of the Stonewall Riots, LGBT+ people of color have been leading the fight for equality for all of us for as long as there has been a movement.  Those within our community have proven again and again that we are strong and resilient, that we’ll keep on fighting until we are no longer physically able to do so, and our LGBT+ brothers and sisters of color have been some of the strongest among us, right on the front lines.  

In a world that continues to see those representing hatred and bigotry growing bolder on a daily basis, our community should stand up and say we won’t allow it to divide us.  We have to say loudly and clearly that we won’t allow the Donald Trumps of the world to infect our community with their poison and that we are better than that.  We have to “be the change we want to see in the world”, and if that change starts with something as simple as changing the rainbow flag to make LGBT+ people of color feel more included, then those that truly want to end racism once and for all should embrace that change gladly.  Yes I was against the idea initially, but after doing some soul-searching and giving it some serious thought I’ve realized that it’s the least… the very least… that we can do.  

James Garcia – 6/16/2017

 

 

Goodbye America, Hello Bigotry: So Much For Our Ideals…

americaI’m sitting here, stuck at work, feeling emotionally devastated… Worse than I’ve felt in a long time.  I’ve made a few comments on Facebook, but I’ve felt the need to pull back, to be semi-friendly, to make excuses for those who claim to love me, yet still voted for Trump.  But why should I hold back? Donald Trump has won the presidency, and that’s something I really never believed would happen yesterday at this time.  I truly believed that more Americans stood for racial and gender equality, equality for LGBT people… That we stood above bigotry. But the country has proven me wrong.  They’ve placed racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, transphobia, (so many phobias…) up on a pedestal.  They’ve told little girls out there that if a man gropes her inappropriately that it’s his right, and she shouldn’t complain.  They’ve told little Muslim and Latino boys and girls that they’re not welcome here, their families aren’t welcome here, and that they’re going to stick them behind a wall.  They’ve told African American men and women that if the police shoot them in the street like dogs, well hey… Too bad for you.  Your lives don’t matter.

I’ve had two friends tell me tonight that it “wasn’t about gay rights” or “It wasn’t about bigotry.”  Well then, what was it about? What else could it possibly have been about??? Trump hasn’t presented any plans or details about how he’s supposedly going to “fix” the economy (which was already recovering nicely) other than by giving a bunch of tax cuts to the rich (because that’s worked so well in the past).  He’s made wild claims about fighting terrorism, but again… He hasn’t given any details about how he’s going to do so, other than by stating “ban all Muslims from entering the country.”

I had one friend who didn’t vote for Trump, (but supports Republicans who did) that stated that it was about being “Pro-Life” and because Hillary is for “late-term abortions” (which she’s not). I almost bought it, but let’s get real here… He’s not going to be able to stop abortions.  Not ever.  Not even if he somehow manages to get a constitutional amendment passed (he won’t).  All Trump could possibly do is stop safe abortions.  Key-word here… Safe…  Let’s face it, if a woman truly believes she can’t support a child or carry it to term, she won’t.  Period.  Instead, what we’ll be faced with is women who can do so going across the border to Canada, and those that can’t, resorting to the abortions of the past (coathangers, falls down the stairs, etc…) So not only will we have those “lives” you claim to care about being lost, we’ll also have the lives of the mothers being lost as well.  So, no. You don’t get to pretend this is somehow about being “pro-life” unless you’re completely naive about how the real world works (which you very well might be).  

Trump’s entire campaign has been built on nothing but the worst sort of bigotry, in so many forms.  Racism, homophobia, misogyny, Islamophobia… He’s backed by the fucking leader of the KKK for Christ’s sake, which should tell anyone all they need to know.  I can’t speak for other minorities (though I can be horrified for them), but I can speak as a gay man, and what people who voted for Trump have told me, in a loud and clear voice, is that they don’t think I am equal to them as a human being.  They’ve told me they couldn’t fucking care less if I’m able to marry the man I love. They didn’t think twice about whether or not I’m allowed to adopt children. They’ve told me they don’t give a shit if I get treated as a person when I walk into a business.  With those stakes on the line, ignorance about what Trump stood for is not an excuse.  Apathy is a slap in the face.  Agreement is absolutely offensive and disgusting.  I can’t even begin to imagine how any minority could have voted for him (though statistically speaking, quite a few must have…)  

I’m going to say, unapologetically, if you supported Trump (or really any Republican) you can make all the claims you want about caring about me, but the harsh reality I’m now faced with, whether you want to admit it or not, is that I’m not even worth your consideration.  Gay rights… Minority rights…Women’s rights… Probably didn’t even cross your mind.  Trump is the lowest form of scum and those that agree with him are as well.  “Deplorable” is too nice of a word.  Those that didn’t bother to research what Trump stands for, voted in protest, or flipped a coin… I don’t even know what to say to you.  You should have cared more… Considered others besides yourself more.  But you didn’t.  I’m beyond livid… I’m tired of sitting back and watching the country be raped by the Republican elite and now by the monster they’ve created, but the entire country has now been placed in their proven incapable hands.

One of my closest friends stated tonight that people who voted for Trump shouldn’t be made to feel guilty for voting for him, because that’s their right.  But I disagree.  STRONGLY.  It definitely is their right to vote for a bigot.  But they should feel guilty about it.  They should feel ashamed of themselves.  Whatever nightmare is in store for us for the next 4 to 8 years is on their heads.  If I believed in any sort of god, I’d be praying for mercy right now.  As it is, I can only sit here with a sense of absolute dread for what’s in store for us.  

James Garcia 11/9/2016  

Reddit, LGBT People, and Donald Trump

trump

I had a discussion on Reddit (thread found here), with a Lesbian woman who claimed to be a supporter of Donald Trump and attempted to argue that he would be the “best choice for LGBT people.”  The following are some of her statements, with my responses.  She has since deleted her comments, so I can’t link to the originals, but here are some that I had to respond to because they were outrageous or offensive (or outrageously offensive).  

“People label “persecution” on things like others denying service.”

Just because we’re not being murdered in the streets (which of course, we are…) doesn’t mean it’s not persecution, so you can keep your sarcastic quotation marks.  In a country where we supposedly have equal protection under the law, allowing one group of people to be discriminated against in the economy that we’ve all helped build, based on an immutable characteristic, is discrimination. Period.  Every American should be able to take part in the public sector without having to worry about whether or not a store will accept them or not.  You shouldn’t have to worry about public ridicule and humiliation because you want to buy a cake.  

An African American should be able to go into any public business and buy whatever products or services that business provides without fear of being turned away because of the color of their skin.  On the same note, any gay person should be able to go into any public business without having to fear they will be turned away because of who they happen to love. Nobody should have to wonder if they’re going to have to drive 2 or 3 hours out of their way just to buy something that is sold in a store across the street, because the owner of the store across the street happens to be a bigot.  That’s not how our country is supposed to work, and that’s certainly not the type of country I want to live in.  

If people behind the counter don’t want to serve every person within the general public who enters their store, is not causing a disruption, and just wants to buy whatever goods or services that business provides, then they should simply not open a business.  There are plenty of jobs out there where you don’t have to serve the public.  If you don’t want to serve gay people, or black people, or Jews, or Muslims… Don’t apply for a business license. Don’t sign a contract with the government that says you won’t discriminate.  It’s that simple.

“I find it ridiculous people believe this nation will go against one of its core values.”

Then you really haven’t been paying attention to the history of our country.  Check out segregation.  Check out the internment of innocent Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor. Check out slavery.  Check out the slaughter of the American Indians.  All of those things went against our supposed “values”, yet they’re all things that happened anyway.  

“…Politicians aren’t going to make such drastic changes against the American citizens will. Putting gays in jail is not what the American general populace wants. I’ve discussed why they wouldn’t go against the populations wish already.”

And you’re wrong.  Where was the outrage when innocent Japanese Americans were ripped from their homes and thrown into internment camps? Many of them lost everything they had! As for now, if the Republican-controlled Congress has shown us anything the last 8 years, it’s that they don’t give a shit about what the general populace wants.  They’ve gone against the majority of the American people multiple times, from trying to overturn the ACA again… and again… and again… and again… To shutting down the government, to all of the Benghazi / email nonsense.  The fact that you still seem to think they won’t shows you’re literally not paying any attention to the real world.

SO do I think they’ll step in to help LGBT people if states start passing laws to arrest them or enforcing laws they already have on the books? Not really.  Do I think the American people will be outraged? Maybe?  Do I think they’ll be outraged enough to protest in the streets to help us? Those are two different questions, and the answer to the second is a definite “no.”  Where’s the outrage for the members of the African-American community, who are being shot dead in the street like animals by certain police officers who are supposed to be protecting them? Why isn’t the populace rising up to  help them when they’re arrested, beat up, and in many cases killed, for minor offenses like running a red light or selling cigarettes?  Answer: It’s non-existent.  The majority of American people simply don’t care enough about issues that don’t affect them directly.  

“You’re right. Trump/Pence could allow businesses to not serve us. I don’t care about that. Why would I want to deal with a business that is forced to serve me anyway?”

You should care about that.  You say you’re not naive, but then you go on to show how you absolutely are naive over and over again.  Do you seriously know nothing about our history?  How well did the whole “White’s only”, “Irish need not apply”, “We don’t serve Jews” garbage work in the past? Hint: It didn’t.  You had entire groups of people that were suffering because they were being denied jobs, kicked off of buses, kicked out of restaurants, and generally left out of an economy that they helped to build.  As the American people have clearly shown throughout our history, they are more than willing to single groups of people out as long as they’re given permission to do so.  You literally have people trying to do so now; so if you think that’s all in the past, then as I’ve said, you’re naive.  

“Being gay means dealing with people who hate you. The government isn’t going to take that away.”

Of course they’re not.  I don’t expect the government to make people like me.  I don’t care if people like me. But we have laws in place that will at the very least make sure that we have a fair shot in the economy that our tax dollars help to build.  Joe-Schmoe at Melissa’s Cake Shop can hate me all he wants, but if Joe-Schmoe wants to open a business and receive the benefits from the government that come with it, then they damned well better sell me a cake just like they would anyone else.  My sexuality has nothing to do with their religious beliefs and it certainly has nothing to do with the cake I’m trying to buy.  

“I’m very interested in these specific moments Trump has voiced hatred. Can you please post some specifics so I can read into them?”

This is, by far, the easiest of your ridiculous comments to rebut.  All I have to do is type “racist / bigoted / sexist Donald Trump quotes” and I’ll be provided with a plethora of information.  It takes willful ignorance to not see them! Here are just a few examples:

Donald Trump disrespecting women:

Ariana Huffington is unattractive, both inside and out. I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man – he made a good decision.”

“You know, it really doesn’t matter what the media write as long as you’ve got a young, and beautiful, piece of ass.”

“If I were running ‘The View’, I’d fire Rosie O’Donnell. I mean, I’d look at her right in that fat, ugly face of hers, I’d say ‘Rosie, you’re fired.’”

“All of the women on The Apprentice flirted with me – consciously or unconsciously. That’s to be expected.”

“The only card [Hillary Clinton] has is the woman’s card. She’s got nothing else to offer and frankly, if Hillary Clinton were a man, I don’t think she’d get 5 percent of the vote. The only thing she’s got going is the woman’s card, and the beautiful thing is, women don’t like her.”

Donald Trump disrespecting people of color:

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best. They’re not sending you, they’re sending people that have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists…”

“Our great African-American President hasn’t exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who are so happily and openly destroying Baltimore.”

Tenant Discrimination:

http://www.nytimes.com/times-insider/2015/07/30/1973-meet-donald-trump/?_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/politics/donald-trump-housing-race.html

Taking advantage of undocumented immigrants:

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/14/nyregion/after-15-years-in-court-workers-lawsuit-against-trump-faces-yet-another-delay.html?pagewanted=all

Disrespecting people with disabilities:

http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/11/26/donald-trump-mocks-reporter-with-disability-berman-sot-ac.cnn

You can try and pretend Donald Trump isn’t a hateful piece of trash, but the piles of evidence available show otherwise.  You can’t claim everything he’s said in his “illustrious” career are being taken out of context.  (Well I guess you can, but it won’t be very effective.)

“There’s a lot of false information and over dramatization of Trump out there.”

Not really… Nearly all of the articles or news reports I’ve provided show actual videos or quote him directly.  That’s not “over dramatization.”  It’s reality.  

“If you look at things at face value (not saying you do personally, just talking about the population as a whole) then you will despise Trump.”

And if you ignore all of his actions, direct quotes, and videos showing his hatefulness, then I guess you’ll love him? Why shouldn’t people take things at face value? If someone makes a bigoted comment (or in Trump’s case, continually makes bigoted, sexist comments), we shouldn’t have to read between the lines to find something good about them.  Especially when it comes to someone running for President of the United States!

“The average uneducated American citizen, who doesn’t care about politics or the election, walks around and sees the propaganda everywhere. It’s kind of creepy how much Hillary is in my daily life.”

Trump receives far more news coverage than Hillary.  So if Hillary is “creepy” because of the amount of news coverage she gets, then Trump should downright terrify you. But you seem to be eating the crap he’s feeding you like candy.  

“Trump’s campaign attracted 822 minutes of screen time on the nightly news broadcasts of ABC, CBS and NBC between Jan. 1 and Labor Day, according to the Tyndall Report, which has tracked broadcast news since 1987. It’s unlikely that another presidential candidate in history has ever gotten more, says Andrew Tyndall, the newsletter’s proprietor.

Clinton’s campaign commanded just 386 minutes, which includes 89 minutes spent on the investigation of her emails as secretary of state.

That’s a big coverage “gap.” Roughly speaking, Trump has gotten more than twice as much network attention as Clinton.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/upshot/measuring-donald-trumps-mammoth-advantage-in-free-media.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/trump-gets-way-more-tv-news-time-than-clinton-so-what/2016/09/21/719d1bac-7ea9-11e6-8d0c-fb6c00c90481_story.html

“I can’t remember the last time I seen something pro Trump besides a bumper sticker 2 weeks ago (and I live in the bible belt!).”

Then again… You’re simply not paying attention.  

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/09/who-gets-better-press-coverage-hillary-clinton-or-donald-trump

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/media-study-trump-helped-clinton-hurt-224300

“I pretty much had to go looking/digging for accurate information on him cause most “educational” resources obviously come from a liberal view.”

Ah yes. Anything negative about Trump must be because the mean old “Liberal media” has such a strong bias against him! (As opposed to him just being a disgusting bigot who should never have been taken seriously in the first place!)  What you’re telling me with that nonsense, is that no matter what negative information comes out about Trump, you’ll just ignore it and pretend it’s “Liberal bias” attempting to smear him. But, as I’ve shown, Trump has benefited far more from news coverage than Hillary has, so I’m not sure where you’re getting that there’s some “liberal media bias” targeted in Hillary’s favor.  If anything, it’s the exact opposite.  

“Hillary makes people feel protected and comfortable. I understand that. She makes a lot of promises. However, that security is an illusion. She has shown time and time again that she is flighty and does not have American citizen’s safety in mind.”

Hillary makes a lot of promises? That’s seriously what you’re going with?  All Trump has done is make promises! He has presented literally nothing regarding actions he’ll take or policy changes he’ll make to protect Americans.  Literally… Nothing… All he’s done is state he’d be willing to use nukes, won’t listen to the UN, won’t honor peace treaties unless he agrees with them, and has repeatedly stated that he’ll “Protect America” without showing how.  So I’m asking… How the hell do you think he’s going to protect America? By banning immigrants and refusing to help refugees? By putting innocent Muslim-Americans on a registration?

You do realize that the very few terrorist attacks that have been committed by foreigners were committed by people here legally, right? In fact, nearly all of the terrorist attacks committed here since 9/11 have been committed by U.S. citizens.  64% of which were by people who were born here.  All of this attention Trump and his bigot-brigade are focusing on immigrants is nothing but fear-mongering meant to get you all in an uproar. Nothing more.  

http://www.ibtimes.com/terrorism-attacks-911-have-involved-us-citizens-not-immigrants-despite-gop-debate-2228202

“She was very anti-gay then. What is to say her judgement won’t change again once she’s in office?”

Wrong again.  Hillary may have opposed gay marriage at one point and stated she believed in traditional marriage (as did so many others), but she has always been an advocate for the LGBT community aside from that issue, and not just for American LGBT people either.  

http://shewinswewin.org/blog/5-times-hillary-clinton-pushed-for-lgbt-rights/

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/lgbt-equality/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-change-position-same-sex-marriage/

http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clinton-making-human-rights-a-reality/

http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clinton-global-lgbt-advocate/

Hillary Clinton has been a global champion of human rights and has actually done things to make human rights (for everyone) a reality.  Can Donald Trump, who has frequently taken advantage of people for his own personal gain, say the same thing? The answer is a resounding no.  You are apparently judging people for claiming to believe in traditional marriage years ago, but Donald Trump does so now.  At least Hillary has come to see the error of her former stance. 

“If we want to gain full equality and acceptance we have to prove ourselves. I want the general public to accept me because I show dedication and love.”

People (including LGBT people) shouldn’t have to earn the right to be treated equally under the law.  We don’t have to earn our constitutional rights.  That’s not how our constitution is supposed to work.

“NOT because the government is forcing them too. It only creates more resistance.”

Wrong.  Segregation, slavery, institutionalized bigotry and discrimination, women’s right to vote, the right for people of color to vote.  ALL of those things had to be fought for and won, in spite of public opinion.  Public opinion didn’t shift until after the battles for equal treatment under the law were won.  

“Trump promises to protect LGBT”

Trump “promises” lots of things, but his actions speak far louder than his words.  His nomination of Mike Pence, a notorious homophobic bigot, shows that he couldn’t care any less about LGBT Americans.  You can pretend Mike Pence won’t have much power, but he’s Donald Trump’s right-hand man, and if something happens to Trump, Pence is next in line.  The Vice President also stands as one of the President’s most trusted advisors.  You’re truly an idiot if you think Pence’s homophobic beliefs will have no effect on Trump’s policy decisions.  

“…but most importantly he promises to protect all Americans.”

Again… Trump makes lots of promises.  But as I’ve stated, actions speak louder than words.  Trump has a history of taking advantage of the most vulnerable Americans.  He’s scammed people looking for a brighter future through education, he’s scammed people looking for homes, he’s scammed people he employed, and he’s scammed America as a whole with his numerous bankruptcies and unscrupulous business practices.  If you think he’ll be any different once he’s in the most powerful position in the country, then, again… You’re truly an idiot.  

“In a country where things are tense because of political/social/racial/etc differences I like that he talks to us on equal ground. He doesn’t look down on us.”

Are you joking? He’s shown multiple times that he doesn’t respect women, minorities, or middle-class Americans.  He doesn’t look down on you? Of course he looks down on you! He’s even called his own supporters morons who’d vote for him even if he murdered someone in the middle of a busy street! In case you don’t believe me, here’s the quote:

“I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and wouldn’t lose any voters, ok? It’s, like, incredible.”

This is a direct quote, and you’re proving him right!

“If we, and the politics, stop trying to make a point with our sexualties/genders the general public will stop caring as well. I don’t want to make a stance, I just want peace.”

It’s not the LGBT community that keeps bringing up our sexuality, it is those that would deny us equal rights under the law that are making it about our sexuality.  When they say “we won’t serve gay people in our businesses” when a lesbian couple wants to buy a cake for their wedding, it is the bigot behind the counter that has brought up our sexuality, not us.  When they attempt to pass laws that say we can’t get married, they are the ones who have brought up our sexuality, not us.  Us wanting to live our lives the way we want isn’t us making an issue of anything.  They’re the ones that have an issue, and that issue is that they just can’t seem to mind their own damned business.  We have a right to live in this society, we have a right to our pursuit of happiness, just like they do.  It’s as simple as that.  

“I’m voting Trump cause I truly believe it’s what is best for the lgbt community.”

Then you’re ignoring all of the evidence to the contrary and have imagined false promises that aren’t born out by his actions or statements.  

“If a big decision was made against the majority of the populations opinion they could lose their job, face prison, or even be murdered… The majority of politicians vote with the general consensus with an emphasis on what will help their family.”

As I’ve shown.  This is absolutely untrue.  Congress has an easily Googled history that shows the exact opposite (of which I’ve already given examples.)  In most cases they’ve had to be overruled by the Supreme Court.  

“I can guarantee a lot of these politicians know gay people (in the closet or no). Some possibly are in the closet themselves. Being that they try to keep scandals to a bare minimum, do you truly think they would be okay with homosexuality being a jail-able offense?”

Yeah… I do… Anti-gay bigots (whether or not they’re hiding in the closet) have shown time and time again that they’ll do anything to discriminate against the LGBT community.  If they can make it illegal for us to be ourselves, they will, and with Trump as President and a Republican-controlled Congress, it will be that much easier for them to do so.  

“Scratch that, do you think the United States population would be okay with homosexuality being a jail-able offense? No way.”

Maybe? They don’t really seem to be fighting to get all of those laws saying gay sex is illegal taken off of the record books that still exist.  They don’t seem to be fighting with us to end employment and housing discrimination.  They don’t seem to be fighting to end adoption discrimination.  Sure, there are some allies, but will a majority of the population fight for us?  It’s hard to tell.  I mean, look how many anti-gay marriage laws had to be thrown out by the Supreme Court.  There was one in pretty much every state! Remember, those laws were voted in by a majority of Americans less than 10 years ago.  

“Taking away rights after they are given is backwards in American values and is a sure way to cause paranoia.”

Tell that to the innocent Japanese Americans who were tossed into internment camps after Pearl Harbor.  

“I can see you got the comparison to Nazi Germany from the article you posted. I’ll have you know, that if you look to other sources, Trump didn’t suggest the database, a reporter did.”

And Trump said it would be a good idea.

“From what I’ve been gathering from the consensus of multiple sources, no one is quite sure what happened or what he exactly said.”

That is the spin Trump’s campaign tried to sell after he ran his mouth off again.  

“Some say the reporter didn’t clarify and Trump misjudged a question.”

Who says? Trump? His campaign? Again… That’s the spin he tried to sell after he realized how he looked when he made those comments.  Here’s the actual exchange (during which he had multiple chances to set the record straight.)  

Reporter: France declared this state of emergency where they closed the borders and they established some degree of warrantless searches. I know how you feel about the borders, but do you think there is some kind of state of emergency here, and do we need warrantless searches of Muslims?

Trump: We’re going to have to do certain things that were frankly unthinkable a year ago

Reporter: Do you think we might need to register Muslims in some type of database, or note their religion on their ID?

Trump: We’re going to have to look at a lot of things very closely. We’re going to have to look at the mosques. We’re going to have to look very, very carefully.

Reporter 2: Should there be a database or system that tracks Muslims in this country?

Trump: There should be a lot of systems, beyond databases. I mean, we should have a lot of systems.

Reporter 2: But that’s something your White House would like to implement.

Trump: I would certainly implement that. Absolutely

There was some minor confusion at that point as to whether Trump was talking about building his ridiculous wall, or whether he would institute a database, but the reporter reiterated that they were talking about the database, asking him again if a database would be a good idea and Trump stated: It would just be good management.

Then the reported asked, yet another time, if Muslims should be on a database…

Trump: They have to be — they have to be.  Let me just tell you: The key is people can come to the country, but they have to come legally.

Trump was asked not once…. Not twice… But a total of SIX TIMES if he would create a database of Muslim Americans, and he answered in the affirmative every… single… time… and only one out of the six times could be considered confusing.  All of the others were up-front, plainly spoken, and obvious.  

“We are working with a lot of he said/she said here. I would prefer to work and debate on something that has solid material to work from.”

