Harvey Fierstein: "I sacrificed my friend on the altar of popularity."

[Pale Blue Dot]

Openly gay stage and screen actor Harvey Fierstein had pointed words on his Facebook page for the President-elect over his choice of Saddleback Church pastor Rick Warren to deliver the invocation on Inauguration Day:

"A couple of boys were calling my best friend a faggot one unhappy day at summer camp. Courses of action seemed slim to my adolescent mind. I could stand up for Jack branding myself a fag as well and insuring myself a miserable summer, or I could join in with the name callers, lose my closest friend, but assure my standing with the majority. I sacrificed my friend on the altar of popularity. I don't think I need to tell you that political expediency was a terrific short-term solution but a long-term nightmare. My summer concluded uneventfully but none of those boys became my friend or did me any favors. And forty years later I still feel the loss of Jack along with a piece of my self respect that I can never win back. Mine was an act of cowardice and betrayal.

"It seems Obama is now maneuvering through the summer camp of his political adolescence and is about to make the same bad choice as I. He can call the placing of a hate monger like Rick Warren on the world dais political healing or inclusiveness or any other nicety he'd like, but I call it pandering to the lowest instinct of the worst kind of politics.

"President Elect Obama, your victory was made possible in no small part to the votes and wallets of the gay and lesbian community along with our supporters. Turning your back on us does not make you more mainstream American. It just makes you a coward."

http://pageoneq.com/news/2008/Fierstein_calls_Obama_1223.html

[Vanje]

1. K&R

[gcomeau]

2. As posted in the other thread about this ridiculous article.

Obama is apparently being accused of lacking the conviction to stand up and say he disagrees with Warren on gay rights... at least if we are to extend the metaphor Feirstein is attempting to use.

The problem? Obama DID say he disagreed with Warren on gay rights. So how the hell is this little story analogous to anything Obama is doing? Feirstein joined the name callers in his little personal parable... Obama on the other hand said "no, I'm not with the name callers on this".

In short, Feirstein is being a moron.

[Rockholm]

3. Obama is being a wuss on this.

[Egnever]

7. How so?

[gcomeau]

9. Oh wow, well I stand corrected. Your argument has defeated me utterly and completely! -nt

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

101. I've always felt that most Democrats who say they support civil unions really do support

gay marriage, but they believe that it is more politically expedient to support gay/lesbian civil unions to protect themselves from being labeled homophobes by the LGBT community and the progressive base, while at the same time, appeasing mainstream America. It's a cop out. Until Obama can demonstrate true leadership and the *audacity* that he claims to have--and come out FULLY and FORCEFULLY FOR GAY MARRIAGE--then he is indeed a coward and a wuss on this issue. The claim that his Christian beliefs and religious convictions lead him to conclusion that marriage is between a man and a woman is nonsense and a LIE in my view. First, he attended a UCC congregation for 20 years and prior to that, had no religious affiliation. The United Church of Christ tends to be quite progressive and forward thinking on a host of social issues. Secondly, nothing in Obama's history would suggest that he is a devout Christian or overly pious such that he would subscribe to a point of view that Jesus Christ himself NEVER held or even discussed: homosexuality or marriage.

I think it's a flat-out LIE that Obama and many Democrats don't support gay marriage. I believe that deep down they do, but they probably feel that they couldn't get elected if they were to admit that they do. Al Gore recently had the courage and decency to finally admit that he is FOR gay marriage. Elizabeth Edwards says that she is but her husband John claims that "he just isn't there yet." Oh what a hypocrite. So you can cheat on your wife but not support gay marriage because of some kind of religious conviction? BULLSHIT!!

[comtec]

116. The support of Civil Unions is legislatively expedient

easier to get Legally Equal civil unions passed NOW, and then fight for the name later.
THAT will be a long bloody battle.
In the mean time you'd be married, for all intense and purposes.
same legal benefits and obligations as being "married", even have weddings, etc... just not the word.
You can take unions NOW... and marriage later.

Wouldn't you want the same legal protections now?

I've said over and over that i can't believe 8 passed, I can't believe people voted to take AWAY rights!

I'm pragmatic, and a bit hopeful.

Realistically you'll get equal under the law civil unions sooner than you'll get gay marriage.

I'm not saying you give up the fight when you have civil unions (legally equal), you keep going and ram reality down the throats of these bigots!

but dammit, a little compromise, at least in the short term to get you what the LGBT NEEDS would help a HELL of a lot!
I do wonder (before prop 8 mind you) how many supporters were driven away by fire breathers, "Gay marriage or NOTHING!"?
compromise is how the world works. It's the beginning.

Mind you that changed, a lot after prop 8. I do think it's coming to a head a hell of a lot sooner than it would have before.
if they had been smart (the other side) they would have quietly passed civil union laws across the country. of course many of those in red states would have been bull shit laws, giving the married couple nearly nothing in protections - but they would not have had this massive country-wide explosion of furious anger.

Oh well we'll see. God willing GU/GM will be passed soon. I can't believe it will be upheld and made into law, just it can't . But stranger things have happed I'm afraid... like 'w'.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

125. I support civil unions as a legal compromise. My point is that those who assert that they

support CU but not GM are not telling the truth in my view. I think they are worried that if they were to come out with the truth--that they actually do support gay marriage--they couldn't get elected. That's fair, but I wish they wouldn't assert that the reason is because of some religious doctrine that I don't they truly agree with. It's disingenuous at the very least and a hypocritical lie at the very worst.

[Skittles]

4. it is FIERSTEIN

and he speaks the TRUTH

[gcomeau]

8. Yes... the spelling of his name is the big issue here.

And if you think he "speaks the TRUTH" try to explain what was incorrect in what I just posted. HOW does he "speak the TRUTH"?

[Skittles]

31. that Warren pick is pure pandering

it's got nothing to do with being "inclusive"

[Egnever]

6. Its not

its more projection of what fits peoples little personal agendas.

But after the last week or two it shouldn't surprise you a bit.

[Bluebear]

13. 'peoples little personal agendas.' - like equality. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[Egnever]

19. Why?

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Egnever]

35. Thats it ?

[Skittles]

36. civil rights are not "little agendas"

and people who think they are *SUCK*

[Egnever]

39. where did i say i dont support civil rights?

Or you just looking for a reason to type You suck!?

[No Elephants]

88. These were your words;;;

"peoples little personal agendas" The prior poster said that you suck for referring to civil rights in that way. If you were referring to civil rights that way, I must agree. If you were not referring to civil rights that way, to what were you refering? And please don't say a two minute invocation. That lie has gotten very old in the past couple of days.

[Marrah_G]

120. Your classification of the GBLT civil rights fight as a "little personal agendas"

THAT is where you show you do not support civil rights...not really, only if it is convenient, at least you have yours right?

[glitch]

122. Not just GBLT, women's rights and representavie democracy in the US are also issues Warren has

targeted.

The guy is toxic so of course let's invite him to do the invocation at our inauguration of a new era of hope and change.
And this is supposed to pass as "deep" symbolism of inclusion. :puke:

[Marrah_G]

119. "peoples little personal agendas."

Equality is not a little agenda unless YOU already have it.

Welcome to ignore.

[boppers]

Strawman.

"accused of lacking the conviction to stand up and say he disagrees with Warren on gay rights"...

Nope, that's not what he's being accused of.

He's being accused of giving a bigoted homophobe a national honor, and a platform, in the name of expediency.

[gcomeau]

21. Either someone didn't read the OP....

...or someone doesn't understand the concept of analogies.

[boppers]

28. Perhaps we saw different things in the OP.

Direct quote:

"political expediency was a terrific short-term solution but a long-term nightmare"

Was the highlight I saw.

That might explain our different perspectives, where you might see Harvey's overall message as "speaking out for one's friends", and I see Harvey's overall message as "taking the politically easiest route is wrong".

So, it looks like a strawman to me, but not to you. :)

[gcomeau]

30. Alright... bit in that case

...doesn't the "political expediency" in question have to be at the expense of the people lodging the complaint for the complaint to have legitimacy? I mean... expediency by itself isn't actually a bad thing. It's rather the opposite actually.

I have searched, in vain, for a decent explanation of how this qualifies considering Obama came down in disagreement with Warren's gay rights stance in the process.

[boppers]

34. Disagreement with Warren?

Obama and Warren have both publicly said that gay people shouldn't have the right to marry.

They disagree on other civil rights they think gay people shouldn't have, but they're in partial agreement in denying marriage.

Harvey thinks it's because of political expediency, because to him (and to me), there's no logical, rational, reason for Obama to take this position.

Of course, Harvey and I may be forgetting that Obama's position on the matter may not be borne of logic or reason.

[ronnykmarshall]

41. Word!

[JVS]

54. There is a range of what he is being accused of. It varies from accuser to accuser.

[No Elephants]

95. Oh no! People upset by the Warren thing are not posting in lockstep? On a message

board? What a shock. Well, obviously, then, there's nothing to what they say.

[tbyg52]

46. >>Obama DID say he disagreed with Warren on gay rights.

Uh huh. And therefore the reason he invited him to give the invocation would be.....?

To put it bluntly, he disagrees (he says) with Warren on civil rights issues. Therefore there was less than no reason to honor him and give him a platform.

[Fearless]

53. Careful everyone. Guard your lunch money.

:eyes:

[No Elephants]

91. Thanks for the heads up, LOL (Psst. Wanna trade sammiches later?)

[Fearless]

98. I'd be delighted!

:fistbump:

[No Elephants]

104. Cool beans. Sadly, that's not just an expression. It's also my sandwich. (My mom always

liked my sister best.) But, don't worry. I'll let you off the hook on the trading deal. I did not pull any dirty tricks when I was in school and I don't intend to start now.

[proud2BlibKansan]

55. Obama could have said no

Warren has been recommended by a committee. Obama could have said 'no, Warren's rhetoric is divisive and offending to the gay community. Let's pick someone else.' But he did not.

It would have sent a powerful message to the far right homophobes. And to the gay community.

[No Elephants]

89. Do you really believe that Warren was recommended by a committee? Obama says he

invited Warren, much as Warren had invited him. Obama's been to that church twice, once on his own, once to debate McCain. If the committee recommended him, that is probably why. But I tend to think that the animus for this originated from Obama.

[proud2BlibKansan]

109. That's what was reported

An inaugural committee made recommendations and Obama approved the plans.

[defendandprotect]

144. Presumably Democrats ... or did Repugs pick Warren for Obama's approval-???

[JoFerret]

66. Sorry - that label is yours

for not seeing this struggle for what it is.

Moral appeasement and weasel words are understandable.

But not right.

[No Elephants]

87. The problem with your claim? Obama did NOT say that he disagreed with Warren until after

we had raised hell. I doubt that Obama would ever have said it if he had not gotten such a backlash. It is not as though he (or anyone) announced that Warren was the invocation speaker and, at the same time, said, I disagree with him." Besides. Obama agrees with Warren that gays should not have a right to marry bc "God is in the mix." That's way too close for me, on both the GLBT issue and the separation of church and state issue.

This is like my stomping on your foot (or your feelings) to get something I want, and not saying anything until I see your extended family heading in my direction, looking angry. Now, it's looking like I am going to lose something. So, I say, hey, it was an accident. I'm totally against stomping."

Besides actions speak louder than words. People all over the world will watch that inauguration and see that Obama honored Warren. Only wonks like us and a few others know all the ins and outs.

[defendandprotect]

145. Agree ---

Besides. Obama agrees with Warren that gays should not have a right to marry bc "God is in the mix." That's way too close for me, on both the GLBT issue and the separation of church and state issue.

on all of this...and worrisome that Obama made the "God is in the mix" comment --

Patriarchal religion - in order to survive -- must either become violent again or grab

hold of government and taxpayer dollars. They've done a lot of that already.

I'd suggest many of the voting steals were helped by religious fanatics.

[The Doctor.]

117. That has merit.

I'd say the analogy would be more apt if Harvey had stood with the bigots but said "I'm with them, but I don't agree with them."

I think that's how many see this.

[rhett o rick]

129. But Obama did invite one of the boys calling names, in fact one of the worst, to come to sit

at his table w/o thinking of consequences for his gay friend. There are a lot of deserving people Obama could have chosen but he didn't. Why? And please don't give me that tired argument of "reaching out".

