posted on June 17, 2004 12:43:38 PM new
For those of you who do not know, Dick Feagler is a long time reporter for the Cleveland Plain Dealer. He is not a liberal, but rather a conservative. I found this editorial written by him to be a powerful reminder that not all conservatives think the way some do on this board. I'd like to share this piece:
Not gay, but just as proud to march for human rights
Dick Feagler
Wednesday, June 16, 2004
Guess who's going to be the celeb rity grand marshal in the Gay Pride Parade on Saturday . . .
Me.
When they called and asked me to do it, I stalled as long as I could. You should have seen me standing there going "humma-humma-humma" on the phone and trying to figure out a way to say no.
"Hold on and let me check my calendar," I said.
What calendar? I've got a malnourished calendar and I don't want a fatter one. But the fib gave me a couple of minutes to think fast.
I knew why they were calling me. I had written some columns in favor of gay rights. And, judging from the response, those columns had caused a ripple in the gay community.
The gays had previously thought of me, if they thought of me at all, as a right-wing, stuck-in-my-tracks fuddy-duddy - a guy with calcified brain cells who couldn't possibly change his opinion on anything that had happened since 1956.
That was a pretty accurate assessment. There are a lot of things in the old days I like better than things in the new days. But human rights are human rights. And, if we stand for anything in America, we stand for the idea that all people are equal and should be treated that way. That includes gays.
I'm an old guy who was raised to think that gays were perverts. But I'm also an old newspaper reporter who, in my time, covered some hideous stories of perversion. And the vast number of those dealt with sicko heterosexual males preying on little girls. Once in a hundred, you'd get a gay-rape story. I've gone behind police lines and seen the bodies of children left in fields. And when the cops finally hunted down the beasts who had left them there, they were never gay men.
I've also sat in courtrooms, watching custody battles. I've seen heterosexual couples play tug-of-war over their kids.
Some people are saying that gay couples will ruin the sanctity of marriage. The sanctity of marriage is already in tatters. We all know that, and we say a proper "alas." But how can we possibly think that if a gay couple moves in next door, their presence will somehow weaken our marriages? It makes no sense.
If you had told me five years ago that I would be a grand marshal in a gay-rights parade, I would have said you were nuts. But gays coming out of the closet changed me.
When that closet opened up about 20 years ago, I thought it was a broom closet. Then it became a walk-in. Now I realize it was a warehouse. A lot of good people were sealed away, afraid to come out and tell us how they felt and who they were.
Let me tell you what happened to me after I wrote two little columns that merely said rights are rights and gay people deserve them.
I now have at least 30 gay people who are friends of mine. Some of them are in my own family. One of them, a woman I prize like a jewel, told me her only two sons had died of AIDS. We had suspected that but had never discussed it until I told her I was going to be the grand marshal in the Gay Pride Parade.
"You went through all that pain," I said. "Why didn't you tell anybody?"
"Who in your family could I talk to about it?" she asked.
And she was right. In the world I grew up in, nobody talked about that kind of thing. You hid it. And if a kid got sick, you invented a disease to cover him.
Trust me that all these things went through my mind before I said I'd be in the parade. But, if you talk the talk, you have to walk the walk.
Some of the best friends I treasure are the gay friends I've made since they came out to me. Gays aren't all great. But they deserve all the rights the rest of us get. I wish I'd figured that out earlier. I'm glad I've figured it out now.
In a clarification that threatens the viability of same-sex marriages, the IRS says homosexual couples cannot file joint tax returns because they would be in violation of the Defense of Marriage Act.
The IRS says the 1996 statute, signed by President Clinton, means "only married individuals under this definition could elect to file a joint tax return."
The judgment came in a letter from IRS Communications and Liaison Chief Frank Keith in response to a query by a conservative pro-family group, Public Advocate of the United States, reported CNSNews.com.
The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, says states will not be forced to recognize homosexual marriages granted in other states and legally defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
Even when states legally recognize homosexual unions, "that recognition has no effect for purposes of federal law," the June 14 letter said.
Jesse Binnall of Public Advocate told CNSNews.com he regards the IRS response as "a victory for the American family."
"Now we have something from a federal government agency saying that ... the court in Massachusetts may recognize this sham marriage, bureaucrats in San Francisco may recognize your marriage, but the government of the United States of America does not recognize these sham marriages," he said.
CNSNews.com said requests for comment from the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force; Parents Family and Friends of Lesbians and Gays; and Lambda Legal were not returned yesterday or today.
As WorldNetDaily reported, Senate Republicans plan to force Democrats to choose sides on same-sex marriage by scheduling a vote on a constitutional amendment in mid-July.
The vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment, which bans same-sex marriage, would take place just as the Democratic Party prepares to begin its presidential nominating convention in Boston, according to Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper.
The enactment of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts last month strengthened the resolve of traditional marriage defenders to pass an amendment.
The Massachusetts high court decided Nov. 18 homosexual couples are legally entitled to wed under the state constitution and should be allowed to apply for marriage licenses, overturning a ruling by a lower court in May 2002.
The Federal Marriage Amendment says, "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union between a man and a woman. Neither this constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."
posted on June 17, 2004 01:57:00 PM new
I'm curious Linda, are there any groups in the US you feel do not have human rights?
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
posted on June 17, 2004 01:59:55 PM new
Cheryl, thanks for posting that article. Just proves you don't need to be gay to be the grand marshall of a pride parade.
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
posted on June 17, 2004 02:33:37 PM new
I presume the parade is being sponsored by snap-on-tools?
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
posted on June 17, 2004 03:19:21 PM new
Linda, I always thought of human rights to mean that every human has the same right as the next. Only people that think of gays as being less than human and not equal (or thinking non-gays are superior) would be against them and their right to marry, etc.
posted on June 17, 2004 03:29:18 PM new
Human Rights: The rights people are entitled to simply because they are human beings, irrespective of their citizenship, nationality, race, ethnicity, language, sex, sexuality, or abilities.
posted on June 17, 2004 04:23:11 PM new
What about the right to marry 7 wives? Are you going to discriminate against polygamists? If you are going to expand the definition of marriage for one group, then you have to do it for others.
Cheryl, will you be marching in the Polygamist Pride Parade?
"I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it."
posted on June 17, 2004 04:42:51 PM new
KD - I always thought of human rights to mean that every human has the same right as the next.
Let me put these 'rights' to you this way.
Logansdad and I do have the same right to marry.
We also are the same in that we can't marry anyone of the same sex....except now in the state of Mass.
And we are treated equally in that the states that don't recognize gay marriages - won't recognize ours - should we choose that route.
Gays are asking for 'special' rights. They have a 'right' under our laws to change the laws. They have no special rights until the laws are changed.
Only people that think of gays as being less than human and not equal (or thinking non-gays are superior) would be against them and their right to marry, etc.
I don't agree have have stated so many times.
Just because that is the way you see it....doesn't mean it's the way we all see it.
Click on the link the says prideguide advertisers.
While you are visiting the site check out who the grand marshall of the parade will be.
In case you are interested in creating a Bear Pride Parade it already exists:
http://www.glbears.com/bp/
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
[ edited by logansdad on Jun 17, 2004 05:58 PM ]
posted on June 17, 2004 05:00:08 PM new
EAG, if you feel you and your people need to marry 7 wives, then I suggest you start your compaining for your agenda. Perhaps next you and your people with your agenda can have your polygamist pride parade. As I told parklane, every group has the right to organize a parade. If you organize it they will come... Good luck in your endeavor.
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
posted on June 17, 2004 05:12:54 PM new
EAG, so what if someone wanted to marry 7 wives? What skin is it off your back? Why can't you just address the issue instead of going off on your tantrums about polygamy and marrying animals? Like I said, so what if someone wanted to marry 7 people?
posted on June 17, 2004 05:58:03 PM new
You know, this was not supposed to be a thread about gay bashing, marrying 7 wives or anything else of that nature. It was meant to show that even a conservative republican can support a human rights issue. A compliment, in my book. Not surprisingly, it didn't take any of you from the right very long to turn it into a hateful thread starting with Linda. You just reinforced what I believed all along and that I'll keep to myself.
To someone very educated and very wonderful who sent me the thread article and who is checking in to see what sort of response it got: See, Dr. Simmons, what did I tell you?
posted on June 17, 2004 06:59:13 PM newABSOLUTELY UNBELIEVABLE!!!
You shame yourself, cheryl, setting us up as you did. Shows your own hateful side to posters who don't agree with your way of thinking.
I didn't state anything hateful here. I posted a news article on the subject of gay's not being allowed to file as married couples. A news article ISN'T hateful....it's factual.
I have NEVER posted anything hateful about gays and I really resent you lying about that.
I don't agree with gay marriage. I have said I support gay civil-unions and have spent much time explaining why I think traditional marriage should continue to remain with one man and one woman. That's NOT hateful....that's a different view/opinion on the issue.
How nice you held back from what YOU wanted to say, as you state above. Was that because you were aware your Dr. Simmons was reading - while we weren't? Might some have held back also had they known cheryl had set them up for some unknown purpose.
Maybe you'd like to direct your Dr. Simmons to your other posts where you didn't hold back when others didn't see things your way, and let them see how the REAL cheryl responds when something is said she doesn't like.
I sure thought more of you than this, cheryl. What a tremendous disappointment this is. really.......
posted on June 17, 2004 07:19:47 PM new
I did not set you up. And if that's what you think, shame on you. Dr. Simmons is a dear friend of mine who, if he knew how, would probably post here. He sent me the article and I told him I was going to post it here because I felt it showed that not all conservatives are bad. The article was meant to be a compliment to you and the other conservatives on this board. Dr. Simmons didn't even get the link to the board until now. In fact, I wasn't going to send it to him at all except he asked me to.
Here's some history for you, Linda. Dr. Simmons is himself, gay. What has been said over and over on this PUBLIC board is nothing new to him, I'm sure. Despite any comments made here, he is not a vindictive, hateful, grudge holding individual. In fact, he's far more understanding and tolerant than I am. This was an article suggested for posting by him and he does have the right to see it posted. Unless, of course, you've made this a private board.
I mistakenly thought that there would be some nice comments coming out of this article especially since a conservative originally wrote it. I never expected the negative it's gotten. I will, however, apologize for pointing you out. That was wrong. However, you are the one who jumped right in with the IRS and gay marriage issue which wasn't even part of the commentary.
Helen - Thanks. I've dealt with tougher cookies than Linda. My belief that all humans should be treated like humans isn't always a popular viewpoint. No, twelve, I reiterate that I did not say anything about perverts, pedophiles, murderers and the like. .
Cheryl
[ edited by cblev65252 on Jun 17, 2004 07:21 PM ]
posted on June 17, 2004 07:21:37 PM new
Cheryl, I think your article is probably true for a lot of people who are stuck on traditional values that no longer make sense. It's difficult to change your beliefs when you've thought, or been taught a certain way your whole life. The only 2 obstacles I see are people that are stuck on tradition, and people who think they will be punished by God if they treat gays as equals. I've heard no other valid reasons why people think the way they do about gays. Because these excuses are so weak, the gays will win and it's thanks to people like you who support them that will help escalate these changes.
posted on June 17, 2004 07:27:30 PM new
Well, twelve, I just got a bit more respect for you. You are willing to NOT hold back your views just because someone else might be reading them. I will never agree with your views on this subject (although, shudder, I have agreed with you from time to time on other issues), but I gotta admire a man who sticks to them no matter how wrong I or anyone else think they are.
Edited to add: Hows about two dollahs? Just kidding. No one's words will be used for anything other than thoughtful contemplation.
Cheryl
[ edited by cblev65252 on Jun 17, 2004 07:29 PM ]
posted on June 17, 2004 07:33:52 PM new
Cheryl thanks for posting that article and sharing your thoughts. I hope your friend decides to post his comments directly here, but I would not be surprised if he did not for various reasons.
Your post just proves that the conservatives here can't believe one of their own is supportive of gays and lesbians.
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
[ edited by logansdad on Jun 17, 2004 07:35 PM ]
posted on June 17, 2004 07:42:45 PM new
I don't consider this a setup at all. Cheryl has always been honest, true and steady in her beliefs, no matter which topic she is taking part in.
If anyone feels that they would have posted differently because they were being "watched", so to speak, it means that they sway according to the situation and aren't speaking from their heart.
posted on June 17, 2004 07:55:36 PM new
right helen - If anyone else who didn't support your views had pulled a stunt like this you'd be having an absolute hissy fit. Don't think you're fooling anyone because your hyprocrisy is always evident.
Cheryl said "See, Dr. Simmons, what did I tell you?"
THAT'S AN UNEXCUSABLE SET-UP, PURE AND SIMPLE
---------------------
Cheryl - I don't want to hear about who Dr. Simmons is or what his sexual preferences are because I don't really care. As I've said before I'd rather people keep their sexual preferences to themselves. And I'm VERY aware that this is a public board that anyone can read.
I have never posted anything on these boards that I'm ashamed of.
But what you did here has totally reversed how I previously saw you as a person. That was a pretty low thing for you to do and I resent it completely.
That doesn't excuse your behavior in any way, shape or form.
Linda says,"right helen - If anyone else who didn't support your views had pulled a stunt like this you'd be having an absolute hissy fit. Don't think you're fooling anyone because your hyprocrisy is always evident".
Linda, I've never been ashamed of anything that I've written here. so you are wrong. At times my composition could be improved but my statements are from the heart. I believe sincerely in every opinion that I state here and I would welcome anyone reading whatever I write and would certainly not feel doublecrossed if someon unknown to me happened to be read my opionon. In fact, I assume that there are a lot of people reading here that we may not be aware of.
I've never had what you call a "hissy fit" and althought you would like to malign my character to compensate for your weak arguments, I have no hypocrisy. I say what I mean and I am not a hypocrit as you charge. In fact, my forthright statements are renown.
As Kiara suggested, if you are speaking sincerely, why should you care who is reading your comments?
Helen
[ edited by Helenjw on Jun 17, 2004 08:19 PM ]
posted on June 17, 2004 09:33:32 PM new
Reality, not negativity.
You may choose to view it as negativity but I don't. I face reality as the world keeps spinning and I don't try to fight it by burying my head in the sand.
And I face it with a smile..... whatever will be, will be, just like the song.
Que sera, sera,
Whatever will be, will be;
The future's not ours to see.....
.