Well, I’ve just given you the entire conversation. So what now? Are you still going to pretend he was just “confused”?  And even if he was actually confused after being asked a simple question six times… Do you really think someone so easily confused is qualified to be our President for Christ’s sake!? How in the hell do you think he’s going to function during serious negotiations with foreign leaders if he can’t even answer a simple, straightforward, question without getting confused?

“I’ve seen some of these links talk about Trump wanting to create a registry for people from Syria specifically. Is that a BAD thing?”

Nope.  He was clearly asked about Muslims, not Syrian refugees.  Besides that, refugees are already monitored, so it would make no sense, what-so-ever, to institute a second database when the information is already there.  

“I don’t find anything wrong with watching people coming from violent/war torn nations that we let into our country.”

Again… They already do monitor refugees.  They don’t just let them land rafts on the beach, march into the country, and go wherever they want to go.  It doesn’t work that way. 

“There’s a pattern of people coming from these places and committing violent crimes.”

Where are you getting that information?  I’d love to see some statistics showing that refugees have a pattern of violence.  

“I don’t know what you propose but SOMETHING has to change cause this process is causing a lot of death.”

In other countries? Maybe…. But not here.  As I’ve shown.  Nearly all of the terrorist attacks on American soil since 9/11 were committed by American citizens, 64% of which were born here.  (Source found above, from the first time I addressed the fear-mongering tactic.)  

“He isn’t advocating for “rounding up Mexicans and tossing them out”. He’s talking about deporting immigrants. Do you disagree with that?”

Yes, I absolutely do disagree with that.  Many of those HUMAN BEINGS came here as children, have been here for years and years, and have established lives in this country.  Did they come here illegally? Maybe? Do we want to be a country full of cold-hearted monsters who turn away people in need? You might want to, but I certainly don’t, and it’s definitely not the ideals that this country is supposed to harbor.  To quote from the Statue of Liberty:

“Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.  Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

We’re supposed to be the country that reaches out to those in need.  

“I’m obviously not as emotionally distressed over this as you are.”

You’re damned right I’m distressed.  As you should be; and if you cared even a little bit for others, you would be.  

“And I’m not naive. I just have a different opinion than you.”

No, you’re worse.  You’re willfully ignorant.  You see possible benefits (however small) to yourself, and ignore the pain a Trump presidency will cause to others and the danger it will present to the country (and the world). You ignore all of the atrocious things Donald Trump has said and done and take in his propaganda like it’s candy.  Hillary Clinton wasn’t my first choice for President (Bernie supporter here).  I’ll readily admit that… But she is far…. FAR better than that egotistical, bigoted, homophobic, misogynistic, hate-mongering, scam-artist that is Donald Trump.  The fact that you can’t see that (or even worse, ignore it, don’t care, or genuinely agree) paints a terrible…. TERRIBLE picture of you.  Just like it does for every other Trump supporter in this country.   

Trump vs. Hitler:

One last thing I’d like to address, which you scoffed at, is the idea that Trump is comparable to Hitler.  Yes, this gets thrown around a lot regarding politicians, and it’s usually uncalled for, but in this instance, the similarities are truly scary.  Germany was in terrible condition economically when Hitler rose to power, and America isn’t, but they’re both using the same rhetoric. Hitler promised to “make Germany great again” and he  used fear and  an irrational sense of nationalist pride to get people to turn against a common “enemy.”   According to him the cause of all of Germany’s problems was the Jews.  His solution was to register them, get rid of them, and cut Germany  off from the rest of the world as if they were some sort of villain.

Trump is using the exact same rhetoric.  His slogan is “Make America great again!” and according to Trump, the way to do that is to get rid of all the Muslims and other immigrants that are “pulling us down.” He’s claimed that our relationships with other countries are holding us down, he’s proposed to literally build a wall between us and another neighbor, and he’s stated he won’t honor treaties with other countries.  

Trump might not be even nearly as bad as Hitler was… Yet (and that is a strong yet…) but there are definite signs that history could repeat itself if we allow it.  I for one, don’t want our country to take even one step down that road.  Hitler didn’t start out as the powerful, fascist, dictator that he ended up as.  He didn’t start out promising to murder millions of people.  It was the people that he convinced to follow him, using fear and pride, that took Germany there, and I refuse to simply sit back and ignore all of the signs and do nothing as Donald Trump and his followers take us down that same road.  

A holocaust survivor on Trump vs. Hitler:

http://www.thewrap.com/are-hitler-trump-comparisons-fair-a-holocaust-survivor-tells-his-son/

A well written article on the Trump / Hitler comparison:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/28/donald-trump-rhetoric-adolf-hitler-anti-trump-campaign

An “interesting” quiz.  Can you pick which fascist made the statement:

http://interactive.nydailynews.com/2016/03/quiz-who-said-it-trump-hitler-mussolini-stalin/

 

James Garcia 9/28/2016

Still Proud

To those people that would carry / have carried out violence against the LGBT community I have this to say:

Chances are good that if your religion teaches you to hate other people, so much that you’d murder them in cold blood, simply because they’re a little different than you, then the problem is with your religion, not the other people.  

If your “god” tells you to hate people simply because they love a little differently than you, then you don’t worship a god at all, you worship a monster.  No all-intelligent being, supposedly capable of creating the universe we live in, would ever sanction the kind of atrocity that happened in Orlando today.   

Your actions, and the actions of those like you, only make me more proud of who I am. They make me more proud to be a part of the LGBT community. You see, the LGBT community, in spite of petty government employees refusing them marriage licenses, in spite of hateful business owners refusing to sell them cakes, in spite of discriminatory “religious freedom” bills, in spite of ridiculous bathroom laws that seek to dehumanize them, and yes, even in spite of all the physical violence that has been carried out against them, they keep on fighting.  Why?  Because the LGBT community is built up of people from all different races, religions, cultures, and backgrounds. It’s built up of people that are brave, caring, and accepting; while you and those like you, are nothing more than sick, pathetic, cowards.  You’ll never win.  In fact… You’ve already lost.
#StillProud #Pride2016 #Orlando

 

James Garcia:  June 12, 2016

Remembering Justice Antonin Scalia

scalia_3

With the news of the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia, I will admit, I didn’t feel bad in the slightest.  My first emotion was excitement that the Supreme Court would no longer be controlled by a Conservative majority.  A friend of mine even said “I cheered when I heard… Then felt bad for cheering…”  But I, for one, am not sad that he’s gone.  I’m glad that someone who wanted to deny me basic human rights, who wanted to sell our country to whoever would write him the biggest check, who’s misogyny plagued women’s rights since his nomination, and who would be a wrench in the works at any attempt this country would make towards stopping catastrophic climate change, is no longer a member of the highest court in the nation. No… I don’t owe Justice Scalia any respect, or any grief at his passing and here are just a few reminders of what makes me feel this way:

On LGBT People:

Calls LGBT people “immoral and destructive.”: “Many Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, as scoutmasters for their children, as teachers in their children’s schools, or as boarders in their home. They view this as protecting themselves and their families from a lifestyle that they believe to be immoral and destructive.”

Homosexuality is like Murder: “If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against other things?”

Compares LGBT people to murderers and animal abusers: “I had thought that one could consider certain conduct reprehensible—murder, for example, or polygamy, or cruelty to animals—and could exhibit even ‘animus’ toward such conduct. Surely that is the only sort of ‘animus’ at issue here: moral disapproval of homosexual conduct, the same sort of moral disapproval that produced the centuries-old criminal laws that we held constitutional in Bowers.”

Compares homosexuals (and minorities in general) to pederasts and child molesters:  “What minorities deserve protection? What about pederasts? What about child abusers?”

On Minorities: 

Claimed African Americans should go to “slower track” schools: “There are those who contend that it does not benefit African Americans to get them into the University of Texas, where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less-advanced school, a slower-track school where they do well. One of the briefs pointed out that most of the black scientists in this country don’t come from schools like the University of Texas. They come from lesser schools where they do not feel that they’re being pushed ahead in classes that are too fast for them.”

On Gender Discrimination:

Claimed the Constitution doesn’t prohibit discrimination based on sex: “the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn’t. Nobody ever thought that that’s what it meant. Nobody ever voted for that. If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, hey we have things called legislatures, and they enact things called laws.”

Said it’s “intelligent” to treat women differently: “There are some intelligent reasons to treat women differently. I don’t think anybody would deny that.” 

These are just a few of the horrible things Scalia has said.  His decisions on his Supreme Court cases show that he wanted to deny me and my fellow LGBT people basic civil liberties, he believed women should be treated differently,  he believed minorities were less than white people, he frequently spoke in favor of stripping away the separation of church and state,  he was part of the deciding factor in the Citizens United case which threatens to destroy democracy as we know it,  and he stood with those who would keep the U.S. from doing their part in stopping catastrophic climate change.  His beliefs, his policies, and the fact that he sat on the highest court of the land put him in a unique position to harm countless Americans.  So do I owe him any respect?  Should I mourn his loss?  Should I be ashamed that I am happy he is no longer in a position to harm any more lives with his toxic views?  No… I don’t think so.

Kim Davis: God’s Warrior or Public Official?

I am going to take a week off from writing my Broken Chains series and comment on the Kim Davis debacle that’s happening in Kentucky at the moment by addressing some of the arguments that I’ve seen from the fanatical, fundamentalist right lately.  The following are my responses that I wrote for a Facebook conversation that was taking place on a friend’s wall (she was being attacked by one of her friends for posting an article about Kim Davis stating that she should be fired for refusing to do her job.)  

Here are some arguments that I saw and responded to (my responses are in black):

Loud Boss

“The government [should] stop pushing their agenda down everyone’s throats in the name of tolerance.”

Requiring a government official to do the job that she was hired to do (in this case issuing marriage licenses to all those legally allowed to marry) is not “forcing an agenda” down anyone’s throat.  It is simply requiring her to fulfill her job duties.  If she no longer wants to do her job, she should resign.  That’s how a job works.  

“The people screaming “tolerate all” are the ones screaming “we will not tolerate your beliefs because they don’t agree with ours”

A person  having a reasonable expectation that they can go into a government office and utilize the services they are supposed to offer is not being intolerant of someone’s views.  A government office is a government office, not a church, not a Christian book store, or a Christian school.  If she wants to be able to preach her religious views at her place of employment she should find a job at one of the other places and allow someone who will provide a government service to all American citizens to take her place.  In America, there are a wide variety of religious beliefs (even no belief at all!).  Every American citizen should be able to walk into a government office and utilize whatever services they offer without being discriminated against.  Kim Davis’s job is not a pulpit for her to preach her religion.  That is not intolerance, that is common sense.  To quote a Reddit user’s statement, I wonder how tolerant these people who cheer Kim Davis would feel if a Christian woman walked into the DMV and a Muslim man working behind the counter said “According to my religion, women should wear burkas and stay in the home, so I refuse to issue you a driver’s license.”  I’m pretty positive that that wouldn’t go over well with the fundamentalists on the right.  

applaus

“A homosexual man has the same right that I do… To marry a woman. homosexuals are looking for special privileges and applause, not equality.”

What many fundamentalists forget is that what they have is the right to marry the person they happen to fall in love with (or someone they got pregnant, or someone they got drunk with and married in a stupor at a Vegas casino by an Elvis impersonator).  Now, according to the Supreme Court of the United States, homosexuals have that same right.  That is not wanting a special privilege, that is wanting access to the same right that straight Americans already have (which, should they ever decide to marry someone of the same sex, they also have access to now).  As a gay person, I can tell you truthfully, I don’t want or care for anyone’s applause.  Those who dislike me for being gay don’t matter to me up until that point when they start feeling like their religious beliefs should have power over me and the rights that the government offers to me.  Once that happens, then we have a problem.  

“So now [Kim Davis] must lose her job, and many must lose their businesses simply because [gay people] don’t agree with them and [they] want to force them to do something that goes against what they believe?”

Kim Davis doesn’t have to lose her job.  If she wants to keep it she can do her job and all that it requires… Including issuing marriage licenses to gay couples.  If she doesn’t like her job duties she can resign, or continue to refuse to do them and be fined or imprisoned.  No one is forcing her to get married to a gay person, no one is saying she can’t believe that being gay is wrong.  What they are telling her to do is to issue marriage licenses to all couples that are legally allowed to request one, which now includes gay people.  If she doesn’t like it, again… She can resign (or continue to refuse to do so and face fines and imprisonment.)  Just like a Muslim DMV employee can’t deny a driver’s license to a woman, a Christian Clerk can’t deny a marriage license to a gay couple.  It’s really simple stuff here.  

“[The] homosexual agenda [is] forcing a woman to adhere to their beliefs in gay marriage.”

No, they are wanting a government employee to provide a service that they are entitled to by law.  The government isn’t charged with making sure everyone adheres to Christian principles.  America is a melting pot of beliefs and cultures and we all have to coexist together within it.  That means if we work at a government facility we will occasionally have to work with people who don’t share our beliefs.  As a government employee Kim Davis doesn’t get to pick and choose which American citizens are entitled to the services offered in the government office where she works simply because they don’t agree with her religious beliefs.  

ball and chain_full

“[Gay people are ] forcing her to go against what she believes in order to make them happy.”

Again… No one is forcing her to do anything.  If she no longer likes her job duties she can easily resign and allow the position to be filled by someone that will perform the duties they agreed to perform.  As a government official, Kim Davis doesn’t get to choose which American citizens she will serve anymore than a Policeman or a Fireman does.  They don’t get to say “I’ll only protect and serve Christians.  If a gay person is in danger or if their house is burning, I can’t help them because I might be violating my religious beliefs.”  Government positions don’t work that way. 

cake

“Well how bout the bakery fiasco? Homosexuals didn’t get their way so they forced the bakery owners to do what the homosexual couple wanted.”

I’ve already written out a detailed response to the bakery nonsense, so I’ll just post a link to it here:

https://strangelyprogressive.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/cakes-made-with-bigotry/

Marching

“This isn’t a peaceful little March for “rights.” No, no, no. This is becoming an enforcement of homosexual beliefs on everyone, regardless of what [a person] believes.”

No one is forcing anyone to be gay or even to believe that being gay is moral.  A Christian having to share the rights that they already have with gay people is not forcing anything on anyone, anymore than it was forcing a “black agenda” on people by allowing black people to have the same rights as white people after the Civil Rights movement.  It wasn’t forcing a “female agenda” on men when women won the right to vote.  It wasn’t forcing an “interracial marriage” agenda on non-interracial couples when interracial couples were allowed to marry.  It’s not forcing a “broccoli agenda” on you if I choose to eat broccoli even though you hate broccoli.  It’s not even forcing a “broccoli agenda” on you if you work at a grocery store and have to sell broccoli to someone else.  You don’t have to eat the broccoli, you just have to sell it to people if it’s on the shelves in the store you work in.  Selling broccoli to someone isn’t violating your broccoli hating sensibilities.  So, moving passed the silliness I’ll say it again:  Having to share rights that you already enjoy with people that are different than you is not forcing anything on you.  

“As far as I’m concerned, that’s unconstitutional.”

Luckily for everyone else, Fundamentalist Christians don’t get to arbitrarily decide what is or isn’t Constitutional!

“This doesn’t “tolerate religion”. it’s forcing everyone to deny their religion to accommodate 2% of the population that is upset.”  

I am not repeating the same argument over and over again for no reason.  This is the same argument that is being used by the Fundamentalist Right again and again and again (and was in fact used multiple times in this same conversation), so I’ll address it once more… Gays having rights isn’t forcing religious people to give up their beliefs.  All American citizens can believe whatever they want to believe.  The only thing it’s forcing religious people to do is to live in a society equally, according to the law, with those that are different from them.  If they can’t handle losing the privileged number one spot in exchange for a level playing field, well… That is their problem, not ours.

gaymarriage

“She signed up to give couples marriage licenses, not to give homosexuals a right to what society has perverted into ‘marriage.’”

She “signed up” to give marriages licenses to all couples who are legally allowed to have one, regardless of what her personal religious beliefs are on the subject.  She doesn’t get to deny marriage licenses to atheists, or Jewish people, or Muslims, or divorced couples, and as of the Supreme Court ruling, she can’t deny marriage licenses to gay people either.  If she doesn’t like her job duties anymore she can resign, or continue to deny those services and face fines or imprisonment. (I feel like a broken record!)

gay agenda

“The homosexual agenda is [forcing others to stop] saying anything against homosexuality.”

I so love this “homosexual agenda” nonsense.  It makes me feel like a super-villain sitting in my secret lair having a meeting with all of the other super-villains about how to take over the world.  But that’s beside the point.  People are welcome to say whatever they want, but as with actions, words have consequences.  If a person says something I don’t like, I have every right to respond to their nonsense.  If they own a business and they refuse to sell me whatever product they already offer simply because I’m gay, then I can file a complaint to the proper government authority.  I can tell all my friends about what happened and they can all boycott their business.  I can also post about my experience on social media (or on my blog) and everyone that reads it can choose to boycott that business also.  In a few states (with more being added all the time) I can sue that business for violating anti-discrimination laws, just like they would be allowed to sue me if the tables were turned.  

“A couple is defined as man and woman. man and wife.”

This again? Hasn’t this ridiculous argument been shot down already? A marriage is defined as “between and man and a woman” only in specific religious sects, not according to the Federal government.  In our country, marriage is a contract between two people.  While most people get married when they love each other, it is not a legal requirement for even love to be involved, much less specific genders.  Sharing a specific religion certainly isn’t a requirement.  People are entitled to believe whatever they want, but we live in a melting pot of beliefs and cultures and in this country all of them are treated equally.  One religion doesn’t get to rule over the rest.  That is what the First Amendment guarantees.  

“[Procreation] is everywhere. You find it in the Bible (which you obviously don’t believe).”

The Bible doesn’t matter when it comes to discussing American law…

Apes

“But you also find [procreation] throughout nature.”

You know what else you find in nature?  That’s right… You find homosexuality in nature.  There are reportedly over 1,500 animal species that either engage in homosexual behavior or form homosexual pairings.  

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150206-are-there-any-homosexual-animals

“It’s just the way we were created. we are created to procreate and that’s through man and woman.”

There certainly isn’t any scientific proof for creation by a god or gods, nor for “procreation as our sole purpose.” There are many living beings (including many human beings) that can’t procreate in male/female pairings and many that simply don’t want to.   Procreation is certainly necessary for man’s continued existence, that is true, though with scientific advances, even that is changing.  Some might even argue we should hold off procreating for a little awhile, what with all the children in orphanages, the current overpopulation problem, and our quickly depleting natural resources…  So, as it can quickly be established, there is no “set purpose” for human beings to exist, and even if there were, it certainly isn’t this “procreation only” nonsense.  

“And they have the right to marry. a man can marry a woman and vice versa. really simple stuff.”

(This argument annoys me to no end!) And now, according to Federal Law, gay couples can marry also.  It’s really simple stuff.  

tax exempt

“They want special privileges, and that is discrimination against the rest.”  

As stated before… Having the same rights as Fundamentalist Christians is not having “special privileges” (Cough…Cough… Tax exempt status…)   Christians can legally marry the person they love, and now, I can too!  Yay! 

“Yes, I’ve had gay friends. and they know I don’t approve or agree. I’m glad they do, because they need to realize it’s wrong in the eyes of God.”

As with the Bible, what a Fundamentalist Christian thinks “God” says is wrong is irrelevant when discussing American law.  People like this character I was debating with are no friend of gay people.  When someone tries to deny someone else basic human dignity and the Civil Rights that they already have access to, they are not a friend.  A person that wishes to deny me access to Civil Rights may be a casual acquaintance, a co-worker, or even a blood relative, but they aren’t a friend and they definitely don’t love me. No matter how much they’d like to pretend otherwise.  

“I love Gay people [but] I hate what they do.”

People like this only “love” gay people (but as I said, that’s debatable) so long as they conform to their beliefs and don’t live their lives as who they know they are.  Anti-gay bigots don’t “hate what [gay people] do.”  They hate gay people.  Period.  No matter how much they try and insist otherwise.  Being gay is a part of who I am just as much as my eye color, or my skin color.  I didn’t choose to be gay anymore than they chose to be straight (and unlike how they actually chose to be Christian).  Due to a random combination of genes, environment, and psychology, I turned out gay.  Being gay isn’t something I “do”, it’s a part of who I am, whether these zealots like it or not.

Kim Davis Jail

“Why are you forcing your “truth” on the poor judge? Sheesh! Her truth isn’t yours, but that’s doesn’t make your truth hers.”

As I’ve stated several times before no one is forcing her to do anything.  She has three options here:

  1. Do her job and provide marriage licenses to all who are legally allowed to have them (including gay people)
  2. Resign from her position if she doesn’t want to perform her job duties
  3. Continue to refuse to perform her job duties and face fines and imprisonment

Those are the options available.  Those are the only options available.  Continuing to deny gay couples marriage licenses from her position as a government official, when they have been guaranteed the right to marry by the Supreme Court, and therefore by the US Constitution, is illegal.  That’s all there is to it.  

“With different truths, we’re left with no truth and just madness.” (This was his response to the statement that not everyone lives their lives by what he believes to be true.)

The world has mostly gotten along just fine since humanity came into existence (ignoring the wars, genocides, and mass exterminations perpetrated by religious groups) with a wide variety of different truths.  Humanity existed long before the existence of Christianity or even Judaism just fine and it will continue to do so for as long as the environmental conditions and the availability of natural resources allows.  Provided we don’t blow each other up with nuclear bombs first of course…

Jason

“If there is no truth.. why can’t I just murder someone?”

Anyone can technically murder someone if they really wanted to (as we see on the news every day it seems…)  However, we have a system of laws in place, and those who break that law (by murdering someone for instance) will face the consequences of violating those laws.  They also may experience backlash from the family and friends of the person they murdered (up to and including losing their own life in return).  That is how our society works and religion has absolutely nothing to do with it.  Also, if the only thing that stops someone from murdering people is someone at their church telling them not to, then I’d say they have FAR more problems than they think any gay person has.  

“You do realize that this country was formed on biblical foundations right?”

As usual, the conversation always seems to head in this direction, and as always… It’s just wrong.  Just because some of the men (not all of them) who founded this country were Christian, doesn’t mean they intended this to be a Christian nation.  Here are a few quotes from our founding fathers (I’ll even use a couple that aren’t normally used to debunk the “Christian Nation” nonsense either!):

“If I could conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution.”  -George Washington

“We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition… In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man’s religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest Offices that are known in the United States.” – George Washington

“The Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” – 1797 Treaty of Tripoli signed by Founding Father John Adamsreligious

Honestly, in spite of how it may seem, I don’t enjoy having this same discussion over and over again.  It’s dishearteningat best.  I can’t understand how seemingly intelligent people think that it’s okay to deny rights that they’ve always enjoyed to people a little different than them.  Where is the humanity?  Where is the empathy for their fellow human beings?  Why must we, as a country, keep reliving the same old battles, but with a change in one of the players?  It seems that we are always embroiled in Civil War of sorts, that usually involves Christians vs. [insert minority group].  It’s even been Christians vs. Other types of Christians for Christ’s sake (no pun intended)!

religion 2

If the religious community as a whole wants to remain relevant in this country (and even the world), then they need to wake up and stop with all of this nonsense where they viciously attack those that don’t hold to their particular faith, whether it be with bombs, guns, and knives, or with laws and regulations that attempt to deny rights to those outside of whatever the majority faith happens to be.  Those that are still a part of the world’s various religious communities that just want to live in peace with the rest of us need to rise up and tell those who cause trouble or who harm others that enough is enough! With information being passed between people in an instant, religion is quickly becoming irrelevant in it’s current form, and if it doesn’t want to be left behind then the religious need to wake up and realize that the rest of world is moving on without them and find a way to coexist.   

coexist

James Garcia 9/2/2015