Chuck0 writes:
> The gay marriage amendment did not come out of the *grassroots*
religious right, rather it is a cynical and effective campaign by the
Republicans to increase Republican voter turnout by Republicans, because
they understand that rank-and-file Republicans are not enthusiastic
about Bush.
What comes out of the grassroots is the hatred of queers. This value is then picked up by the mainstream, validated and manifested as hate amendments. This is classic "will of the mob" mentality. It is the pre-existing hatred of queers in the grassroots that the Republicans are exploiting.
frank writes:
> just a brief reminder as to what really runs this show, and why chucko
is correct...market forces don't care what color the buyer is, or what
sexuality is favored, or what kind of dog or cat you love or anything
else, as long as you got the money to affrim the market, which is what
affirmative action is all about...
What leftists need to be aware of is that heterosexism and racism also run the show.
This reductionist thinking ignores the fact that market forces are happy to exploit persecuted minorities. Also, if market forces were suddenly no longer in control, heterosexism and racism still would be.
Reducing everything to market forces allows heterosexism to flourish on the left.
Joanna wrote:
> So long as the economy stays good, the zealots are going nowhere. But
what will happen when it goes sour....and the weather gets nasty, and
people get scared and hungry and some zealot comes round and says "you
don't want to fight the nasty army, nooo, you want to kill the nasty
queers and the nasty brown people etc. who are responsible for bringing
god's wrath, etc."
Joanna is right. Queers are persecuted no matter the season or weather. It is naive to believe that getting rid of capitalism is going to change this.
Dwayne wrote and Doug commented:
>> tolerance for queerness is a sort of 'gateway drug' of social policy
> And if we're honest, it is, no? And that's a good thing.
But the left is continually squicked by queerness. It is odd: on the left citizens will fight for immigrants' rights; the bourgeousie will fight for the poor; the unjailed will fight for the incarcerated. But non-queers are hard to enlist for queer battles. My queer friends in Missouri say it was dificult to raise funds and support among non-queers to fight the marriage amendment. Hopefully, it will be diferent in Ohio and Oregon.
Liza writes:
> Historian George Chauncey - who wrote a wonderful book called Gay New York -
has a new book just out called Why Marriage? about the forces shaping the gay
marriage debate. In it he argues that as society gets more tolerant in some ways
and gays make progress, those opposed to homosexuality get more militant, hence
all these terrible state-level amendments. It provides a good counter to any
straightforward narrative of progress or decline.
I will have to read it. I loved his first book.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister