tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post7491584637592028064..comments2024-02-26T02:02:51.364-05:00Comments on Queers United: Sherri Shepherd "Struggles" With Whether LGBT People Deserve Equal RightsQueers Unitedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05074493276489593816noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-17927733324301165952009-03-25T18:47:00.000-04:002009-03-25T18:47:00.000-04:00I can't watch The View anymore because they have d...I can't watch The View anymore because they have dumbed it down to a level so low that I can't tolerate it any longer. Sherri and Elisabeth are not only closed minded religion addicts but they are also very uninformed of the facts. These women need to do their research when on a television show like this. I also feel the producers AND Barbara Walters are minipulating the viewers with staged "controversy". I won't waste any more of my life on this B grade "talk" show.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-27110307171603821222008-12-05T19:01:00.000-05:002008-12-05T19:01:00.000-05:00crystal thanks for making a username and providing...crystal thanks for making a username and providing your input. Atleast you are consistent in your belief. Ie: a photographer should be able to deny photographing a gay or black wedding, etc as they see fit. See my issue with that is, where does it end? What if one lives in a small town, and the business says we choose to cater only to asian people? Should all the other races have to goto different towns simply because this owner does not like or agree with someone else?Queers Unitedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05074493276489593816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-87019645609873554632008-12-05T18:21:00.000-05:002008-12-05T18:21:00.000-05:00Thank you for clarifying the school field trip iss...Thank you for clarifying the school field trip issue for me. And you're right, the parents most likely had to sign permission slips as with all field trips. But I guess I'm wondering what was the purpose of the field trip? It would easier to support this if there had been a history of attending different wedding services from many different cultures. Then this would be just another one of the many different types of nuptials. But I'm assuming that this was the first field trip for these children to ANY kind of wedding. <BR/><BR/>Yes, I believe the vendor always reserves the right to refuse service especially when they own the business. This means that if you own your own pharmacy and don't want to give out the birth control pill for religious reasons, that's your prerogative. Or a doctor should not be forced to perform abortions if it is against their conscience. (I am pro-choice btw). Customers would just have to look elsewhere. However, if you work for Walgreens, Walmart, or CVS, you had better hand me my pills.<BR/><BR/>I know of pastors who would marry christians and marry non-christians, but won't marry non-christians with christians based on the Biblical principal of Christians not being yoked with non-believers. Proving that they are not against non-christians, but believe that the Bible them not to. So if you're looking for an interfaith marriage, you'll just have to go to the many other ministers that perform them.<BR/><BR/>Granted this may never happen, but if I were a photographer and a klansman needed me to photograph a peaceful rally he had every legitimate right to be involved in, I would like to believe that I had the right, based on my personal beliefs and disapproval to refuse whether I were Black or White. <BR/><BR/>But I repeat, how come it's ok to say that the clergy will be protected against retribution for speaking and practicing their faith and conscience, but the same courtesy will not be extended to their parishioners that have the same strong beliefs? <BR/><BR/>Another thing I would like to point out is that this may be different from just straight out racial discrimination. I can't speak for this particular photographer, but perhaps this isn't a case of hating gay people, but rather not agreeing with gay marriage. Like what if they had hired her to work at a non-gay event? If she had refused simply because they were gay, then I would have to look at the situation with more scrutiny.<BR/><BR/>There's a phrase that's popular amongst Christians and non-Christians alike: Hate the sin, love the sinner. Whether you believe that homosexuality is a sin or not, do you believe that someone of this opinion (gay = sin) can truly separate their opinion of a person from the behavior and lifestyle of said person? Maybe if you could, you'd have a little more sympathy for Sherri Shepard. After all, she's not simply throwing the baby out with the bath water. She probably represents a growing segment of the population who are trying to reconcile what they "know" and believe about homosexuality and the real world implications of relationships friends, family, neighbors, and co-workers of the LGBT community. People moving from hating and apathetic to TRYING to understand despite feeling as if they maybe going against the wishes of their God. Instead of wanting to cuss out people like Sherri and making them feel like poo because they're not so quick to jump on the gay bandwagon (and I'm NOT speaking to you specifically QU), why not TRY to at least see where she's coming from and put yourselves in her shoes. Think about it, she's trying to see where the LGBT community is coming from because if she wasn't, she wouldn't have to "struggle" so much with prop 8. You don't understand that she now becomes a go-between for your community to others that are against your community. She may eventually become a stronger advocate than any gay person may ever be, simply because she has a greater capacity to understand both sides. It's like a converted atheist can be a more effective converting other atheist because they may not be as self-righteous as the lifetime Christians. Believe it or not, gays can be just as self-righteous as the people they talk against. It seems that both sides are operating on guilt and compulsion rather than love and understanding.<BR/><BR/>I'm sorry for going on and on. You don't necessarily have to respond, I just thought I'd try to share a point of view that is rarely shared on these blogs.<BR/><BR/>Peace and Love, <BR/>Crystal (the previous anonymous poster)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-38980264040236717882008-12-05T10:14:00.000-05:002008-12-05T10:14:00.000-05:00The lesbian wedding field trip was at the suggesti...The lesbian wedding field trip was at the suggestion of the school not the teacher herself. It was a school trip in which the parents agreed and signed waivers for their kids to go, the parents wanted their children to attend.<BR/><BR/>As far as the New Mexican wedding, what if the photographer did not want to tape a black wedding, would they be in their right to not do that?Queers Unitedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05074493276489593816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-80280036926091777362008-12-05T05:35:00.000-05:002008-12-05T05:35:00.000-05:00Christians do have legitimate concerns when it com...Christians do have legitimate concerns when it comes to them being forced to accept homosexuality through marriage or otherwise or in the schools. Why is a teacher taking her class on a field trip to a gay wedding? I've never gone on a field trip to a straight wedding. There's definitely seems to be an underlying agenda there (at least on the teacher's part). <BR/><BR/>There was even a case where a New Mexican photographer ended up in court over refusing a lesbian couple's request to work at their wedding. She didn't break a contract, she just simply refused to enter into one. It's costing her a lot of money right now.<BR/><BR/>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/feb/25/artist-hit-for-refusal-on-beliefs/<BR/><BR/>So while it's all well and good to say clergy won't be forced to perform ceremonies, what happens to the other 90% of Evangelical Christians who AREN'T legally protected by the title of Reverend? <BR/><BR/>Just something to think about. By the way, I'm BLACK, FEMALE, STRAIGHT, CHRISTIAN, and open-minded enough to try to understand and research where BOTH sides of the issue of coming from.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-57918189941476248222008-11-19T21:43:00.000-05:002008-11-19T21:43:00.000-05:00Marriage is a living institution; that means it is...Marriage is a living institution; that means it is evolving. It is not static. Time was when slaves could not be joined in 'marriage,' time was when anyone who had been married could not be divorced legally. People who can marry in one state cannot marry in another; in some places cousins can marry while in others they cannot. <BR/><BR/>Marriage as an institution is NOT as cut and dried as anti-gay marriage people and the Christian rightwing insist. And I hate to mention that there ARE instances of gays being married in the church, just as gays marry every day in churches all across the United States. How dare the government not accept the church's definition of Marriage when it is, as Sherri says, a deeply spiritual thing?<BR/><BR/>The churches don't agree; the Bible is actually NOT clear on this since the words that humans decided meant 'homosexuality' don't necessarily mean that at all. The laws don't agree, either, since in some states the current law is seen as discriminatory, while in others discrimination against gays and others is alive and well. <BR/><BR/>Best course of action for the govt is to let each church define marriage for itself and define civil marriage/civil wedding/civil union to apply equally to all Americans. That is the only FAIR way. <BR/><BR/>Will rabid rightwing Christians accept such a compromise? Of course not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-74485325576086718722008-11-18T19:02:00.000-05:002008-11-18T19:02:00.000-05:00You decided to change what has been traditionally ...You decided to change what has been traditionally accepted as marriage. Prop 8 did not start out of thin air it was a response to the gay community changing an establishment. I do not believe for a moment the heterosexual community would have backed prop 8 or prop 22 if there was not a push to change what has been accepted for hundreds of years. That is where I am coming from when I say ramming it down our throats. And to answer your question, your marriage affects whether I can adopt children through my church and what curriculum is taught to my children. That greatly affects my life.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-78455408459204698462008-11-18T18:51:00.000-05:002008-11-18T18:51:00.000-05:00Traditional marriage is a man and many wives, are ...Traditional marriage is a man and many wives, are you in favor of polygamy? How does my marriage effect your life? Churches are exempt from performing marriages, the clause was in the court decision. How are we by just living and being who we are ramming it down your throat, anymore than you are ramming your heterosexual agenda down ours?Queers Unitedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05074493276489593816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-89455028356673191732008-11-18T18:48:00.000-05:002008-11-18T18:48:00.000-05:00I understand this is a passionate issue for you as...I understand this is a passionate issue for you as it is for me, but you fail to see how this movement if allowed does not let me live my life as I best see fit for my family. You do have your civil rights, tell me if your partner is in the hospital can you not see them, can you not own property with your partner? You have the same rights as I do, you do not have the authority to redefine a word or term. And for the record I have ZERO issues with homosexual individuals it is just like anything else, there are radicals and stupid people apart of any group. If this is how you want to live your life, fabulous. But stopping trying to ram it down my throat and portraying me and my family like bigots because we believe strongly in traditional values. You cannot have it both ways, you live your life, I live my life and the other does not strongly affect the other.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-75514839832960504192008-11-18T18:37:00.000-05:002008-11-18T18:37:00.000-05:00Since when does marriage mean between a man and a ...Since when does marriage mean between a man and a woman? Dictionaries didn't even say that till activist conservatives changed it. Marriage has evolved from a man and his many wives who were considered property and purchased from their fathers. <BR/>"Please live your life as you desire without intruding on my life and how I choose to raise my family."<BR/>You said it perfectly, please let my family live, you don't have to like us, just stop denying our rights and civil rights, not religious marriage, civil.Queers Unitedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05074493276489593816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-52838848237633565562008-11-18T18:23:00.000-05:002008-11-18T18:23:00.000-05:00Queersunited this is not a civil rights issue. Th...Queersunited this is not a civil rights issue. This is a definition issue please stop confusing the two. The word marriage implies union between a man and a woman. I'm so grateful for this country that we live in where everyone can have different opinions but because someone has a differing opinion does not make them a moron or a bigot. This is an issue of me raising my kids how I best see fit. Where would my rights be if prop 8 had not passed? I legally would not be able to deny taking a homosexual couples wedding pictures, my church could be sued if they refused to marry a homosexual couple and most importantly religious adoption agencies would have to be shut down. Please live your life as you desire without intruding on my life and how I choose to raise my family. You deserve every right and privilege a heterosexual couple has within marriage but please do not attempt to redefine marriage, that is taking away my civil rights.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-57646875389974830352008-11-12T19:02:00.000-05:002008-11-12T19:02:00.000-05:00My bad... you said "queer male" Apologies for fail...My bad... you said "queer male" Apologies for failing to acknowledge you as a queer male. Shame on you for forgetting that you outed yourself.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-54643612922265635932008-11-12T18:56:00.000-05:002008-11-12T18:56:00.000-05:00"Please folks who are typing as anonymous, I urge ..."Please folks who are typing as anonymous, I urge you to take 2 seconds to make a username, so we actually know who we are talking to. It gets crazy to respond to those who post as anonymous."<BR/><BR/>Please "Queers United," consider fixing your damn blog so it doesn't crash when I try and register, or toss every other post I make. I do remember mentioning my inability to register elsewhere.<BR/><BR/>That said, you also identified yourself as a gay male in another post. I am pretty sure you are also white, from the rather white and USA centric slant of your posts. Your knowledge of trans issues is not something I would expect from anybody else but a gay male who fancies himself liberal and hip for "having best friends who are trans, black, etc.<BR/><BR/>In addition, if unity means keeping gay transphobia in the closet, who exactly does it serve? What about race baiting? What about the near total lack of trans centric articles (Not counting demeaning frivolous pap like hormonally ill chickens mislabeled as 'trans.")<BR/>It serves you and other gay white males, that's who...and at everybody else's expense.<BR/><BR/>And that is why I am here...to keep you honest as you whine about gays facing discrimination, flaunt your race baiter view of nonwhites, and generally present a dime story novel understanding of trans issues.<BR/>You also even manage to demonize African diaspora peeps. Nice.<BR/><BR/>And...I consider you just an immoral oppressor for doing what you do. Your white gay male centric approach is getting seriously old now, and is seriously appropriative as well. There is no need to stain a pursuit of gay rights with cultural appropriation, denial, dishonesty, and race baiting and plain old marginalization and exploitation of trans lives.<BR/><BR/>The fact that you belittle a trans woman like me on your site does not aid your case... it just makes you look smug and arrogant.<BR/><BR/>Try bringing some integrity and honesty to your "united" approach, and watch how fast I align with you. At the least, you will be believeable, instead of simply another liar hiding behind a pseudonym on the Net who likes beating the messenger.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-7933055634397998372008-11-12T01:01:00.000-05:002008-11-12T01:01:00.000-05:00Renee - What I don't get is if they say civil unio...Renee - What I don't get is if they say civil unions and marriage are the same (even though civil unions lack 1,000 rights that marriage provides) why do they care if we can use the word as well? This whole M word thing is such nonsense.Queers Unitedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05074493276489593816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-31307505818278260782008-11-11T23:49:00.000-05:002008-11-11T23:49:00.000-05:00@Queers UnitedI want to be married, not civil unio...@Queers United<BR/><EM>I want to be married, not civil unionized. civil unions also lack of hundreds of rights that come with marriage.</EM><BR/><BR/>The fact that we want to all it a civil union and not a marriage means it will not be equal. Anyone remember Jim Crow, that was separate but equal to. As long as we all don't have the same rights inequality exists.Reneehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16388113393817266374noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-10500480515226625302008-11-10T23:58:00.000-05:002008-11-10T23:58:00.000-05:00There is hate and ignorance on all sides of the is...There is hate and ignorance on all sides of the issue/debate. However, it doesn't mean that EVERYONE is filled with hate and ignorance. <BR/><BR/>I agree that the 'anonymous' people should create a name. It makes you seem less credible when you aren't willing to attach your beliefs to your name.Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14347126530586729121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-35842999000069549102008-11-10T21:20:00.000-05:002008-11-10T21:20:00.000-05:00Please folks who are typing as anonymous, I urge y...Please folks who are typing as anonymous, I urge you to take 2 seconds to make a username, so we actually know who we are talking to. It gets crazy to respond to those who post as anonymous.Queers Unitedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05074493276489593816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-12234840847525236492008-11-10T21:18:00.000-05:002008-11-10T21:18:00.000-05:00Anonymous who speaks of gays hating trans all the ...Anonymous who speaks of gays hating trans all the time on every post. First off make a name since you keep coming back, and its annoying to see anonymous, you should also own up to your words if you stand behind them. Second, you don't know me, you don't know if I am trans or gay, or black or white, don't assume stuff. For all you know I am an straight old lady who has a lesbian granddaughter. <BR/><BR/>What are you trying to accomplish? This is a blog of inclusion so I don't know why you are wasting your time ranting. You should use your energy at those who are actually hating on the trans community rather than on this blog which is made up of gays, straights, trans, asexual, intersex, etcQueers Unitedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05074493276489593816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-8940915625029255062008-11-10T21:15:00.000-05:002008-11-10T21:15:00.000-05:00You are right. Equal rights for women and African...You are right. Equal rights for women and African Americans were granted by so-called activist judges and legislatures.<BR/><BR/>The 14th Amendment also protects minorities against the tyranny of the majority.<BR/><BR/>E-mail ABC's The View and have them correct Elizabeth's misinformation...<BR/><BR/>http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-42771610213127630282008-11-10T20:01:00.000-05:002008-11-10T20:01:00.000-05:00It kills me that Hasselbeck says things like "legi...It kills me that Hasselbeck says things like "legislating from the bench" and "the people voted and it's the will of the people". Ok. Like I've said a million times. What if "the people" decided all of a sudden that black people couldn't get married or short people or christians. Or if folks decided tall people couldn't adopt children. Is that ok then? It's such a stupid argument that ignorants like Lizzy continue to put forth. 90% of the country was against interractial marriage at the time it was made legal. Were they "activist" judges legislating from the bench? No, they were judges doing their job and doing the "right" thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-84839526809497884152008-11-10T12:58:00.000-05:002008-11-10T12:58:00.000-05:00Maybe there should be a protest/march/vigil outsid...Maybe there should be a protest/march/vigil outside of The View's studio...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-13314418595529905982008-11-09T23:16:00.000-05:002008-11-09T23:16:00.000-05:00I dont need the word marriage. Let the churches ha...I dont need the word marriage. Let the churches have it if they want it so bad. All marriages should be civil unions, since it is about the rights and responsibilities granted by the state. I want equality in the way gays are treated by our government. Nothing more, nothing less. Unless they will let me pay less taxes since I have less rights.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-46397100058176770562008-11-09T23:00:00.000-05:002008-11-09T23:00:00.000-05:00Sherri Shepherd has the brains of a clam. I am st...Sherri Shepherd has the brains of a clam. I am struggling with how she manages to hold a high-visibility job, unless it is to train her female audience to be really, really stupid.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-23140007737266436932008-11-09T18:49:00.000-05:002008-11-09T18:49:00.000-05:00Sherri please educate yourself before speaking nex...Sherri please educate yourself before speaking next time. Although I didn't need anyone to convince me that other people's civil rights were important.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3451574857665049482.post-26518206463775431842008-11-09T18:35:00.000-05:002008-11-09T18:35:00.000-05:00powerdiva -- it is assumed that marriage rights tr...powerdiva -- it is assumed that marriage rights travel across states. Civil unions don't. Meaning I could lose all rights to care for my partner in a state that doesn't acknowledge civil unions (think making health decisions or admittance to a dying loved one's ICU bed.) <BR/>And Arkansas just voted to retract adoption and foster care placement from all couples except those legally MARRIED. Civil union couples couldn't adopt there.<BR/>I could go on, but I hope you get the point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com