Falwell gets 'Thank You' from Gay Rights Group
The Human Rights Campaign has formally thanked Rev. Jerry Falwell for apparently speaking out in favor of gay rights for the first time publicly. [...]
Falwell, who in the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, blamed the terrorist attacks on “the pagans, the abortionists, and the feminists and the gays and lesbians,” and who describes himself as “very conservative,” told Carlson that if he were a lawyer, he too would argue for civil rights for gays.
“I may not agree with the lifestyle,” Falwell said. “But that has nothing to do with the civil rights of that … part of our constituency.” (source)
You know, I’m probably just getting too old for such nonsense. Ten or so years ago, I would probably welcome the likes of Jerry Falwell into enlightenment, but today, I find myself not really caring what he thinks. And the Human Rights Campaign sucking up to him makes me want to throw up after all the misery he has caused over the years during his reign of the Moral Majority.
This isn’t the first time I’ve had an issue with Human Rights Campaign. They fired Cheryl Jacques as their director because she would not give in to civil unions. She insisted that it was marriage or nothing. I agree with that. And now, suddenly, they are kissing up to Jerry Falwell because he now thinks that we should have basic civil rights with the rest of Americans?
Well, I just called Human Rights Campaign and canceled my membership. I’m tired of giving money to people who just don’t get it.
4 Comments
Leave a comment
Any thing that comes out of jerry falwells mouth is waste,like i said before he is a money hungry pig,who should not even be called a human,his followers are idiots, so for him to take back what he said is another slap in the face,because if he thinks we are just as stupid as he is.
When I talk to young people, I am encouraged. Most between 18 and 25 are very progressive. In 10 years or so, the neo-cons of our generation will really be in for a surprise. I think there will be a cultural revolution that will eclipse that of the '60s.
Can you imagine the clash between an ultra-conservative Supreme Court and liberal legislative and executive branches?
We saw something similar to this with the Temperance Movement and Prohibition in the 1920s. The young progressives where busy doing the Charleston and having a good time, while a bunch of religious nuts amended the Constitution.
Ten years later, the Jazz kids were grown up and taking over politics. This led to one of the most progressive periods in U.S. history -- FDR was practically crowned king!
Here are some song lyrics to ponder...
Propellerheads feat. Shirley Bassey - History Repeating
The word is about, there's something evolving,
whatever may come, the world keeps revolving...
They say the next big thing is here,
that the revolution's near,
But to me it seems quite clear
that it's all just a little bit of history repeating.
The newspapers shout a new style is growing,
but it don't know if it's coming or going,
there is fashion, there is fad
some is good, some is bad
and the joke is rather sad,
that it's all just a little bit of history repeating.
... and I've seen it before
... and I'll see it again
... yes, I've seen it before
... just little bits of history repeating
Some people don't dance, if they don't know who's singing,
why ask your head, it's your hips that are swinging
Life's for us to enjoy
woman, man, girl and boy,
feel the pain, feel the joy
aside set the little bits of history repeating
... just little bits of history repeating
... and I've seen it before
... and I'll see it again
... yes, I've seen it before
... just little bits of history repeating
I agree with them on Roberts, but unfortunately, there will be no one else offered who is any better. The only reason Roberts was brought up as a nominee is because of his lack of record.
We all know that he is ultra-conservative. We can dress him up to look like a sheep and pretend that at the end of the day, he will uphold our equality and our equal civil rights, but the reality is, he is a wolf who would send us back to the 1950's, if he could. I would submit that anyone who feels otherwise is seriously deluding themselves.
I used to be the typical "gay activist" who was more of a pragmatist. Today, I'm tired. I'm tired of compromising on things in life that others enjoy. I harp in this journal about gay this, and gay that, when the reality is, my homosexuality is the least of what I am. But, by doing everything humanly possible to deny people like me basic equality, people like Judge Roberts and Jerry Falwell, have made being gay a huge thing; a defining thing.
That's not the way life should be. I don't let them run my life or define my happiness. But, on the other hand, I'm no longer willing to compromise - not on marriage. Never.
They may think they have won the battle on marriage with the states passing amendments to their constitutions defining people like me as second class, but they have done nothing. I'm like the drop of water against the rock. They are the rock. I am persistent and unrelenting. I will never give up. They think they have win this battle.
What they don't realize is that they have already lost the war.
Hum, I just got this...
Dear Fritz,
Today, HRC announced our opposition to the nomination of John Roberts to fill the vacancy left by moderate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court following a decision by our Board of Directors. I wanted to make sure that you, as one of our valued members and supporters, were informed right away about this decision.
Our decision is based on a variety of factors, including John Roberts' extremely skeptical view of the constitutional right to privacy—a view that could seriously endanger our rights as defined in Lawrence v. Texas; his hostility towards enforcement of civil rights; his severely limited view of the role of the courts to protect individual rights and liberties and his views about the separation of church and state.
As you may know, HRC has been involved in judicial nominations throughout the Bush Administration. Taking a moderate stance based upon clearly articulated criteria, we have opposed only those nominees whose records indicated a clear hostility to the enforcement of civil rights. In all, we opposed only seven of the more than 200 nominees named by President Bush. Given what we have seen of his record, we now feel strongly that John Roberts rises to this level and opposing his nomination is the right thing to do - not only for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, but in order to protect the civil rights of all Americans. Materials regarding our position can be found on our website at www.hrc.org/supremecourt