• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Right-wing Jews, Christians, and Muslims unite to -- what else? -- hate gays

Status
Not open for further replies.

FoneBone

Member
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/31/international/worldspecial/31gay.html

International gay leaders are planning a 10-day WorldPride festival and parade in Jerusalem in August, saying they want to make a statement about tolerance and diversity in the Holy City, home to three great religious traditions.

Now major leaders of the three faiths - Christianity, Judaism and Islam - are making a rare show of unity to try to stop the festival. They say the event would desecrate the city and convey the erroneous impression that homosexuality is acceptable.

"They are creating a deep and terrible sorrow that is unbearable," Shlomo Amar, Israel's Sephardic chief rabbi, said yesterday at a news conference in Jerusalem attended by Israel's two chief rabbis, the patriarchs of the Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Armenian churches, and three senior Muslim prayer leaders. "It hurts all of the religions. We are all against it."

Abdel Aziz Bukhari, a Sufi sheik, added: "We can't permit anybody to come and make the Holy City dirty. This is very ugly and very nasty to have these people come to Jerusalem."

Israeli authorities have not indicated what action, if any, they might take to limit the events. Banning the festival would seem unlikely, though the government could withhold the required permits for specific events, like a parade.

Interfaith agreement is unusual in Israel. The leaders' joint opposition was initially generated by the Rev. Leo Giovinetti, an evangelical pastor from San Diego who is both a veteran of the American culture war over homosexuality and a frequent visitor to Israel, where he has formed relationships with rabbis and politicians.

Organizers of the gay pride event, Jerusalem WorldPride 2005, said that 75 non-Orthodox rabbis had signed a statement of support for the event, and that Christian and Muslim leaders as well as Israeli politicians were expected to announce their support soon. They said they were dismayed to see that what united their opponents was their objection to homosexuality.

"That is something new I've never witnessed before, such an attempt to globalize bigotry," said Hagai El-Ad, the executive director of Jerusalem Open House, a gay and lesbian group that is the host for the festival. "It's quite sad and ironic that these religious figures are coming together around such a negative message."

Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum, co-chairwoman of the festival and the rabbi of Congregation Beth Simchat Torah, a gay synagogue in New York City, said the controversy was another sign that each religion had become polarized between its liberal and conservative wings.

The global Anglican Communion split deeply over homosexuality in the last two years after its American affiliate ordained an openly gay bishop and the Canada affiliate decided to allow blessings of same-sex unions.

"I reject that they have the right to define religion in such a narrow way," Rabbi Kleinbaum said of religious leaders who denounce homosexuality. "Gay and lesbian people are saying we are equal partners in religious communities, and we believe in a religious world in which all are created in God's image."

The festival is planned for Aug. 18-28 and is expected to draw thousands of visitors from dozens of countries. The theme is "Love Without Borders," and a centerpiece will be a parade on Aug. 25 through Jerusalem, a city that remains deeply conservative, though other parts of Israel have become increasingly accepting of gays in recent years. Other events include a film festival, art exhibits and a conference for clerics.

When the first WorldPride festival was held five years ago in Rome, religious opposition came from the Vatican, while secular opposition came from a neo-Fascist group that vowed to hold a counterdemonstration. But the neo-Fascists canceled their demonstration, the march came off peacefully, and even a few center-right politicians joined many thousands of marchers.

One day later, however, Pope John Paul II appeared on a balcony over St. Peter's Square and delivered a message expressing his "bitterness" that the gay festival had gone forward, calling it an "offense to the Christian values of a city that is so dear to the hearts of Catholics across the world."

Both WorldPride festivals were initiated by an umbrella group, InterPride, that says its mission is to promote gay rights internationally.

The outcry over the 2005 festival will not be confined to Israel. The American evangelical leader who helped to galvanize the opposition, Mr. Giovinetti, is the senior pastor of Mission Valley Christian Fellowship, an independent church that meets in a hotel in Southern California. A former band leader in Las Vegas, he is also host of a radio program heard on stations around the United States.

