When one goes to court, we ALL go to court of 'pro-fam' antipathy
You know what's annoying? How whenever one gay person does something on their own free will, it is automatically spun by our opposition as representative of the whole of the LGBT community.
Latest case in point: As you might remember us telling you last week, a lesbian in California has filed a lawsuit against the eHarmony dating service, because the online matchmaker does not allow for gay couples. She didn't file the lawsuit as part of a larger gay rights movement, but merely as a citizen who perceived a wrong that she wants to fight to remedy. Some in the LGBT community surely agree with her and might even join the class action lawsuit, while others surely find it short-sighted, baseless, or just plain silly. But again -- this is not an ACL & Lambda Legal-based, HRC & Taskforce-backed legal action, but rather one person's discrimination suit.
But how does the Concerned Women For America's Matt Barber address the matter? Well, in two different pieces, one written and one spoken, Barber presents the case by referring to the action as "a 'discrimination' lawsuit recently filed by homosexual activists." Because in case you didn't know, we gays all speak the same language, preach the same prayers, and vote the same votes. One gay goes to court, and we ALL go to court.
::Writer rolls eyes to show contempt, so therefore the entire gay community has rolled eyes to show contempt::
Now, we do understand when gay marriage lawsuits and things of that nature are presented as representative of the entire community, as the vast majority of the LGBT population tends to stand behind those actions, and they generally have the support of all of the major advocacy groups. However, it's unfair for these kids, in their campaigns to make the gay community look militant, to paint each and every gay-featuring legal case as speaking for the cause of gay activism. Would we says "HETEROSEXUALS ATTACK [insert gay-friendly company]" when one social conservative extremist legally challenged a business' pro-gay policies? Hopefully not! But then again, we also enjoy heterosexuals and have no political, religious, or social desire to demonize them!
**And on a related note: It's far from just gays who have made note of eHarmony's exclusion:
I picked up on the whole, "where we go one, we go all," rhetoric as well, Jeremy, and while I believe Ms. Carlson has the right to sue...I'm not sure she should have. Frankly, with the advent of sites catering to the LGBT community, I see this entire eHarmony issue as only being beneficial to these new sites.
Posted by: Kristen | Jun 8, 2007 6:39:47 PM
I agree with Kristen, she has the right to sue, but I question the thought process as it will open a lot of discrimination against the LGBT community as a whole as well as many businesses which cater to the LGBT community. As for the nonsense of the talk of the entire LGBT community being part of the lawsuit, as if this was just another piece of the gay agenda that the right loves to toss out, it is as ridiculous of the LGBT community holding all christians responsible for everything that Westboro does.
By the way, I have been out for almost two years, and no one I know has received a toaster, nor have I received my copy of the gay agenda, so I feel like I am just winging it here...
Posted by: Todd | Jun 9, 2007 2:23:45 PM
Todd: You get your copy of the agenda on your third anniversary. Remain patient.
Posted by: G-A-Y | Jun 9, 2007 7:06:11 PM
*tapping my foot* It's been almost 5 years for me, and I still don't have a copy of that ever elusive agenda.
Posted by: Kristen | Jun 11, 2007 9:12:51 AM
Barber looks like he wants to kick the S**t outta someone in every picture taken of him.
Posted by: Franc | Jun 11, 2007 7:35:23 PM
Well Franc, have you seen his boxing videos?
Posted by: G-A-Y | Jun 11, 2007 7:38:43 PMcomments powered by Disqus