2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[Gavin Luper]

Funny thing is, with those on the left and Perry's own opponents on the right, going after the video so feverishly. They are just giving the video free advertisement. Instead of letting it sink into the either with all the other campaign videos out right now. It gives Perry tons more advertisement, and reaches out to even more voters.

I call bullshit. It gives him tons more advertisement as an anti-homo fundamentalist who is hated rather than considered for the candidacy. Check the like/dislike ratio on the video, mate. The more people who see it, the more who loathe it.

I think Roy brings up a valid point. One does not need to be open about one's sexuality in order to serve in any position, either in the public or private sectors. My grandmother had a delightful phrase regarding this: "I wish homophobes would stop flaming gay people. And I wish gay people would stop flaming, period!" To translate, she had absolutely no issue with anybody choosing how to live their own lives and how to conduct their personal business - she only took offense when they shoved it in the faces of others. I think you would find that a lot of society (including gays) would tend to agree with that position... after all, how do you think they feel when the exaggerated merits of a straight lifestyle are shoved down their throats?

Being open about one's sexuality doesn't mean dancing on a parade float in the military barracks and trying to fuck all the other dudes in the showers. It means when your comrades are discussing their girlfriends and wives back home and ask you, "So, you got anyone special back home?" you don't have to say, "Uhhh ... no" and lie about yourself. You should be free to say "yes, I have a boyfriend" or "yes, I have a husband and two kids and a dog" or "yeah I've got a few dudes I go around with". No different to a straight soldier saying "I have a girlfriend" or "I have a wife and two kids and a dog" or "I've got a few chicks I go around with". I realise nobody would ever really phrase the latter like that, but I'm just making the point. There's really no difference between any of those, and if the case is that heteros can say that and it's perfectly normal and okay but homos can't because they're gay and shouldn't need to be so open about it, then that would be bigotry.

I think Katie is right, and I don't mean to generalise like this and I know it doesn't apply in all cases, but I think it's easy if you're heterosexual to take for granted how much of a non-event it is if a man is in a social situation or meeting new people and says something like, "Oh, you're from France? So is my girlfriend." Conversely, to say "so is my boyfriend" in that same sentence invites anything from mild surprise and/or a flurry of polite or friendly questions, through to comments of "I wouldn't have picked that" or looks of disapproval and disgust, total awkwardness, people screwing up their faces in you, shaking their heads, refusing to shake your hand or if you're revealed as a homo mid-handshake, dropping your hand in disgust and walking away. (That's assuming relatively polite company, ignoring actual problems like homos being threatened, abused, bullied, bashed, and in many countries, imprisoned, beaten or killed.) Anyway, in most situations it is much easier for heteros to mention their significant other and have conversation continue normally than for homos to do the same thing. The amount of times I've mentioned my boyfriend with new work colleagues or friends of friends only to have them be all "OMG DID YOU JUST COME OUT TO ME" is ridiculous. I'm not coming out of anything; I'm completely open about being homosexual.

Anyway, TL;DR version: DADT's repeal was absolutely important, because it means homos can be themselves and talk about their loved ones and lives back home freely, IN THE SAME WAY THAT (MANY) HETEROS DO WITHOUT EVEN NOTICING.

Now, I haven't seen the vid yet, but from the one line people keep quoting it seems less like its "OMG HAT GAYZ" and more "We should all be able to embrace who we are publicly without fear of ridicule or harassment". I think its great that more and more people in the LGBT community can feel the freedom of being themselves without having to be afraid of what people think, thats what America is all about. But not all Americans enjoy that freedom anymore. It seems to be popular to bash Christians in any capacity, and I remember in High school having to be afraid to let people know because I was brutally harassed, and even in the Christian club that met after school we weren't safe from taunts and people throwing things at us. This is wrong no matter who you are. We wouldn't tolerate it if it were done to minorities, or jews, or muslims, or gays, so we shouldn't tolerate it when its done to Christians, even if we don't believe in the same things.

We should all stand up for every other American's right to be who they are without fear, regardless if we follow the same path.

The Rick Perry video contains very thinly-veiled anti-gay sentiment, period. However, I do agree with you, I don't like the Christian or anything-else bashing, either. There shouldn't be this discrimination, either positive or negative. The opportunities and dignities of the world should be no different whether you are homosexual or a Christian, and of course, it should be pointed out that those two groups are not mutually exclusive; there are loads of homosexual Christians. Freedom encompasses both sexuality and religion, and as long is nobody is being hurt or threatened with either of those, they ought to be protected.

I think you're missing the entire point of why DADT is so fucking horrific. DADT was a band-aid of surrender, saying "well if no one will vote to NOT kick out gay service members, why don't we just never talk about it?" Under DADT being gay in the military was still disallowed. Regardless, no your orientation doesn't matter in your job. That's the point. If you can get fired from your job for accidentally letting slip "Yes, on Christmas my family likes to drive through the neighborhood to look at Christmas lights. Funny story actually, last year my boyfriend - OOPS DISCHARGED" - there is something seriously wrong. Straight people take for granted how often they can mention their significant others. Why should some people have to hide their personal life when sharing your personal life is the norm for everyone else?

It's like disallowing redheads from serving. If you make all redheads shave their heads, no one knows that they have red hair. But why fucking bother? Hair color doesn't matter, attraction doesn't matter. Period.

Well said, thank you.

[Roy Karrde]

I call bullshit. It gives him tons more advertisement as an anti-homo fundamentalist who is hated rather than considered for the candidacy. Check the like/dislike ratio on the video, mate. The more people who see it, the more who loathe it.

Really? The man is going after the Social Conservative vote, in a closed election. Who is going to hate him? The Libertarians? They will vote for Paul. The Liberals and Democrats? They can't vote in the Iowa Caucus, and if he some how makes it to the Convention, this ad will be long gone as there will be more recent things to run at him with. The Tea Party and Centrist Republicans? They are battling over Gingrich and Newt.

In Iowa, the candidate who locks down the Social Conservative vote, will have a very good showing. And that is who the ad is geared toward.

The Rick Perry video contains very thinly-veiled anti-gay sentiment, period.

Not quite. To quote a local radio show host today: It is pointing out a disconnect, look at what we tolerate, we tolerate homosexuality in the military, but we don't tolerate a kid bringing a candy cane to school with a Jesus message attached to it to give to a buddy in the third grade. There is nothing anti gay, thinly veiled or not, about pointing the inconsistency out.