I have a good number of gay friends. But I gotta say, the gay rights movement today is insanely compromised and corrupt, and here's why:
http://www.rslevinson.com/gaylesissues/features/collect/onetime/bl_platform1972.htm
This platform was announced in 1972, before the gay rights movement became corrupt. 82 organizations signed onto this statement. None of them have ever renounced it. So why aren't they fighting for all the points in this platform anymore? Read it carefully, guys... the hypocrisy lies in the details.
I'm pretty sure that they're not fighting for this stuff because the gay rights movement has lost a lot of its support with the recent gay marriage debacles. Some of this stuff has happened though; I'm pretty sure the SCotUS ruled sodomy laws unconstitutional.
Another point may be that the rights fight has been taken away from legislation, where protests matter, to the courts, which don't give a fuck.
>>1
I don't get it... so you're saying they should still be figiting for those things?
>5. Elimination of bars to the entry, immigration and naturalization of homosexual aliens.
>7. Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent.
>8. Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers.
>>7
Exactly. Why did they abandon this part of their platform? Isn't it hypocritical?
Platform's closed. AIDS.
What does No.7 have to do with homosexuality? If they'd wanted the age of consent for homosexual acts to be brought in line with the age for heterosexual acts (which I believe it now is, in all US states, but probably wasn't in the 70s) that would have been understandable. As it is, though, it just looks like the were saying "let us fuck kids", which really wouldn't help their case much.
>>13
In the beginning of the movement, faggots were closely associated with pedos.
In the platform it notes that it is at the state level, and so would effectively achieve the parity with heterosexual age of consent laws. Thus the federal laws would remain in place and give a single age for everyone in the country.
You can't have federal laws for that, it's unconstitutional
If they're looking for social acceptance (and that's what they say they want, at least), probably the worst strategy I can think of is campaigning to legally legitimize not only their own sexual preference but also much more feared sexual deviance such as polygamy and pedophilia. That's like a group which claims to simply support political candidates who support enforcing existing immigration laws marching around in KKK and Nazi uniforms. It's not garnering any support, it's scaring people away!
> much more feared sexual deviance such as polygamy and pedophilia.
polygamists and pedophiles are usually productive members of society. homosexuals are usually too busy telling anyone they can find about their sex life and persecuting anyone who doesn't want to hear about it to do anything productive.