[gcomeau]

133. Why?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4708518&mesg_id=4708518">Gosh, I'm stumped

[rhett o rick]

134. Yes, why? Why did Obama choose Warren? nm

[gcomeau]

135. There *was* a link there you know. -nt

[rhett o rick]

137. Yes and I thought it was well written. And I agree that we need to mend fences and "reach across

the isle", however, one must be careful when making friends with the enemy that one doesn't make enemies of his friends.

[defendandprotect]

143. The problem is after saying belatedly he "disagees with Warren on gay rights" ...

Obama's actions suggest that Warren is to be esteemed ...

Unless you think being included in Obama's Inauguration and given two

minutes to offer his prayers is an insult?

[sniffa]

5. Thanks for posting this

:thumbsup:

K&R

[AtomicKitten]

10. I like reading what everyone thinks about this.

Plus I loved this guy in Torch Song Trilogy. Ferris was great too.

edited K&R

[insanity]

11. BULLSHIT

I do not think anyone here likes Rick Warren's stances on social issues, the guy is an asshole. That being said, the inauguration is an event that should include people from all different backgrounds and walks of life... people who have differences of opinion. Our country has suffered for 8 years because the assholes in charge only associate themselves with like-minded people.

The inauguration does not belong to gays, blacks, the youth, Obama, Rick Warren, or anyone specific. It belongs to a nation that needs to start healing.

Also, Obama has said he disagrees with Warren on gay rights issues, so I don't see the big deal.

I might catch shit for this, but the problem with many on the left is the same with many on the right: they are too concerned with their own agenda to accept the reality. It is either their way of the highway. The irony is that because of this, many issues get superficial treatment.

[Bluebear]

14. 'I do not think anyone here likes Rick Warren's stances on social issues' - I do.

[insanity]

18. He has done good things, but I meant the abortion/gay rights issues.

[boppers]

37. Condom Burning? Really?

HIV "faith healing"? Really?
Feminine "submission" to men? Really?

[Pale Blue Dot]

22. Say what you want about the right, but they NEVER lacked courage.

For the past 40 years they believed that they were right and NEVER tried to compromise. Instead they went out and fought as if their issues were the most important thing for everyone. The Democrats, on the other hand, tired to be pragmatic and compromise. They let Republicans control the agenda. Now we're in charge and we're still trying to be pragmatic. We are still letting the Republicans dictate the terms of the dialog.

[insanity]

23. And that has flushed our country down the toilet

I'll take pragmatism over blind stupidity. The Republicans have been able to control the agenda because of southern whites who have been pissed off about Civil Rights.

[Pale Blue Dot]

25. It's not a battle of "pragmatism vs. the right".

That is EXACTLY what the right has managed to accomplish.

[No Elephants]

107. Not only the Southerneres. The followers of Rick Warren and his ilk, in whatever state they may be

found.

[PVnRT]

112. You have got to be fucking kidding me

We should have abandoned civil rights legislation to make some racists whites in the South more comfortable? What a fucking joke.

[insanity]

151. No, it is just a reality

Republicans have dominated the elections since 1972 because of racism. Civil rights legislation was a good thing. The argument was made that the Republicans are better at politics because they know how to sell their agenda when the truth is they are better because they appealed to racists while keeping their ultra-rich constituents.

[Uzybone]

24. thats why America is in the toilet

but we should take example from them? Right.

[Pale Blue Dot]

27. It's in the toilet because their philosophy was wrong.

And we didn't fight it. We lacked courage.

[defendandprotect]

147. Many murdered, some may have assisted with election steals ....

many bombed and damaged women's clinics all over US until many areas have no provider.

In the case of Sen. George Mitchell when Dems had majority, he simply turned the Senate

over to Bob Dole---!!!!

The co-opting of the Democratic Party continues on --

Like the co-opting of a "people's government" by buying it --!!!

[Egnever]

29. Oh you will definitely catch hell for it

But its long been established that this is the whats in it for me nation. Empathy is long dead in America.

[No Elephants]

106. And what about those who pooh pooh things if they think (incorrectly) that nothing is in this for

them? On this board, "Wasting time on this is foolish" and "You should drop this" seem on translate directly to "I'm not GLBT." I have not seen one gay person post that civil union is a perfectly acceptable to marriage or that inviting Warren to give the invocation at this very historic event was no big deal deal.

[PVnRT]

113. And on DU

As you and the STFU Brigade have demonstrated so well.

[PVnRT]

111. So, then, where are the racists and neoconservatives?

They should have spots at the inauguration too, if we're being "inclusive."

[rhett o rick]

131. I agree that the cerimony should include people with different opinions, but no assholes. nm

[PeaceNikki]

12. K&R

Thanks!

[Starry Messenger]

15. K & R

[Neshanic]

16. I'm just WILD about Harvey. He's the gay that will not just sit quiet for you all.

[Umbram]

126. For us all? (nt)

[polichick]

17. That is the way I see it too - and it's especially telling that Obama chose...

THE most popular Evangelical pastor.

[No Elephants]

108. Is it?

[polichick]

110. Of course.

[AntiFascist]

20. K&R, WOW I had almost exactly the same experience...

except in my case it was a "nerd" not a "fag". I also see how it directly applies to Obama's situation.

[ProSense]

26. Yeah, Obama is a coward

except when he doesn't bow to the pressure of cheap name calling.


Pathetic.

[Teaser]

33. I'm glad Harvey has an outlet

facebook is useful for that.

[IndianaJones]

38. why would anyone listen to this guy and not your benevolent straight overlords here? nt.

[Lex]

43. Heh.

zzzzing

[Tarheel_Dem]

40. Coward? I think not. Try again Harvey. Were he a coward, he certainly

would have buckled under the pressure from his fierce critics on the left. He's made a decision, and he's sticking by it. GoBama!

[ronnykmarshall]

42. Yeah those fucking fags.

[Tarheel_Dem]

47. You seem to want a fight. Good luck with that. (nt)

[ronnykmarshall]

51. Oooooo thanky!!!

Sorry hon, it's not worth the effort.

[Bluebear]

44. 'his fierce critics on the left' = those gays.

[No Elephants]

94. I am a critic of the Warren debacle. I am probably a centrist. I am not gay.

[Lex]

45. Nothing like sticking by a bad decision.

Shows what a Decider he is.

[Tarheel_Dem]

49. "You're either with us, or with the terrorists"...right? I guess a return to

civility was too much to hope for. The problem, as I see it, is that there are elements on both sides of the political spectrum who thrive on disagreement and unpleasantness, it seems to be their only reason for existing. Stand aside while the concensus builders get to work for the good of ALL the American people.

[Lex]

50. I don't know, maybe standing shoulder to shoulder with bigots is the new fun thing.

You know, it helps build consensus and all. People should just be cooler about it and not so unpleasant.

[Tarheel_Dem]

56. You've just proven my point more than you'll ever know. (nt)

[Bluebear]

57. Righteo, toots.

[arewenotdemo]

72. ouch

[IndianaJones]

48. stick with crappy decisions no matter what. woo hoo. nt

[Lex]

52. yeah . . . sound familiar?

ugh

[mondo joe]

60. "He's made a decision, and he's sticking by it." Did you mean Bush?

Stay the course.

Stay the course.

[Tarheel_Dem]

67. Oops! How did that happen? I thought I had placed all the "my way, or....

the highway" DU'ers on Ignore. Only one way to rectify that. I'll say this, these threads are useful for one purpose, and one purpose only....all the loudmouths gather in one place. Thank you.

[mondo joe]

68. Funny, since "my way or the highway" is exactly what you're advocating.

Enjoy.

[Lex]

79. I think they lost the plot.

:P

[No Elephants]

92. ZZZZZ. Er. Oh, I mean, I just could not bear it if you put me on ignore. Please reconsider.

[Jakes Progress]

141. Yeah, he's sticking to it.

Even though it is wrong. Even though it is causing pain among the people who supported him. Even though it will aid those who would do away with the rights that we voted to protect.

Now let's see. Who can we think of who made a big deal about staying the path regardless? Something about a war, wasn't it?

Look. The PE works for me. I helped hire him. If I don't like what he does, I get to say so. He's not my leader - he's my employee. Here is a place where he has screwed up. Big time. I know all the secret homophobes and the in-denial homophobes don't think so, but this was a bad move. I'm gonna tell him that that's what I think. I get to do that. I'm a democrat, and this is America. If we don't tell him when he screws up, he won't hear it from the other guys.

K&R for Harvey. Those that don't get it need to look at the darker parts of their souls.

[Tarheel_Dem]

150. I'll thank you to leave my soul out of this. Say whatever you want,

whenever you want. I'm just grateful that we have a PE who won't be pushed around by the fringe elements. And I don't believe for a second that everyone posting crap about PE Obama is, or has ever been a Democrat. A lot of self described Greens & freepers post here as well.

And as for Harvey, why didn't he get off his fat lazy ass and hit the road, if he felt so strongly about the issues. He had as much chance as anyone to throw his hat into the ring. As far as I know, there was no law preventing him, or YOU, from running for the office. Get used to it, with or without you, Obama is a consensus builder, and will likely govern from the center. The Democratic party had it's chance to vote for two "far left" candidates & Nader, and they were all soundly rejected, and laughed off the stage.

[Jakes Progress]

152. So anyone who supports the civil

rights of all people are far left fringies? Does your deep, deep Democratic connection go far enough back to have actually supported civil rights for blacks? How about women? Just how far toward the fringe is it to expect a Democrat to reject bigotry?

You just happen to have a slim hand to work with here. There is no defensible reason for including a bigot like Warren in the honors that day. You can call me lazy, or you can call me a fringe nut, so don't tell me I can't wonder about what deeper part of you just doesn't really think gays deserve the same rights as you or I. I was around and marching during the sixties when there were no electronic fora, but there were still a lot of people who said that blacks needed to just shut up and stop making so much trouble. We knew about their souls too.

[kdpeters]

58. Always love Harvey, but he's wrong on this.

He's projecting and he's way off. I think there is a generational gap in GLBT reactions to this with Melissa Etheridge's response being closer to the way most younger GLBTs treat the issue and Harvey Fierstein being more generally representative of the older GLBT reaction.

[Bluebear]

59. Plenty of younger GLBT's who are revolted by Etheridge's response.

[mondo joe]

65. Nothing young people love like old hippies.

The young just can't get enough of that soft rock.

[kdpeters]

70. True. There's also plenty of overlap in the other direction as well.

In general, however, there's a different way of looking at the world. That's not a bad thing. It's a good thing. The reason for it is that each successive generation grows up in a world made possible by the progress achieved by those that came before. I'm mighty grateful to all of them, Harvey Fierstein in particular. After reading his critique and those of many here on DU, it's clear to me that the differences in perspectives are due to difference in experiences.

I've experienced and witnessed my share of hell for being GLBT. I've also experienced and witnessed a great deal of change. Due to my field (interpreting for the Deaf and Deaf/blind) and where I live (Georgia), I have to navigate personal, social, and professional interactions with super religious evangelicals like Warren several times a week. I'm sure that Harvey's profession (showbiz) and region (Manhattan) don't provide a fraction of the challenges I have to deal with in this regard. I get it in my gut what Obama is trying to say in his explanation and what Melissa was trying to say in her column because I actually live it.

[JohnnieGordon]

74. Her CDs should be burned, seriously, total Benedict Arnold..nt

[kdpeters]

83. Amazing how quick came the calls to give Melissa the Dixie Chick treatment.

Complete with cries of "traitor" and calls for music burnings. Amazing!

[Bluebear]

93. Can you cite the calls for music burnings?

[PVnRT]

114. No, that's against the rules

At least, that's the going excuse for not posting evidence of ridiculous claims around here.

[kdpeters]

128. "Her CDs should be burned" right there in the subject line one level up

[Bluebear]

132. From a 100 post wonder. Big evidence.

[kdpeters]

136. Nice chatting with you, Bluebear. Merry Christmas.

[Bluebear]

138. And to you!

Best wishes of the season.

[JohnnieGordon]

148. A 100 post wonder, excuse me?

It's against the rules to call someone out for their low post count. That's quite a nasty, unprovoked comment there, Mr. 1,000+ post wonder.

[JohnnieGordon]

99. She is a traitor, the Dixie Chicks weren't

Nothing wrong with burning CDs as long as they're the right ones.

[mondo joe]

61. What your source for this?

[Bodhi BloodWave]

63. i must admit i find it interesting how many here

were criticizing Melissa and commenting about who had made her the leader, and why were people always listening to celebrities(some even stating she should just STFU) then here comes another one and the same people start cheerleading him.

[tbyg52]

62. Bless Harvey's heart. I know where he's coming from.

This was in the early 70's.

My best friend in college and his two buddies spent a year making fun of gays, occasionally. (To which I objected.) My best friend was going along, although I was pretty sure he was gay (I was a drama major and a year ahead of him). Turns out they were *all* gay. End of story.

[xchrom]

64. rick and barack agree on no marriage equality for lgbtiq people.

fierstein has this nailed to a fare thee well.

there is direct line from donnie to rick and barack using these hate mongers for his own expediency.

barack is using us in the very same way conservative christians use us as an issue -- with the added benefit of being able to 'take it back' with impunity.

[Bluebear]

69. Donnie was just the opening act, evidentement.

[xchrom]

75. but of course now it's because we want barack to fail.

the stupidity never stops.

[Phx_Dem]

71. Harvey, you sound like part of the problem.

[mondo joe]

73. Depends on what you think "the problem" is. NT

[Phx_Dem]

80. I consider anyone who refuses to engage the opposition

part of the problem. Much like George Bush refusing to talk to any country who disagrees with him or who he considers
our "enemy."

[mondo joe]

82. There are many ways to engage the opposition, and good manners are almost

always a good idea.

But one doesn't have to kiss ass.

[No Elephants]

90. Or anoint the ass America's preacher, though he spews hate against Democrats, women and gays.

[SemperEadem]

149. I"m American and I dont consider him to be my preacher

I don't consider anyone to be my preacher, frankly...

[bluedawg12]

76. This is not going away anytime soon.

Promise.

[Tarheel_Dem]

77. You may be right. But I certainly hope the public face for this issue will

be someone like Melissa Etheridge, and not Harvey Fierstein. If the general population's reaction is the same as mine, the advocates here at DU may even wind up losing the allies they already had. Dr. and Mrs. King knew how to disagree, without being disagreeable. Melissa has learned that lesson well.

[bluedawg12]

78. Harvey has it exactly correct - and this issue is not going away.

[Tarheel_Dem]

84. I frankly don't care about the issue going away. I know some people

make their living bilking people out of money for various "causes". So, I'm sure the issue won't go away as long as there's money to be made. There are sheep on all sides of the political spectrum. Rick Warren has his sheep, and Harvey Fierstein apparently has his. My hope is that the sheep on both sides are pushed even further to the fringes, so that people of goodwill can actually get some things done that benefit ALL the American people. Eh..whaddya gonna do?

My question is, if the Barney Franks, the Harvey Fiersteins, and the Rachel Maddows who are now so vocally exorcised about a two minute prayer...why didn't they toss their hats into the ring? And as for the keyboard commandoes here at DU, I pose the same question. Why didn't they form an exploratory committee; traipse the whole of these United States seeking support for the issue they claim to care about; put their lives and the lives of their families at risk; and be examined & attacked up one side and down the other? Oh, that's right, it's much easier to sit behind a computer in your mother's basement, hurling insults at anonymous people on a message board. So much for committment.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Starry Messenger]

100. Am I mistaken in thinking that Barney Frank is in office?

I think he tossed his hat.

[Lex]

81. Actually it takes all kinds of folks to advance civil rights.

There are the ones who make nice with the Establishment, and ones who take to the streets in protest, some frustrated, some angry, some conciliatory. Some working within the system and some on the outside. There is no "right" way here--that's how a movement works, everyone pushing in their own way (which may or may not be to everyone's liking).

[Tarheel_Dem]

85. I don't doubt it for a minute. But what I do know is that when people are

yelling at me, I tend to yell back, so no one is being heard. If the LGBT community feel they need to be militant in their protests, then so be it. I just think the end result will be disastrous for all concerned.

[Bluebear]

96. 'the advocates here at DU may even wind up losing the allies they already had'

Yep. I keep hearing that threat.

[mondo joe]

97. The committment to civil rights runs deep there.

:crazy:

[PVnRT]

115. As deep as the Platte River

[glitch]

123. Whoever said that has no commitment to their own values. nt

[Umbram]

127. Nobody actually means that...

well...I can't speak for them, but I'll put a wager on it.

There's just a lot of frustration with the rhetoric being used by both "sides" of this issue.

Anyone who disagrees in the slightest suddenly becomes the archenemy. On DU this discussion has become post-rational.

People are being labeled bigots that aren't. People are being labeled anti-Obama that aren't. Just foolishness and defensiveness at this point.

[mondo joe]

130. It's such a noble sentiment. My support for civil rights is contingent on whether

or not you hurt my feelings.

Who could find anything bigoted in that?

[Umbram]

140. Ehh....

I'm not saying it's a good or noble thing...but it is human nature. Someone gets their feelings hurt, they say something they don't mean.

A kid gets angry, they 'hate' their parents. Do you take them seriously?
A supporter of a primary candidate threatens not to vote for the winner. Do you take them seriously?
And on and on and on...

I prefer to assume that 95% of people on DU are for human rights for everyone, including marriage equality. People just like to argue about details and get overwhelmed by ridiculous rhetoric.

Hell, in another thread you happily concluded that I am OK with gays and lesbians being attacked on the streets.

I just laughed it off. I've been a member of two different gay/straight outreach programs, openly dated someone of the same sex, etc. You don't know me. I don't take you seriously. Rhetoric and stupidity. You and I could meet at a bar and agree 100% on almost everything. Here on DU, however, I'm a bigot, homophobic, etc. Pfft.

We are all so quick to go for each other's throats because the real enemies of equality aren't here in any serious numbers. Everyone is busy inventing bogeymen to fear where there are none (or very few. ***on edit - I'm talking about on DU, there are such enemies in masses elsewhere, but are they really here in any numbers? Honestly? ***)

Alright, it's X-mas Eve, I've had a few drinks and am rambling.

[xchrom]

102. kick

[xchrom]

103. kick

[xchrom]

105. kick

[xchrom]

118. kick

[ClarkUSA]

121. Wasn't Harvey Fierstein a rabid Hillary supporter during the primaries?

I'm not surprised he's throwing Obama under the bus. Bet he doesn't have a bad word to say
about Bill Clinton's rotten DOMA passage, though.

[Lyric]

124. I supported Hillary. DOMA is and was utter fucking SHIT, and from

a bigoted Congress and a bigoted President who thought personal prejudices were more important than civil equality and human rights. Unlike that horrific welfare reform bill, in which Clinton was basically railroaded by a vindictive and evil newly-elected Gingrich Congress, DOMA wasn't even slightly forced upon him. He embraced it willingly, and was quoted at the time saying that he believed marriage was a sacred union meant for a man and a woman ONLY.

I give Bill Clinton no cover and no pass for DOMA. Don't assume that other Clinton primary supporters are ignorant of, or don't care about, Bill's role in marginalizing the Constitution with DOMA. I assure you, we are perfectly capable of being furious at both Bill AND Obama. If you hear more about Obama right at this moment, it's because THAT wound is still fresh and searingly painful. The DOMA stab in the back is an old, familiar agony that we've all grown used to feeling over the years.

[xchrom]

139. kick

[defendandprotect]

142. LOVE Harvey Fierstein: "I sacrificed my friend on the altar of popularity."

He can call the placing of a hate monger like Rick Warren on the world dais political healing or inclusiveness or any other nicety he'd like, but I call it pandering to the lowest instinct of the worst kind of politics.

Agree --

[JohnnieGordon]

146. Love to see a Harvey vs Melissa debate

He'd rip that dippy Benedict Arnold to shreds.

[southernyankeebelle]

153. Harvey

Oh Harvey as a straight woman all I can say is you are a great artist. I saw you in a movie with Ann Bancroft playing your mother. Wow what a movie.