Neither he nor other evangelical American leaders were at the news conference in Jerusalem, which was called by the chief rabbinate of Israel. But by all accounts Mr. Giovinetti played a crucial role in spreading the first alarms among religious leaders about the gay festival.

He said he had first heard about WorldPride from a congregation member who had told Mr. Giovinetti that he was gay for many years and still monitored gay Web sites. Mr. Giovinetti said he alerted Israeli politicians and religious leaders.

Mr. Giovinetti circulated a petition against the festival, titled "Homosexuals to Desecrate Jerusalem," which he said had been signed by every member of the ultra-Orthodox Shas Party in the Israeli Parliament. Another American who helped bring together the opposition was Rabbi Yehuda Levin, of the Rabbinical Alliance of America, which says it represents more than 1,000 American Orthodox rabbis. At the news conference in Jerusalem, he called the festival "the spiritual rape of the Holy City." He said, "This is not the homo land, this is the Holy Land."

Annual marches by homosexuals have become routine in Tel Aviv, a secular coastal city. For the past three years, gay parades have also been staged in Jerusalem. Religious groups have complained, but the police have issued permits for the events, which have been held without any serious incidents.

Laurie Goodstein reported from New York for this article and Greg Myre from Jerusalem.
 

DarienA

The black man everyone at Activision can agree on
Incredible... homosexuals have done something with the 3 religions that folks said could never be done....

This is mind-numbingly dumb.
 

RiZ III

Member
Im liberal and all, but these guys area really pushing it. Why must they have their little parade such a conservative and historically religous city? Im sorry but thats just stupid and asking for trouble.
 

levious

That throwing stick stunt of yours has boomeranged on us.
RiZ III said:
Why must they have their little parade such a conservative and historically religous city?

I'm guessing it's to make a statement about tolerance and diversity in the Holy City, home to three great religious traditions.

Makes me sad that the old slogan, "We're here, we're queer, get used to it," no longer seems to get used.
 
RiZ III said:
Im liberal and all, but these guys area really pushing it. Why must they have their little parade such a conservative and historically religous city? Im sorry but thats just stupid and asking for trouble.
They do have parades in Oklahoma, so maybe doing it in Jerusalem might be possible. I'm not aware of how Jerusalem might vote on certain issues. As for historically religious cities part, perhaps it would be better to start making inroads into conservative minds. If we make it seem inevitable that homosexuality will be accepted, then perhaps they will give up faster. Maybe not. Either way, it is a bold statement.

There is also the danger of violence, but looking at the silver lining, perhaps a gay martyr will be made that will humanize the rest of us.

iceman said:
Ever heard of the crusades?
The crusaders came with a willingness to engage in violence. I'm not too sure about this gay parade being willing to physically fight while there.
 
segasonic said:
They really should do this in Tel-Aviv, fits much better I think...
Tel Aviv has been getting parades for a long time already. Jerusalem has only gotten small parades so far. Perhaps it's time to take the initiative and expand the boundaries?
 

RiZ III

Member
Whats the point of gay parades again? I see your peoples point about making 'inroads' and all. But why do gay people have to march through the streets saying they're gay? Its abnoxious. I mean, I'm not going to stop homosexual people from having their style of life nor am I going to condemn them to hell, but marching through the streets of Jerusalem is just going to piss people off. A lot of people, like myself, don't exactly approve of homosexuality but we don't care if they live the way they live as long as homosexuality doesn't intrude our lives. By having a parade through Jerusalem, homosexuality is stepping on 'our turf.'

Damn it I sound like a hick. I'm not a homophobe, hell one of the guys living with me in my old apt was gay and so is one of my cousins, but just something about a gay parade in Jersulem kinda ticks me off.
 

Escape Goat

Member
RiZ III said:
Im liberal and all, but these guys area really pushing it. Why must they have their little parade such a conservative and historically religous city? Im sorry but thats just stupid and asking for trouble.


So one should never come out of the closet because they're just asking for trouble right? The reason they do that is to give the world the finger. A protest wouldn't garner much attention but a gay parade would be harder not to notice. And you're right, these people are exposing themselves to harm but tht doesn't invalidate their purpose.
 
RiZ III said:
You have to march through Jerusalem to come out of the closet?

It's a parade celebrating diversity, not coming out of the closet. You can't expect things to change if you never do anything to show there are different views.
 
RiZ III said:
Whats the point of gay parades again? I see your peoples point about making 'inroads' and all. But why do gay people have to march through the streets saying they're gay? Its abnoxious. I mean, I'm not going to stop homosexual people from having their style of life nor am I going to condemn them to hell, but marching through the streets of Jerusalem is just going to piss people off.
I'm not sure as I've never attended one myself. My guess is that one of their functions is to have an event where people in similar situations can walk in solidarity.

A lot of people, like myself, don't exactly approve of homosexuality but we don't care if they live the way they live as long as homosexuality doesn't intrude our lives. By having a parade through Jerusalem, homosexuality is stepping on 'our turf.'
Aren't those public streets? No one is going into their houses or private locations. What makes Jerusalem only one group's or groups' turf? Of course, I'm not a citizen of Israel. However, I do understand that they do have one of the more liberal laws concerning homosexuality.
 
RiZ III said:
Whats the point of gay parades again?
One of the key points is to promote visibility, especially in cultures in which people are expected to be in the closet. If you grew up having to live a lie about who you are for fear of being kicked out of your home, beaten, kicked out of your church and generally being the recepticle of dimwits' generalized xenophobia, you might understand why people have historically desired to participate in a pride march.

I mean, I'm not going to stop homosexual people from having their style of life
That's right. And you couldn't if you wanted to.

A lot of people, like myself, don't exactly approve of homosexuality but we don't care if they live the way they live as long as homosexuality doesn't intrude our lives. By having a parade through Jerusalem, homosexuality is stepping on 'our turf.'
Tough. It's not about your approval. And how is this "your turf" exactly? This is an especially amusing and ironic statement considering that the three religions warring for this part of the world all have an "our turf" attitude that's meant the bloodshed of thousands. You might want to think about the repercussions of your own territorrialism.

I'm not a homophobe, hell one of the guys living with me in my old apt was gay and so is one of my cousins, but just something about a gay parade in Jersulem kinda ticks me off.
Some of my best friends are black, no really. I just don't want them living near me. Or in my schools. Or my relatives to date them. Do you have any idea of how you sound?
 

RiZ III

Member
Fred you make some good points, but I think your taking my statements a bit out of context.

By 'our turf' I meant a city of religous significance. Three religions that really don't approve of homosexuality.

Either way, when I think about it, it really doesn't matter. Yea, its a public place so they can do whatever they want. I really don't think parades are necessary but I guess they have full rights to do it. So..yea.
 

Pellham

Banned
Riz is demonstrating the attitude that is prevalent in that general region of the world. Let's face it, homosexuality is not accepted over there. It might be in 50 years, 100 years, who knows when, but doing a parade in a city that could possibly get you killed or physically harmed by the locals is not a good idea IMO.
 

Uter

Member
Hammy said:
There is also the danger of violence, but looking at the silver lining, perhaps a gay martyr will be made that will humanize the rest of us.

Right... Because without complete acceptance of the gay lifestyle people are inherently dehumanized... :lol :lol
 

FoneBone

Member
Uter said:
Right... Because without complete acceptance of the gay lifestyle people are inherently dehumanized... :lol :lol
Viewing them as undeserving of equal rights isn't "dehumanizing?"

By the way, for the assholes who keep using that reasoning, the idea that you can be anti-equality and not be anti-gay or homophobic is utter, utter bullshit.
 

bionic77

Member
Hey they are still better then us. They just don't want gays to march around, we don't want to grant them essential medical treatment.

I think most people would rather have a doctor then a parade.
 
Pellham said:
Riz is demonstrating the attitude that is prevalent in that general region of the world. Let's face it, homosexuality is not accepted over there. It might be in 50 years, 100 years, who knows when, but doing a parade in a city that could possibly get you killed or physically harmed by the locals is not a good idea IMO.

Well, they did schedule it explicitly a holy city for 3 religions, ostensiably for the oportunity to rub it in the noses of those who regard homosexual acts as a sin; I highly doubt they're out to change opinions.

"It hurts all of the religions."

I say go for it then!

*snatches away blunt object*

No.

Iceman said:
Is this a new extreme sport?

Ever heard of the crusades?

"They're copies of the old Knights Templar uniform, but we washed them a ton of times till the red went pink..."
 
Uter said:
Right... Because without complete acceptance of the gay lifestyle people are inherently dehumanized... :lol :lol
I didn't say that. Don't put words in my mouth. You do know that there is a subset of people who literally hate gays? Perhaps you didn't. But now you do.
 

Uter

Member
FoneBone said:
Viewing them as undeserving of equal rights isn't "dehumanizing?"

Who implied or stated that they were undeserving of "equal rights"? Since when would a decision by the authorities of a city not to allow a 10 day festival amount to infringement of their "equal rights"? Way to twist the argument into something it isn't.

FoneBone said:
By the way, for the assholes who keep using that reasoning, the idea that you can be anti-equality and not be anti-gay or homophobic is utter, utter bullshit.

Wow, thanks for the petty underhanded insult...

What exactly is meant by "equality" by you to begin with? Your assumption that your definitions of equality and rights are the only ones that are legitimate is ridiculous at best. As if there is no difference between concepts of equality of opportunity and equality of outcome?... And just how do you propose that society creates your ideal of equality WITHOUT infringing on the rights of others?
 
Uter said:
Who implied or stated that they were undeserving of "equal rights"? Since when would a decision by the authorities of a city not to allow a 10 day festival amount to infringement of their "equal rights"? Way to twist the argument into something it isn't.
One of the targets of gay parades are those who oppose equal rights. You should do a quick Google search on the opponents of gay equality. They exist.

What exactly is meant by "equality" by you to begin with? Your assumption that your definitions of equality and rights are the only ones that are legitimate is ridiculous at best. As if there is no difference between concepts of equality of opportunity and equality of outcome?... And just how do you propose that society creates your ideal of equality WITHOUT infringing on the rights of others?
I'm going to assume that Fonebone meant marriage equality. Under the law, we want "equality of opportunity". With the ability to marry, hopefully the outcomes will be the same for either homosexuals or heterosexuals.

And tell me this, how would gay equality "infring[e] on the rights of others"?

heezzi said:
You must be as dense as the Schiavo thread suggests. Be careful around statements that use the word "every". Do a bit more background research next time.
 

FoneBone

Member
Uter said:
Who implied or stated that they were undeserving of "equal rights"? Since when would a decision by the authorities of a city not to allow a 10 day festival amount to infringement of their "equal rights"? Way to twist the argument into something it isn't.
Nice try, but you were referring to "the gay lifestyle," not to a single event.



Wow, thanks for the petty underhanded insult...

What exactly is meant by "equality" by you to begin with? Your assumption that your definitions of equality and rights are the only ones that are legitimate is ridiculous at best. As if there is no difference between concepts of equality of opportunity and equality of outcome?... And just how do you propose that society creates your ideal of equality WITHOUT infringing on the rights of others?
Ah, I see. The argument that accepting homosexuality and gay marriage is somehow harmful to straight people.

This is clearly a derail (one I initiated, admittedly), so I should just say this: :lol :lol :lol
 

Uter

Member
Hammy said:
There is also the danger of violence, but looking at the silver lining, perhaps a gay martyr will be made that will humanize the rest of us.

Uter said:
Right... Because without complete acceptance of the gay lifestyle people are inherently dehumanized... :lol :lol

Hammy said:
I didn't say that. Don't put words in my mouth. You do know that there is a subset of people who literally hate gays? Perhaps you didn't. But now you do.

I wasn't saying that you said that, I was proposing that as the logical end of your statement.

"perhaps a gay martyr will be made that will humanize the rest of us." By "us" who exactly are you referring to? And how exactly would a "gay martyr" "humanize" everyone, who assumedly is dehumanized? As if being against the gay lifestyle inherently deprives a person of compassion or civility? Ridiculous...
 
Uter said:
I wasn't saying that you said that, I was proposing that as the logical end of your statement.

