Bounty on gays

[giza]

Money is being offered to kill gays in Jerusalem

Reading through the article linked above, this is apparently an intimidation tactic that is being used against a Pride Parade scheduled there on August 10th. Lots of quotes from rabbis going on about how evil homosexuality is, yada yada yada. Nothing I really haven't heard before.

I guess this means that Muslims don't have a monopoly on religious-based hatred now. :-/

Comments

[ilthuain.livejournal.com]

Not all religions condemn homosexuality, just some major sects in all world religions. In my opinion, members of the United Church of Christ are as Christian as they come, and they're hip with the gay. Also, Reform Judaism is the largest Jewish group in the U.S., and they accept homosexuality as 'part of the whole and undivided person', and by extension, part of God's divine plan for that individual.

Don't even get me started on the UUA, they've been offering gay marriage since 1984.

[ilthuain.livejournal.com]

It's way more than that. Look at the possible schism in the Episcopal Church, the formation of the Alliance of Baptists, the huge happenings within Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, the mainline Mormons vs. the Community of Christ... this is not just limited to one or two percent of the religious population.

Consider these numbers (provided by OCRT and Barna Research):

"-Among Americans generally, 45% agreed that homosexuality is acceptable; 46% said it is unacceptable. Since the margin of error is 3%, this is a statistical dead-heat.

-Among Born-again Christians: the numbers were 27% and 66%.

-Among Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Christians, they were 2% and 95%.
bullet

By inference, a significant majority of Americans who are neither born-again nor Evangelicals agree that homosexuality is acceptable."

If you consider how many Americans self-apply the title "religious", these numbers are all the more encouraging. Religious organizations are not united on this issue, and considering the long struggles for equality in the past, we are gaining ground by leaps and bounds every year.

[xoagray.livejournal.com]

Damn. I'll openly admit I honestly feel the pride movement is detrimental to the gay community. But this is truely fucked up. I'm honestly not surprised to hear it coming from that area of the world though. With as many religous fanatics as there are around there, who could expect anything less than extreamisem.

X

[branwyn.livejournal.com]

I think that the reason Pride parades are "detrimental to the gay community" in relatively liberal societies like in North America is that it's no longer a political statement, it's become a party, and many less-open-minded people see that as "flaunting it" (and in some cases it is)... and some of the stuff that appears in Pride parades should not be in public, regardless of the reason or event.

However, the response seen in Jerusalem is not far from the response you might have seen at Pride parades on this continent... 25 years ago. It wasn't coked-up circuit boys flaunting their leather-accented naughty bits in a roving street party, it was a small collection of brave but determined people who risked their social lives and careers and possibly even their lives to stand up for their basic human rights. Their bravery and persistence has slowly bought us a society where today's Pride parades could occur without massive, massive backlash and retribution.

So let's be careful about slagging Pride parades in general. The fact that a Pride parade in a relatively-enlightened country like Israel would inspire such a violent reaction is reason enough to say that we need to keep having them in our countries as well.

And if you don't like what the Pride parade is projecting about gay people, then get your ass into a parade and make the statement you want to make. In fact, I have been thinking of doing the same thing - getting together a group of people who want to march for the right reasons... carry a series of banner that say "It's not about clubs and parties. It's not about leather or nudity or kinks. It's not even about sex. It's about basic human rights for all." Or something to that effect. You would instantly win the hatred of some of the hardcore gay community and the respect and understanding of many people who are "on the fence" about the issue.

*hmms* I think I might actually want to do that. I shall have to think about it.

B.

[xoagray.livejournal.com]

That's a switch for you, last time we talked, you were as against it all as I was. Though I'll agree, the meaning has defintaely been lost. I like your idea, it sounds a lot like the one I had before I wrote it off about everyone just getting out there in their work clothes because that's how most people would see us.

I just don't agree with how the pride movement has gone, it's exactly what you said anymore, just a big party where people can flaunt things that "shouldn't ever be in public". That is why it's now counterproductive. If it actually made a statement to the world other than "Look at what a freak show we are!" it might be something worth while.
either way, reguardless of how anyone feels about it, it's obvious that marching down the streets in a tutu and leather gear, or having sex on the streets, is NOT going to show a posative image of gay people to the world. And I know I speak for a LOT of people when I say that's not the image that I want people to have when I say that I'm gay.

As far as getting out there and doing something about it, you're absolutely right, if you go against the grain, you get stomped on. Ironic that the people that are screaming about wanting tolerance, are often so intolerant themselves. I've made mention a few times about doing things at parades such as marching in work clothes, or just street clothes as our everyday selves, and it got shat on so fast it's not even funny. Saying or doing anything that might take away even for a second from the fetish freakshow party aspect of the parade will get you immidiately labled as "closed minded" and "anti-gay". Tolerance is something that works both ways, these people preach acceptance and tolerance, but refuse to do it.

The thing is, most modern priders don't want acceptance, they want the right to shove their every fetish in everyone's face without negative consiquence. And if you say anything against that, they label you as "closed minded" and blackball you. They're not looking for equal rights, they're looking for the right to wear bondage gear and buttless chaps to the grocery store. It's really kinda' sad where things have gone.


X

[branwyn.livejournal.com]

Really?

I don't remember being against pride parades, ever. I remember defending them as a celebration of gayness, even if it is a bit wild, and I remember taking a middle ground stance thinking that they still needed to exist but could probably used to be taken down a few notches so as to be a little more... accessible.

And now I'm looking at probably the best compromise... adding a new dimension. Now I wish I had seen this year's parade, actually - I can probably find a list of the participants online if I wanted... maybe footage too.

The trick would be to make the "We're just people who are gay" contingent as interesting and entertaining as the "We're freaks! We'll do what we want!" contingents. Tough.

B.

[xoagray.livejournal.com]

Yeah, we were talking about it as we were leaving Miami's place back when I came up there and stayed in canada for like 2 weeks. We both came to the conclusion that it was generally a bad thing for the gay community.

Making it interesting would be hard, because you won't get any cooperation from most of the priders. it'll just be a handfull of people in a see of freak show. And the media won't help much, as they're usually out for the kinkiest, freakiest things they can get. The only way it would really work, and have any effect, is if you could get a good number of priders to do it, and that's extreamly unlikely.

X

[balinares.livejournal.com]

I guess this means that Muslims don't have a monopoly on religious-based hatred now. :-/

Hmm dude, where have you been the last 2,000 years? :/

[unciaa.livejournal.com]

Hah! Same post, same time. *g*

[balinares.livejournal.com]

Tsh! Hadn't we agreed you were supposed to get out of my brain already? :)

[giza.livejournal.com]

Among other body parts...

[unciaa.livejournal.com]

> I guess this means that Muslims don't have a monopoly on religious-based hatred now.

Now? Did I blink and the rest of religion had a spotless record until now or something? *g*

[zealianbadass.livejournal.com]

Makes me wonder what'll happen to those who try. I think this might serve well as a chance to be able to wipe out a few of those fanaticism-drunk fools.

[delphi-of-clf.livejournal.com]

They were never the only ones to do that.

[furahi.livejournal.com]

Whar Sichi and Balinares said ^^