"Gay Rights"

[dazzleman]

does the term 'gay rights' refer to anything other than marraige?

It means a lot of things, and the meaning has evolved over time.

Initially, it simply meant the right to go out publicly as a gay person without being arrested or beaten.  Later, it evolved into the right not to face employment discrimination.

Much more recently, it has come to mean the right to marry and adopt children.  I think that like most of the 'rights' movements of the past 40-50 years, it has veered off track at this point, even though it surely started out with the right idea, as did feminism, the civil rights movement, etc.  All these movements have gotten old and stale, and seem more interested in perpetuating their own existence than actually completing what they initially set out to do.

[dazzleman]

Initially, it simply meant the right to go out publicly as a gay person without being arrested or beaten.

And as Joke Jake still takes pleasure in the idea of such things happening then it's clear alot more has to be done by the movement when it comes to the basics!

I doubt Jake means what he says.  It is actually surprising to learn about the level of abuse, legal and illegal, to which gay people were subjected in the relatively recent past.

In all honesty, I don't think homosexuality will ever be viewed as being equal to heterosexuality.  Even the most 'enlightened' people on these issues would be devastated if one of their kids turned out to be gay.  I don't think that's really going to change, however politically correct people try to be.

I think the mistake all these 'movements' make is that they refuse to acknowledge that any progress has been made.  I understand why they do this -- they are trying to keep up momentum for further changes -- but beyond a certain point, it becomes a tactical mistake.

When I hear black leaders talk as if life for them hasn't changed since the 1930s, or feminists bitterly complain about how oppressed women are, it's just a turnoff for most people, whether they are targeted beneficiaries of the movement or not, and encourages them to write off the movement entirely.  Even if you support increased rights for blacks and women, if these movements are as impotent and ineffectual as they themselves claim to be, why put any stock in them?

The gay rights movement is moving down this same path, IMO.  The goals keep being redefined, to things that are more and more elusive.  Just as the feminists are practically at the point of demanding legislation that mandates that men carry 50% of all pregnancies, some segments of the gay rights movement appear to be on the brink of demanding that gay couples be acknowledged as the NATURAL parents of children they have adopted, something that even heterosexual adoptive parents don't have.  This is impossible and a denial of reality.

My hope (and also fear) is that all this political correctness will provoke a backlash at some point.  A backlash against some of this stuff is definitely needed, but I fear that the longer it is held off, the worse it will be when it happens.  And I wouldn't want it to sweep away legitimate gains.

[dazzleman]

One in 10 people are born gay. 

Where did you get that statistic?  I didn't even think they had officially proven that people are born gay.  I thought it was just speculation and theory.

Rin-chan

That's a statistic that has been thrown around by others, and there's really no proof to it.

I do believe that some people are born gay, but I have no idea what percentage they are.  There are even theories that gay men were born that way, but gay women were made that way.  Who knows?

I think the gay movement likes to push the idea that anybody who is gay was born that way, for obvious reasons.  Others like the Christian right say that nobody is born gay, and that it's a choice.  I don't think either theory is correct.