"perhaps a gay martyr will be made that will humanize the rest of us." By "us" who exactly are you referring to? And how exactly would a "gay martyr" "humanize" everyone, who assumedly is dehumanized?
us=homosexuals
Are you aware that deaths of individuals can cause observers to feel sympathy?

As if being against the gay lifestyle inherently deprives a person of compassion or civility? Ridiculous...
Didn't say that.
 

bionic77

Member
lockii said:
I'm pretty sure Atheism and Buddhism don't explicitly state anything against homosexuality.

Atheism is a religion?

I thought of Buddhism when I asked this question, but I really know very little about the religion. I don't want to make a overbroad generalization, but from my limited experience it doesn't appear that Buddhists are any more tolerant then any other religions. Maybe that is a cultural thing for Buddhists then as opposed to religious?
 
bionic77 said:
Atheism is a religion?

I thought of Buddhism when I asked this question, but I really know very little about the religion. I don't want to make a overbroad generalization, but from my limited experience it doesn't appear that Buddhists are any more tolerant then any other religions. Maybe that is a cultural thing for Buddhists then as opposed to religious?

From what I understand, Hinduism and Buddhism themselves do not mention homosexuality. However, there are cultural biases against gay people, and that may be what you see.
 

bionic77

Member
Hammy said:
From what I understand, Hinduism and Buddhism themselves do not mention homosexuality. However, there are cultural biases against gay people, and that may be what you see.

I don't know about Buddhism, but from what I heard during some lecture at my law school (about tolerance) there are at least some Hindi priests who preach against homosexuality. The panel didn't really mention Buddhism explicitly so I thought that might be the only religion that accepted it. The dude on the panel was Pakistani though, so he might not have mentioned Buddhism because he didn't have any experience with it.

I am admittedly ignorant on this stuff and was just curious.

If you want to see a place that is tolerant of gays, there can't be many more tolerant then my law school.
 

Uter

Member
Hammy said:
us=homosexuals
Are you aware that deaths of individuals can cause observers to feel sympathy?

Didn't say that.

ah, my bad. I didn't realize "us" was in reference to homosexuals, I thought you were referring to humanity at large. I think you can see how I might respond like that if it was stated how I assumed it was.

My mistake, sorry about the confusion. :D
 

Heezzi

Banned
Hammy said:
You must be as dense as the Schiavo thread suggests. Be careful around statements that use the word "every". Do a bit more background research next time.

You say this like I was saying every religion is doesn't condone gayness. I said yes because it was shorter than me saying "pretty much".

Let me stop talking to you before I catch the case of the gay.

Is that dense enough for you?
 
bionic77 said:
Is homosexuality a sin in every religion?
Heezzi said:
You say this like I was saying every religion is doesn't condone gayness. I said yes because it was shorter than me saying "pretty much".
1. "Pretty much" fails to describe the religions of over a billion people.
2. "Condon[ing] gayness" is not the same thing as being a "sin".

Let me stop talking to you before I catch the case of the gay.
You should try catching a bit of intelligence first.
 

Uter

Member
In any case, I think it entirely reasonable for leaders from major religions to be against a festival and parade being used as a statement by international gay leaders. Why it is only considered bigotry when it comes to religious groups and not other non-religious pressure groups who display a similiar intolerance of those who differ with them??
 
Uter said:
Why it is only considered bigotry when it comes to religious groups and not other non-religious pressure groups who display a similiar intolerance of those who differ with them??
You can always make a thread about such a specific incident on GAF if you feel it's bigotry...
 

pwn3d

Member
bionic77 said:
Is homosexuality a sin in every religion?

I think I read somewhere that in some Native American religions homosexuality is accepted and there are ceremonies for homosexual marriage. Unfortunately I forgot where I saw this, but if anyone else knows the details it would be interesting to know.
 

FoneBone

Member
I believe Uter's referring to me. I guess I consider myself intolerant of homophobia, and I make no apologies or excuses for it. Nor do I believe any are warranted.
 

Yamauchi

Banned
I suppose if conservatives go into gay bars and condemn them (which I have never seen), then they are allowed to do it vice versa.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom