« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

11/12/2008

Video: Seriously, Monica? You don't get it?

by Jeremy Hooper

In observing the following clip, many, like our bloggy buddy Andy Towle, are lashing out against Bill O'Reilly's oddly determined attempts to pit gays against the African-American community. And that's a perfectly valid source of anger, especially since the racial blame game has been widely debunked in recent days. We, however, see something else EXTREMELY annoying in this clip from the 10/10 "O'Reilly Factor." Watch it and then we'll get back to ya:

Okay, so our big issue? That Monica Crowley is criticizing gays for protesting at religious places, because she says that religious people have a right to practice their "Biblical admonitions" of homosexuality. She's right about the point -- they do have a right to chant Leviticus from the rooftops. But our problem is not their right to preach. Our problem: THAT THESE PEOPLE USED THEIR PERSONAL FAITH AGAINST GAYS' CIVIL LIBERTIES! Religion is the key to EVERY gay bans' passage. That is an undeniable fact. Folks like Rick Warren made public calls for people to vote for Prop 8! So it's completely out of line for her to suggest that these protests are themselves out of line. What we find problematic is not the church's existence, but rather the church-state marriage that denied us of our own! What we are protesting is the injection of that faith into public policy, not the church's views or their leaders' right to convey them!

Then to make it even more absurd, Crowley suggests that gays should be protesting either the state legislature or the courts. Uhm, has she not noticed that the California legislature voted for marriage equality? Twice, in fact. And has she not noticed that the courts, working from a reasoned constitutional basis, gave us our right to marriage equality? Why the hell would we protest them? We are quite happy with the way they got behind our rights! What we aren't happy about is that there are a huge number of people in the faith community who felt that their personal prayers are suitable arguments against civil fairness!

Honestly, it blows our mind that an analyst who has booked national TV airtime would operate from such a bizarrely off-base, point-missing place. Yes, even on the obviously pro-right Fox News.

Bill O'Reilly Trying to Pit Gays Against Blacks [Towle]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Ah yes.

The whole double standard.

You can want gay marriage. I can oppose it. I can take it away from you, but you better not complain to me about it!

Apparently the right to freedom of speech has some sort of weird limit on it that I never heard of. Apparently it can only go back and forth once. Then you're not allowed to speak anymore. Then you're supposed to just give up and accept that other people have taken a giant dook on the constitution and call it good.

Hmm, never got that memo.

Posted by: Jason D | Nov 12, 2008 1:00:01 PM

Sadly, yes, there's been some stupid gays on our side who've lashed out at African-Americans and it's been unacceptable (although having one's civil rights taken away is understandably fucking stressful) so there's been a desire to pin the blame on someone. It seems that the religious right would like racism to be the scapegoat for this. This is of course, no surprise at all because RELIGION IS 100% TO BLAME.

Organized religion, superstitious beliefs, blind adherence to a fucking stupid 1000 year old book written by misogynists, call it what you want, but they're the reasons for this stupidity. It just happens that the majority of black people in California seem to be religious, but it's because of their religion, and not how much damn melanin they have in their skin that they voted for the side of evil.

Posted by: aaa | Nov 12, 2008 1:13:24 PM

SNAPS to Margaret Hoover.

She actually makes sense, and I really didn't think that could happen on Fox News.

But she gets the situation, and why protests are happening where they are, only to be shouted down by O'Reilly and Monica.

Posted by: Nick | Nov 12, 2008 2:33:15 PM

Highlighting the fact that a majority of African-Americans voted for Prop 8 isn't just about blame! It's about exposing a huge gap in the outreach efforts of groups trying to expand civil rights. The votes of black people count as much as anyone else's, but I never hear about anyone effectively soliciting their support. Does skin color disqualify blacks as potential allies?

Posted by: Derek in DC | Nov 12, 2008 4:23:55 PM

I am so sick of O'Reilly. I say we sick the Lavender Panther's on him.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | Nov 12, 2008 4:27:19 PM

He's Horrible does he ever let anyone finish? I can see why I can't watch it...Doesn't the bible say no Shellfish and pork too? Perhaps Mr. warrens church should do the same for fisheries and pork processing plants.....

Posted by: JOHN NORMILE | Nov 13, 2008 11:48:03 AM

Sadly, there are two things going on here that often go unnoticed:

1. TONS of people, both fundies and not, view voting like some sort of high school popularity contest. People get to vote their personal tastes and preferences, and let the most popular personal tastes win. It astonishes me, but TONS (I mean friggin' HORDES) of people think that's what democracy means. The notion of reasoned, logical consideration of public policy and individual liberty, whether agreed with or not, would shock the heaving masses.

2. A friggin' LOT of fundie types really do want some sort of theocracy, even if "theocracy lite." They won't say so in mixed company, but they do.

These tendencies are overcome only once an issue is essentially dead and antiquated. What to do with such people?

Posted by: Steve | Nov 13, 2008 11:58:15 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails