Q: "Are Black people immoral?" A: "I'll leave that for others to conclude."

[Clarkie1]

Hillary Clinton told the press that the morality of homosexuals is for "others to conclude."

http://www.alternet.org/rights/49251/

Is this a good answer? Discuss...

[eleny]

1. "Is the Iraq War immoral?" A: "I'll leave that for others to conclude."

It's handy.

[Erika]

2. What the hell are you talking about?

Our country is a mixture. There is no more a pure Black, than a pure Asian, or a pure white.

What the hell are you talking about?

[Clarkie1]

3. I will clarify....see edited OP shortly. nt

[robinlynne]

4. right you are.

[Canuckistanian]

5. Um, a bit fuzzy on the details

Could you elucidate?

[Clarkie1]

6. Please see edited OP for clarification. nt

[nilram]

11. Must be referring to presidential hopeful Clinton on gays

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/14/clinton.gays/

And why? Because she doesn't want to alienate the moral majority? Put me in the ABC Club -- Anybody But Clinton (well, as long as they're Democratic).

[Ninja Jordan]

7. Are you using race as an example of an immutable characteristic? And homosexuality is also?

Becuase I don't think it's fair to compare the civil rights movement and the badges of slavery with current gay issues.

[Clarkie1]

8. I do. It's who a person is a much as a color of their skin. nt

[Ninja Jordan]

10. Then your example is beyond idiotic (nm).

[Clarkie1]

12. Well...we clearly disagree.

How many homosexuals do you know?

[Ninja Jordan]

14. Blacks were killed for trying to fucking read. I can SEE someone who is black.

I can't SEE homosexuals. They face much less discrimination because of this. Comparing slavery and Jim Crow with gay marriage is both insulting and ignorant.

[Clarkie1]

16. You are making those comparisons not me.

How would you feel if someone told you that whether black people are moral or not is "for others to conclude?"

Please address that issue.

[Ninja Jordan]

19. Uh, you're comparing being gay to being black. Do you read what you post?

[Midlodemocrat]

98. Being gay is as much a part of a person as their skin color,

or their gender.

[treestar]

104. Oh come on

They aren't exactly the same, of course. But there is a similarity. The OP is trying to say that Hills said something that if translated to another type of oppressed minority, would not work.

Why go off on this tangent of "I'm the bigger victim?" Yes we know whatever your group is, they are the biggest victims, OK?

But the point was, is there anything weird about HC's wording here?

[mondo joe]

113. I didn't choose my skin color or my orientation.

Did you?

[Lex]

42. And gays have been killed for trying fucking BREATHE.

And it's still okay for people like Ann Coulter to call others "Faggot" and get a roomful of people to laugh. I don't think she could've done that with the N-word.

There's a long way to go for both African Americans and gay people.

[nofurylike]

45. yes. eom

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

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

[Big Pappa]

64. "Stay behind closed doors"

Is that the same as sit in the back of the bus. Dude wrong is wrong.

[Ninja Jordan]

68. Sure it's wrong, but Rosie O'Donnell isn't frickin MLK

Let's get real here.

[Big Pappa]

70. We

are not talking about which one is "more wrong". Murder is worse than being mugged" but they are both wrong. If she cannot answer that simple question then how the hell can she handle the tough issues.

[Bonobo]

72. You should quit while you're behind... way behind.

Are you black by the way... I can't "see" you.

[Ninja Jordan]

99. Sorry, but the civil rights struggle blacks face isn't comparable to gay marriage

and I don't think you'll find a viable politician who would make such a comparison.

[Chovexani]

137. For fuck's sake no one sane is trying to make the comparison

And you (collective you, not just you NJ) are playing right into the Reich Wing's hands with this horseshit. They love to pit black folks and gays against each other in this bullshit pissing contest nonsense. Divide and conquer, it's several thousand years old. Plz to read up on it.

It doesn't matter who's been fucked over more. Everyone's rights are being denied and we need to fight for everyone. Whether you are black, red or purple, disabled, transgendered, whatever. Also, this totally ignores the fact that there are many GLBT black folks. It's not an either/or proposition, and every time someone has to start this stupid ass flame war, we get caught in the middle. Let's not play the "who's more oppressed than whom" game because I could be really wanky and point out I'm a black lesbian witch with Romani heritage, and I would win.

God this is stupid. I am not sure how many times people have to say this.

[Lex]

77. That's plain idiotic. "Rosie O'Donnel isn't frickin MLK"???

Um, okay. Great point.

[mondo joe]

81. Who the fuck said she was?

Really.

[Duncan Grant]

101. Let's get real here. Does Coretta Scott King's opinion carry any weight here?

Coretta Scott King, speaking four days before the 30th anniversary of her husband's assassination, said Tuesday the civil rights leader's memory demanded a strong stand for gay and lesbian rights. "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice," she said. "But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'"

"I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people," she said. - Reuters, March 31, 1998.


More can be found here.

[Flubadubya]

107. I love it... but nobody wants to touch this...

Every time (and it seems to be often) that the "black vs. gay" debate about discrimination gets heated up around here and someone introduces this WONDERFULLY sane, reasonable, and compassionate argument from Coretta Scott King, it literally "clears the room".

It is so devastatingly to the point that all the previously "head-up" debators run from it.

I saw this happen the other day. It was either you or someone else who kept inserting this CSK speech over and over in the midst of all the overblown rhetoric and NO ONE responded to it. Funny how even DUers often don't like to hear the truth. :eyes::shrug:

But thanks for posting this just the same. :thumbsup:

[Leopolds Ghost]

128. The only problem is, there's a huge amount of classism and racism in the urban gay community.

Especially the upper-class gay community whose economy revolves around displacing African-Americans out of their homes as "stepping-stone gentrifiers".

And there's a lot of homophobia in the black community -- for which gay people in my town frequently use as an excuse to dismiss the economic and social concerns of religious, impoverished African Americans as "irrelevant and obsolete".

Both groups simply want the other to go away.

[Maven]

71. "Choose" to live a "lifestyle" behind closed doors?

Where the fuck did you pull that bullshit from, Pat Robertson?

Obviously you don't know THING ONE about sexual identity or GLBT people in general. You tell people their option is to mask who they are and emotionally suffocate?

BTW, why don't you look up Coretta Scott King. She, unlike you, was astute and compassionate enough to see the parallels between all movements for civil rights, whether based on race, gender, or sexual orientation.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

78. Wow. Your bigotry is showing.

You better watch that.

[mondo joe]

79. Bullshit. Gays are attacked for simply EXISTING.

Your arguments are embarrassing.

[Leopolds Ghost]

129. Um. So are blacks.

I guess you didn't realize that.

[mondo joe]

132. Which proves they are alike. Duh.

Glad you got it.

[NMMNG]

109. A. It's not a "lifestyle" it's an orientation--a facet of one's entire being

B. People have been discriminated against, beaten or even killed just based on the mere perception that they were gay, whether they were or not. How does that one hide that behind closed doors?

[uppityperson]

115. A black person can't pass as white? Are you serious?

All sorts of people hide all sorts of characteristics out of fear.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

133. I can't decide if that's more offensive or stupid.

:puke:

[yardwork]

141. Gay people are killed all the time. Read the news.

Is this ignorance or bigotry? I'll leave that to others to decide.

[nofurylike]

43. heinous(!!!) crimes have been committed, and still are, against

blacks and homosexuals, among so many.

you are correct in one sense. through history, we queers have only been battered, tortured, murdered, executed, enslaved, disenfranchised, starved, thrown into streets to be gang-raped or in snake pits to be guinea pigs in torturing human experiments, and so on, if we do not pass as straight.

do you feel that any people of color who could pass for white should, and should not claim the struggle of people of color as their own, but rather ought to pass when they can, and feel fortunate they can?

do you think passing is easier? denying your culture, your family,
your Self?

or your love of your life?


the first question i am always asked is if i'm married/have kids....

i do not pass. i do not deny my love of my partner, my family....
and goddess, i have suffered for it, beyond the telling. but i hold my head up, proud of who i love.

my struggle does not erase or belittle your struggle. but my struggle has been equally tortured.

thank you reading.


peace

[Tyrone Slothrop]

87. Excuse me, but when were gays "enslaved" as you say?

And by whom?

I don't recall ever hearing of any society that enslaved homosexuals.

[mondo joe]

89. Try Nazi Germany. NT

[Tyrone Slothrop]

94. I don't exactly consider that slavery

Slavery is/was largely about breeding and captivity for the purposes of cheap/free labor. You don't intentionally exterminate your free labor without good reason. (Btw, for what it's worth, I asked my bosses -- Orthodox Jews -- if they considered the Holocaust to be slavery. They don't; the labor was merely something that happened on the way to genocide.)

However, if you believe that this was slavery, do you also consider Freemasons and their descendants to have been slaves? Catholics? Bosnians? Jehovah's Witnesses? Journalists? If you want to call the acts of Nazi Germany (the most irrational, twisted, bizarre "society" in modern times) as "enslavement", then all of those other groups have been enslaved, tortured, etc. just as much (if not more) than homosexuals.

So...any other examples? Or is that?

[Name removed]

111. Deleted message

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

[yardwork]

140. Idiotic, hm? That's nice.

What exactly is the difference between bigotry directed at people because of the color of their skin versus bigotry directed at people because of who they love?

Who's idiotic?

[Canuckistanian]

15. Oh? And why not, exactly?

Have not gays been killed and oppressed for their orientation?

Are you one of those who think being gay is a 'choice'?

[Ninja Jordan]

17. No I don't think it's a choice. However, comparing it to blacks' 150 year civil rights struggle

is wrong.

[Lex]

40. Gays have struggled for civil rights too. It's not exclusive to blacks.

nt

[Coventina]

103. Tell that to the thousands of gays & lesbians who have been

burned at the stake, hung, stoned, beheaded, tortured, mutilated etc. for thousands of years.


Bigotry and its enactment on human bodies of ANY color or sexual orientation is WRONG.

on edit: typo

[kenny blankenship]

39. Indeed. Even some straight people have been killed

because other straight people mistakenly thought they were gay. I remember a case on Staten Island in which a retarded man was beat to death. The men who killed him thought he was a homosexual (he was not). There was no other reason given. In my life I've read in either Time or Newsweek of a case of murder which, when the prosecution explained the crime's motivation was that the assailants had killed the victim because they believed the deceased was gay, the judge actually said "So, that's a crime now?"

[donco6]

73. Not civil rights movement - but sexual orientation, yes.

No one's going to confuse the African American struggle for civil rights with the struggle for gay rights - two different things. But the treatment gays receive for being gay certainly has some comparability with the discrimination blacks face for being black.

[Beausoir]

9. I see your point and I am disgusted. She is going to have to do a gut-check.

Either she believes in equal rights for ALL human beings, or she doesn't.

BTW, John Edwards was equally as slippery and smarmy on this issue a few weeks ago.

[Clarkie1]

13. I know, and I respect Edwards for that.

As much as I may not feel he's quite up to the job of leader of the free world and have serious questions about his judgment on other fronts, he wins points from me for being clear on this.

[Bluedogvoter]

20. It wasn't an equal rights question.

Its an easy answer if it was, she was being slippery on the morality of it.

[napi21]

18. OK,I'll be the target here. Being of different races is not considered

immoral in any religion that I am aware of, but in many religions, homosexual acts are a sin and therefore immoral. Many may not agree with that, and that's why we have separation of Church and State!

Personal morals are exactly that...personal! Everyone has to make THAT decision for themselves.

Wickopedia defines morals as....

"Personal morality defines and distinguishes among right and wrong intentions, motivations or actions, as these have been learned, engendered, or otherwise developed within each individual."

I don't see any right for anyone to IMPOSE THEIR moral values on anyone else, so I guess I'm haveing a hard time understand why there is such a dust up over Pace's comment. He has already said this is HIS opinion!

[Clarkie1]

21. Homosexuality is not "learned, engendered, or otherwise developed."

It's not more a choice than the color of your skin.

Now, you do make one point I agree with. It's O.K. for Pace, or Clinton, or whomever to say that homosexuality is immoral for themselves, within their value system for their person, but it's definitely not o.k. to say homosexuality itself is immoral, because that's the same as saying homsexuals are immoral, or black people are immoral, or Chinese people, or whomever.

[Ninja Jordan]

22. Then you're saying it's an immutable characteristic--the ONLY relation it has to being black

The similarities end there. The struggles are different.

[Kingshakabobo]

38. The "only" relation to the civil rights struggle?

You can't think of any more similarities? What about housing and employment discrimination? What about being scapegoated by asshole politicians? What about violent acts committed against them for who they are? What about marriage discrimination?

You can't see that there is a SLIGHT similarity in that they're both struggles for human rights?

Why does it have to be a pissing match over who was more oppressed? Before you answer that, I'll say Blacks have suffered MUCH more violence, oppression and discrimination.....

Now can't you budge a little past immutable characteristics? Not that I care. It's just that your position fascinates me.

Thanks in advance.:-)

[mondo joe]

82. Different struggles for the same thing: legal equality.

Got a problem with that?

[napi21]

31. I see your point and I agree, it is not a choice, but as I see it, the difference

made in the post I answered is that racial differences are quite apparent, homosexuality is not. That's why I don't think onyone should compare the two.

I have seen and still today see racial prejudices, but I'd bet many of the same people who hold a racial prejudice either don't care or are homosexual.

I honestly don't see anything other than the passage of time that is ever going to change that. My parents had a prejudicial attitued toward blacks, hispanics, jews, and asians. My dad was chastised when he said he was going to marry my mother becasue his family was German and my mother's family was Irish. There was never a discussion about homosexuality in our house. I have the feeling if I ever mentioned it, my parents would have both fainted to the floor!

Most, but not all, of those attitudes have disappeared over the last 30-40 years. I hopeit's not going to take another 30 yearsfor the current additudes to disappear as well.

[Fleshdancer]

35. What justification do you think slave owners used back in the day?

What justification was used to explain why women shouldn't have the right to vote or own land or be something other than the property of her husband or father?

Do you really think no one has ever argued in a place of worship that being of a different race/gender/sexual orientation/nationality/religion makes those said people of that land immoral? Seriously?

[Fleshdancer]

23. I agree with your point 100%

:wtf:

and to answer your question, no this is not a good answer. Bigotry and discrimination is never a good answer. Hate and ignorance is never a good answer. Selling out a portion of society that does no harm and yet receives an extreme amount of hate and violence -especially at the hands of hungry politicians during campaign season - is never a good answer.

:wtf:

[lutefisk]

24. To answer Clarkie1- Hillary Clinton gave an awful answer

She is getting a free ride for now, with token attacks and criticism to make things look good. But once she has the nomination, the opposition will eat her alive. I believe they want her to be the nominee because they know she really isn't a very strong candidate. Sorry.:hide:

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

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

[Bluedogvoter]

27. I'll leave that for others to conclude.

[renate]

66. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[leftofthedial]

26. I haven't read other responses. I'll stick my head into the noose.

That is a TERRIBLE answer. It is for each of us to conclude--that it is NOT an issue of morality.

[jaysunb]

28. I'm not a supporter of HRC ( for president ) but

this question really is just another distraction from the real issues that confront us.

[SemperEadem]

117. exactly

it's a question that makes folks whip out their shanks and start flaying away on each other rather than flaying the idiot who launched the divisive salvo (the person who initially put this out on the airwaves/cable signal/internet, not the OP). Now, the discussion is "who has a right to feel more discriminated against", rather than "what place do divisive questions about personal moral issues have in determining a candidate's ability to write/enact policy to end civil rights violations based on divisive moral issues and why are divisive moral issues even being administered as a litmus test?"

Both groups have suffered horribly from their civil rights being violated with the justification of 'morality' or 'God on their side' in both similar and very different ways and still do to this day.

[terisan]

29. Q: Are white people immoral? My A: ?????????? How the heck should I know ??

Are heterosexual people immoral???

Are people between the ages of 18 and 32 immoral? Are people who wear green hats moral or immoral? Are people with grey eyes moral or immoral?

Frankly I leave the group morality questions for others to conclude and if they are foolish enough to walk into the trap, let them.

[champt10]

32. Suprisingly, I think its a decent answer

WIthouth hearing eveyrthing, the answer is actually truthful in some fashions. The correct response would be: "I cannot speak for everybody. Morals are something that is decided by each and every person. In my opinion, homosexuality is... That is what she should have said.

[Bluedogvoter]

34. Interesting argument.

I like the way you think.

[champt10]

36. Thank you.

Its the one thing that pisses me off about Republicans most. They assume that we all have the same morals (Their christian morals). But we dont, and that is fine.

[IChing]

30. Gitmo is a" tactical decision"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3161744

[ComerPerro]

33. not really a good analogy. Sexual orientation can't always be replaced by race

I get your point, and it was a disgustingly spineless (and typical Clintonian/diplomatic) answer.

But still, not quite the same.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

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

[WhollyHeretic]

41. So when did you choose your sexual orientation?

[champt10]

44. I think when talking in terms of...

struggling for civil rights, it is acceptable to compare blacks and homosexuals. But you cannot always interchange the two, as in the case the original popster tried to do.

[Lex]

47. I've got news for you. Homosexuality is more than who you have sex with.

Do a little research.

[ruggerson]

49. Bullshit

I couldn't change my sexual orientation anymore than a white person could become black or vice versa. Being gay is not about who you have sex with, bub. If I never had sex again, I'd still be a gay man. You can be gay and celibate. Your post is utter crap.

[FreeState]

51. Being gay is not about sex

I really do get sick and tired of people comparing something centered around who people have sex with to race/ethnicity, which is something that basically cannot be changed. And yes, you can "change" who you have sex with.

Being gay is not about who you have sex with.

http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=31

Sexual orientation is different from sexual behavior because it refers to feelings and self-concept. Individuals may or may not express their sexual orientation in their behaviors.

[ends_dont_justify]

52. Sad

If we weren't all so busy defending why our persecution and tragedies were more important we'd get a lot more done in this world.

[donco6]

74. You are seriously confused about sexual orientation.

Try reading a few articles before posting again. You would sound less ridiculous.

[mondo joe]

83. Orientation is not limited to when you have sex. Let's educate you here.

Orientation is innate and it's there when you have sex and when you don't, and even if you never have sex.

[Neecy]

92. ummmmm.....

Likewise, any lesbian woman could have sex with a man if she wanted to.

If she wanted to have sex with a man, she wouldn't be a lesbian. She'd be bisexual - apples and oranges.

[cwydro]

108. Ignorant post.

Very.

[WhollyHeretic]

46. Fucking cowardly answer

God forbid she say that people aren't evil just for existing.

[ends_dont_justify]

48. To some people

As disguisting as those people are. Is hillary going to bend to the views of the KKK?

People say that being black and being homosexual are too different to compare. Not so -- both are hated by the same people. Prejaduice, cowardly majority people. In order for a minority to succeed, it must no longer be a minority. To do this we have to see similarities in our differences and fight persecution as a whole.

Hillary lost my vote, btw, if she's the nominee. Not for homosexual reasons, but I will not vote for a POTUS who cannot represent all americans atleast in the sense of accepting they have a right to opinion.

on edit: spelling

[leftofthedial]

50. Q: "Are white males immoral?" A: "I'll leave that for others to conclude."

gee . . . umm . . . well . . .

[rodeodance]

53. Some will come to that conclusion --Just keep personal opinions OUT of

gov. policy.

[Duppers]

54. Good way to make a point, Clarkie1. What about HERMAPHRODITES???

Hillary has no courage!!

Sorry folks here misconstrued your intent.

If Hillary were running for office back in the 1950's, would she have had the courage to support the then-controversial civil rights movement? Even though she's definitely not a racist, I doubt it!! It MIGHT have lost her a few votes!!

The first thing I thought about when I heard Hillary say that is the argument I had for years with fundie idiots (redundant). I ask them if hermaphrodites are immoral?? Hermaphrodites WERE born that way---'god' make 'em that way* and I've read that their sexual identities and choice of partners 'vary.' Are they then immoral??!!!

The fundies always walk away scratching their heads and mumbling at me.

But they VOTE and that's all that matters to Hillary Clinton. Damn! She thinks she has to remain neutral as possible in order to get those precious votes of the BIGOTED middle America...




(on edit: I know gays were born with their sexual identities too, but that fact escapes so frikin' many people.)

[The Straight Story]

55. I think the difference is - Some see gay as a verb while being black is a noun

Not saying it is right, but it seems to be in this political climate the way people view it.

[donco6]

75. And if so, they're ignorant about sexual orientation.

I'm not gay only during the time I'm having sex. I'm gay 24/7. Christians have this idea that as long as you're not engaged in the behavior, your not "gay" (and having been in some ex-gay groups I can attest to that belief). But that's just stupid. Gay is who you are.

[jeffrey_X]

56. Can you identify a gay person by just looking at them?

No.

Can you identify a black person by just looking at them?
Yes.

[ends_dont_justify]

57. There's plenty of people who'd disagree with you, with the topic of random anti gay violence NT

[FreeState]

60. Does it matter?

I mean really - people may discriminate against black people because of the color of their skin (though I tend to not think this is the base root of racism). But people discriminate on perceived sexual orientation. Discrimination is wrong no matter who it is or why the people know the person belongs to the group.

Edit: this logic makes about as much since as saying "she wanted to be raped she had a mini-skirt on", it implies that the victim is at fault for some reason. I do not care if someone kills some one because they are black or because they had a rainbow flag on their car - both are equally heinous and repugnant.

[donco6]

76. Most of the time, yes.

Maybe I have better training.

And most gay bashers are evidently able to do it, too.

[mondo joe]

80. Ask people who are judged to be gay on sight. NT

[Dora]

95. No. And can we identify a black person by just looking at them? NO!

No. Determining a person's race by appearance alone is not definitive. People come in ALL colors, and there has been many a "black" person who has "passed" for "white."

Mark Twain wrote about this in his novel, Pudd'nhead Wilson. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pudd'nhead_Wilson


Whether it's my struggle or my neighbor's, any fight for civil rights is the same fight.

It's the fight for equality in the eyes of the law, regardless of who we are as people.

[Leopolds Ghost]

131. So most blacks can't be identified by looks alone?

I guess blacks who can "pass as white" (because they are, indeed, mixed-race) are somehow superior because of the unique burden placed on them by having to pass as white, which they are, for the most part? Please. Dark-skinned African Americans are persecuted at all levels of our society, including urban liberal politics.

[Dora]

135. I never said anything about superiority, so don't waste your breath refuting it.

Address what I said, or go annoy somebody else. I'm not going to engage your strawman.

And as for "dark-skinned African Americans persecuted at all levels of our society, including urban liberal poltics," the same is true for homosexual Americans, including, yes, being persecuted at the level of urban liberal politics.

This very thread is a perfect example of that.

[GOTV]

110. You can't always identify Blacks by looking either.

And yes, there are stereotypical mannerisms that make people "look" gay whether they are or not. And sometimes people are beaten or killed for "looking" gay.

[gollygee]

116. It certainly isn't a 100% comparison

A gay person is part of a family that was discriminated against, or if they were it wasn't for that reason. The history of slavery isn't involved. Ongoing community-wide discrimination. Generational poverty that resulted from slavery and ongoing community-wide discrimination. And of course it's more obvious if someone is black than if someone is gay. Not even just by looking - I've been involved in hiring people and you can tell virtually 100% of the time from someone's resume what color the person is, between their name, what schools they've gone to, etc. - and that can absolutely cause difficulties getting jobs. You can't tell in most cases from a resume if someone is gay, so at least in the hiring process if it's a bigot doing the hiring, a gay person has a greater chance of getting an interview than a black person.

Still, there is *some level* of comparison in that both groups are discriminated against in housing and at work, and both suffer from violent hate crimes.

People at one time in this country (and some people still) thought that black people were immoral, but it wasn't the skin color they thought was immoral, it was traits that they incorrectly assumed (and still assume in some cases) correspond to having that skin color. But it's specifically homosexuality that some people find immoral. So that is related but not a 100% comparison either.

[Donnachaidh]

58. as much as I dislike Hillary, I find the substitution of the word "black"

for "homosexual" Misleading. And repulsive. And deliberately inflammatory.

I'm not happy with her *non-answer* to the Pace crapola. But exactly WHAT does a post like this do, except put words in the mouth of a presidential candidate YOU may dislike.

She and all the other Dem candidates catch enough crap from the media, and the Republicans. Can we post about what she ACTUALLY says - instead of manipulated text that (as far as I know) she's never said?

This is a post worthy of Fox newswriting.

[Duppers]

59. Hillary's lack of courage is the fucking point here, people!

the OP was not about black vs. gay.

I repeat from my post above: If Hillary were running for office back in the 1950's, would she have had the courage to support the then-controversial civil rights movement? Even though she's definitely not a racist, I doubt it!! It MIGHT have lost her a few votes!!

[greyl]

69. You're absolutely correct.

(I'm surprised at the skew of responses, too.)

[politicat]

61. Except the question you're using is badly phrased.

The original, being "Is Homosexuality immoral?" is asking if a quality is immoral. You're asking if people possessing a quality are immoral. Apples and Fig Newtons.

[FreeState]

63. Homosexuality is not a quality

Homosexuality is not a quality. Its an identity.


http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=31

[RedCappedBandit]

65. I'm pretty sure i've seen her use this response elsewhere

Typical political bullshit.

[Marr]

67. I don't know why politicians say stupid ass things like that.

I think the spineless equivocating pisses me off even more than if she'd said, "yes".

Just state your damned opinion. I really think a person would go farther with a simple "of course I don't think it's immoral- what sort of a bigot do you think I am?!". It's the mealy-mouthed pandering that people hate. It's so weak and dishonest.

[AndyA]

84. I'm afraid Hillary stepped in a big pile of shit with this one.

That is not an appropriate response. But it is a typical response from her. She always has one foot on the dock, and the other on the boat. You never know for sure which way she's going to jump when the boat starts moving.

Not a quality I want in a President, I'm afraid. I've had enough surprises with * over the past six plus years.

Shame on you, Hillary.

[marmar]

85. Point made....but why not start with Q: "Are white males immoral?"....

I cannot stand this pitting of one minority against another, eventually leading to a "who's more oppressed" flamefest. Gen. Pace is a white man, so maybe that comparison would be more valid, no?

[MedleyMisty]

90. The thread would be the same, pretty much

Only it'd be people saying "Why are ya'll blaming white men for all the problems in the world?" and stuff, and it might actually be uglier and more flamier.

A lot of white men do think they're oppressed.

[goodhue]

86. It is a horrible answer, which she will need to change

But don't expect her to apologize

[cboy4]

88. Excellent post n/t

[butterfly77]

125. This is a bullshit post...

are any other races immoral "yes"

[Beelzebud]

91. I get your point, but what a clumsy way to make it...

[verse18]

93. To all of you who don't see gay rights as a civil rights issue:

IF YOU'RE NOT PART OF THE SOLUTION, YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

Human rights are human rights. What's so hard to understand? It's about one group restricting another groups' rights and freedoms because they're seen as different. Different because of skin color, sexual orientation, or other happenstance of biology. IT DOESN'T MATTER. If you can't grasp that then shove the fuck off!

[BoneDaddy]

96. Clarkie's point is that

Hillary Clinton SHOULD have said, "absolutely not" and is using race in place of sexual orientation to show that she is pandering to the religious in attempt to get her bid for the white house to hold some water.

The purpose of Clarkie's heading it to show how ludicrous it would be for someone to dodge the question if race was in the content and not orientation.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

97. Hillary was asked about "ality", not "als".

I think that's an important distinction.

I'm still disappointed she didn't say "no", though.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

100. Is Hillary Clinton immoral?

Yes.

[WI_DEM]

102. I agree HC answer to that question was weak and stupid

[qwlauren35]

105. Immorality is based on behavior.

Some black people behave immorally, some do not. Being black is not an immoral act.

By that token, BEING homosexual is not an immoral act either... however, some homosexuals behave immorally.

And to continue, some heterosexuals behave immorally.

Duh.

[treestar]

106. Arrrrrrrrrrgh

Is there a Democrat who will come out and say that there is nothing immoral about being a homosexual, and that a gay person can be as moral as a straight person, or as ethical (or as dishonest and unethical as the case may be?)

:banghead:

[gollygee]

112. Note to Hillary: The correct answer is "no"

to both questions.

[Catherine Vincent]

114. This question is stupid.

:eyes:

[Name removed]

118. Deleted message

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

[Catherine Vincent]

120. It's still stupid.

But like you said, it snatched a few homophobic trolls, so that's all that matters.

[Ninja Jordan]

121. Whom are you referencing?

[uppityperson]

122. Now now now, you must know it is against DU rules to directly state whom.

[Ninja Jordan]

123. If the accusation is false.

Which it is here.

[uppityperson]

124. Who is being accused?

[Ninja Jordan]

126. I guess we'll never know

[uppityperson]

127. Must be "deleted".

Unless you are assuming someone else is meant. If "deleted" it seems like it was justified.

[Moochy]

136. We'll leave that up to others to conclude

[Catherine Vincent]

130. I'm not referencing anyone. I was replying to someone.

n/t

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

138. Why are you curious?

:spray:

[paulk]

119. really, really stupid post

talk about a strawman...

[BlooInBloo]

134. Not as stupid as it taking 134 tries to get the words "homosexuality is not immoral" out.

[paulk]

139. I've never found much use for morality

when it comes to politics.

you want morality, go to church.

I don't expect, or want, politicians to inform me about what's moral and what isn't.

[LaurenG]

142. Locking

Please don't start flame bait discussion topics.

Ohioblues
Du moderator