Black rejection of gays lethal


Dr. Tripp

Well-Known Member
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/tucker/2005/061905.html

Black rejection of gays lethal
Published on: 06/19/05
CYNTHIA TUCKER

Black Americans represent only 12 percent of the population, but we account for more than half of all new cases of HIV/AIDS. That frightening fact was one of the headline statistics to emerge from a conference in Atlanta last week held by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The highest rate of infection in the country occurs among bisexual black men. And that has implications for black women, who are 19 times more likely to be infected than white women. That's because so many black men have unprotected sex with other men but then conceal that fact and have unprotected sex with women, too.

Yet, there has been little activity that would suggest a crisis, especially among those activists who can usually be counted on to draw attention to the suffering of black Americans. Where are the rallies and town hall meetings, the urgent press conferences, the demands for more money for research and prevention? The usual suspects ? Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the leadership of the NAACP ? have had little to say about a plague spreading like wildfire.

Perhaps that's because they'd have to aim their criticism within, not just at the irresponsible sexual behavior that spreads HIV but also at the demoralizing prejudice against gays that shares the blame. Black Americans harbor a profound homophobia that assists the spread of HIV by driving men to have sex with other men "on the down low."

Of course, white America shares that prejudice. You only have to recall the outing of former New Jersey Gov. James McGreevey to remember that some gay white men also engage in surreptitious gay sex and expose their wives and girlfriends to HIV. But black Americans are far more vulnerable in so many ways ? including access to health care ? that homophobia does more damage.

Some sociologists and other observers believe that gay or bisexual black men are more afraid to come out of the closet than whites because they already face racial discrimination and are reluctant to take on the added burden of homophobia. After all, they'd face that in their own homes and churches.

Atlanta writer E. Lynn Harris, who rocketed to fame and fortune with a series of spicy novels about black men who secretly have sex with other men, wrote in Essence: "The truth is that most brothers who are attracted to men are desperately afraid of revealing it. . . . Many . . . fear that . . . they'll be drummed out of their families, destroying their only safe haven in an already unwelcoming society."

Though AIDS researchers have suspected for years that a culture of clandestine gay sex was helping to fuel the epidemic, the "down low" syndrome has only recently become widely known. Last year, J.L. King wrote a book ? "On the Down Low: A Journey Into the Lives of 'Straight' Black Men Who Sleep with Men" ? about his secret life. And Essence, a magazine oriented toward black women, has published several pieces about the down low phenomenon.

But those revelations have produced more recriminations than introspection. Some Essence letter writers were furious that the magazine dared broach the subject.

"A brother writes a book and goes on Oprah warning sisters about men who are infecting them with AIDS. This is pointing fingers at black men, who aren't the only people living on the down low," wrote one. Another said: "How dare you print an article shaming our people? [The article] misrepresented the black male, and [it] was repulsive and ignorant."

The gay-bashing from black clergy continues unabated, as well. In December, a leading black Atlanta minister, Bishop Eddie Long, staged a march to highlight his opposition to gay marriage. He attracted thousands of black marchers, including the Rev. Bernice King, daughter of slain civil rights leader the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. (By contrast, his widow, Coretta Scott King, has been among the rare voices condemning black homophobia.)

Fear. Hatred. Secrets and lies. That's the sort of climate in which HIV thrives.
 
To give you all a quick synopsis, Cynthia Tucker is one of the most hated journalists in Atlanta?s liberal black community. Albeit sometimes she makes good points, her unabated bashing of African American leaders and institutions are legendary. Consequently, when she does make good points, her message is overshadowed by the perpetual and negative "cow towing" that she has done on behalf of extremist conservatives. To give you all an idea, she is a staunch believer that HBCU(s) have outlived their usefulness. Her attack on the civil rights community is the rule rather than the exception. The compliment that she gave Corretta Scott King in this article is one compared to 99 insults. :lol:
 



JSU said:
...Black rejection of gays lethal...CYNTHIA TUCKER
...Black Americans harbor a profound homophobia that assists the spread of HIV by driving men to have sex with other men "on the down low."...

Really??!! I just abject behavior is not for those of a weak constitution.


JSU said:
...Black rejection of gays lethal...CYNTHIA TUCKER
...The gay-bashing from black clergy continues unabated, as well. In December, a leading black Atlanta minister, Bishop Eddie Long, staged a march to highlight his opposition to gay marriage. He attracted thousands of black marchers, including the Rev. Bernice King, daughter of slain civil rights leader the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. (By contrast, his widow, Coretta Scott King, has been among the rare voices condemning black homophobia.)

Fear. Hatred. Secrets and lies. That's the sort of climate in which HIV thrives.

Since when did opposition to homosexual marriage come to be homophobic? Homosexuality is clearly identified as wrong in the scriptures. Would Ms. Tucker have the clergy remain silent on the subject? Would she have us to compromise the scriptures? Did she hear what Bishop Long and Rev. King had to say on the subject? Did they not call upon the church to embrace the homosexual but not his homosexuality? Hardly homophobic.
 
dacontinent said:
Really??!! I just abject behavior is not for those of a weak constitution.




Since when did opposition to homosexual marriage come to be homophobic? Homosexuality is clearly identified as wrong in the scriptures. Would Ms. Tucker have the clergy remain silent on the subject? Would she have us to compromise the scriptures? Did she hear what Bishop Long and Rev. King had to say on the subject? Did they not call upon the church to embrace the homosexual but not his homosexuality? Hardly homophobic.

^^^^^^^^

In all due respect, this type of thinking is part of the problem. We really need to move beyond petty religious debates. Many people selectively use the Bible to discriminate against homosexuals and justify homophobia as such. I'm not going to touch homosexuality and the Bible because that is another thread all by itself. In this matter, I would argue that we live under the constitution not the Bible. The Constitution provides for the freedom of religion which inherently means freedom from religion if one chooses. Our laws should be based on the constitution and what's fair, not theocratic law.
 
lil_j said:
^^^^^^^^

In all due respect, this type of thinking is part of the problem. We really need to move beyond petty religious debates. Many people selectively use the Bible to discriminate against homosexuals and justify homophobia as such. I'm not going to touch homosexuality and the Bible because that is another thread all by itself. In this matter, I would argue that we live under the constitution not the Bible. The Constitution provides for the freedom of religion which inherently means freedom from religion if one chooses. Our laws should be based on the constitution and what's fair, not theocratic law.

:lol: Unfortunately, since she critiqued ministers, you can't exclude it from the conversation. Ministers are in the morality business. Her unwarranted back door attack on the civil rights community (Jesse, Al and the NAACP does not have equal time to defend themselves in this article) is also reflective in the writing. As I stated earlier, sometimes she makes good points. Oft times it is lost in her ultra conservative attacks. A wolf in sheep clothing is still a wolf. :lol:
 
:tup::lecture:
dacontinent said:
Really??!! I just abject behavior is not for those of a weak constitution.




Since when did opposition to homosexual marriage come to be homophobic? Homosexuality is clearly identified as wrong in the scriptures. Would Ms. Tucker have the clergy remain silent on the subject? Would she have us to compromise the scriptures? Did she hear what Bishop Long and Rev. King had to say on the subject? Did they not call upon the church to embrace the homosexual but not his homosexuality? Hardly homophobic.
 
lil_j said:
^^^^^^^^

In all due respect, this type of thinking is part of the problem. We really need to move beyond petty religious debates. Many people selectively use the Bible to discriminate against homosexuals and justify homophobia as such. I'm not going to touch homosexuality and the Bible because that is another thread all by itself. In this matter, I would argue that we live under the constitution not the Bible. The Constitution provides for the freedom of religion which inherently means freedom from religion if one chooses. Our laws should be based on the constitution and what's fair, not theocratic law.


In all due respect, this type of thinking is part of the problem. We really need to move beyond petty religious debates. Many people selectively use the Bible to discriminate against homosexuals and justify homophobia as such. I'm not going to touch homosexuality and the Bible because that is another thread all by itself.
icon13.gif

=============================================================

In this matter, I would argue that we live under the constitution not the Bible. The Constitution provides for the freedom of religion which inherently means freedom from religion if one chooses. Our laws should be based on the constitution and what's fair, not theocratic law.
__________________
icon14.gif

===========================================================
 
The high incarceration rates for Blacks and solicited and unsolicited sex (rapes) while in prison contribute greatly the spread of AIDS. As a result, a man who may not be gay is very likely to be infected.
 
dacontinent said:
Really??!! I just abject behavior is not for those of a weak constitution.




Since when did opposition to homosexual marriage come to be homophobic? Homosexuality is clearly identified as wrong in the scriptures. Would Ms. Tucker have the clergy remain silent on the subject? Would she have us to compromise the scriptures? Did she hear what Bishop Long and Rev. King had to say on the subject? Did they not call upon the church to embrace the homosexual but not his homosexuality? Hardly homophobic.

What is the black clergy answer to this epidemic? Is it "just say no" and you are going to burn in hell. I got news for you my brother, it's not working. Marriage is a civil contract not a religious convenant. And yes, discrimination against those who are homosexual is "homophobic". Jesus did not condemn the lepers in his time.
 
J C said:
What is the black clergy answer to this epidemic? Is it "just say no" and you are going to burn in hell. I got news for you my brother, it's not working. Marriage is a civil contract not a religious convenant. And yes, discrimination against those who are homosexual is "homophobic". Jesus did not condemn the lepers in his time.

The bible does however condemn gays. Marriage IS a religious covenant. Its the rights that the government gives to a married couple that I guess you could say comprise the civil contract. I say give them their contract...we have no right to tell them they can't have those rights. But the government should not be made to redefine the term marriage. That should always be kept as a bond between a man and a woman.
 
BLAQUE PRINCE said:
The bible does however condemn gays. Marriage IS a religious covenant. Its the rights that the government gives to a married couple that I guess you could say comprise the civil contract. I say give them their contract...we have no right to tell them they can't have those rights. But the government should not be made to redefine the term marriage. That should always be kept as a bond between a man and a woman.

If you want to start another thread about what the Bible says about homosexuality and the context in which is written, fine. I would be happy to debate the subject matter. But to stay on topic, the incriminating attitude that the black community at large has against (black) gays does contribute to a large underground (DL) community. That is something that really has to be addressed.
 
Can we agree that monogamous relationships should be encouraged whether they are gay or straight. Monogamous relationships would contribute to lessening the spread of this terrible disease that has ravage many parts of the world and is taken a toll within our communities.
 
J C said:
Can we agree that monogamous relationships should be encouraged whether they are gay or straight. Monogamous relationships would contribute to lessening the spread of this terrible disease that has ravage many parts of the world and is taken a toll within our communities.


Thats a good start.
 



When it comes to gay and bi-sexual dudes. you have to deal with their mentality and perspective. If you don't have that as a foundation, trying to formulate a solution to this problem is futile.
 
northern tiger said:
When it comes to gay and bi-sexual dudes. you have to deal with their mentality and perspective. If you don't have that as a foundation, trying to formulate a solution to this problem is futile.


Well what do you think "their" perspective is? As the article implies, I think their mentality and perspective has alot to do with the black cultural climate.
 
lil_j said:
If you want to start another thread about what the Bible says about homosexuality and the context in which is written, fine. I would be happy to debate the subject matter. But to stay on topic, the incriminating attitude that the black community at large has against (black) gays does contribute to a large underground (DL) community. That is something that really has to be addressed.

There isn't much to discuss...the message is pretty cut and dry.

As for staying on topic...if you are going to discuss gay MARRIAGE then you really can't have a discussion without the bible. Taking part in homosexual activity is a sin like any other and we should not hate them any more than any other sinner and for that matter any more than ourselves. But it is not hate to state the homosexuality is wrong any more than it is to state that fornication is wrong. We have got to get off this hate labeling crap just because someone states the facts.

To tell the truth gays are doing more to force the DL mentality than anyone. It does not help that they have gay pride month and parades to go out of the way and let everyone know their sexual preferences. And now corporate America is getting in on supporting these activities. Thats bringing attention to your sexual preference in the work place when we could all leave that at home where it should be. You end up with folk that don't want that spotlight on them and go the DL route to hide the fact.
 
J C said:
What is the black clergy answer to this epidemic? Is it "just say no" and you are going to burn in hell. I got news for you my brother, it's not working. Marriage is a civil contract not a religious convenant. And yes, discrimination against those who are homosexual is "homophobic". Jesus did not condemn the lepers in his time.

I am a clergyman and I am black, but I cannot speak for the entire category. Unfortunately, the clergy in general has been too quiet on the subject.

The answer is to say "YES" to the God and to His Word because you don't have to burn in hell: NO ONE DOES. I have preponderance of evidence that it DOES work. No excuses; no rationalizing. Just surrender to the Word of God. No one has to practice homosexuality. There are choices to be made.

In this country, marriage can be a Judeo-Christian covenant (I can speak for those), it can be a covenant in other belief systems (I don't know enough about them), and can be a civil contract.

Phobia is fear. We discriminate against plenty of things that we don't fear. Right is right; wrong is wrong. Fear does not hae to be involved in that process.

J C said:
Can we agree that monogamous relationships should be encouraged whether they are gay or straight. Monogamous relationships would contribute to lessening the spread of this terrible disease that has ravage many parts of the world and is taken a toll within our communities.
No, we cannot. It would be akin to encouraging reading at a 3rd grade level instead of motivating people to earn graduate degrees. Since there are a good number of people who do not achieve at that level, it would help some. However, if that became the standard, society would be destroyed in a matter of a couple of decades.

Try this: Remain a virgin; marry a virgin; develop your relationship and stay married and faithful to that sexual relationship for as long as you both shall live.

Now, what does that sound like?
 
J C said:
What is the black clergy answer to this epidemic? Is it "just say no" and you are going to burn in hell. I got news for you my brother, it's not working. Marriage is a civil contract not a religious convenant. And yes, discrimination against those who are homosexual is "homophobic". Jesus did not condemn the lepers in his time.

I am a clergyman and I am black, but I cannot speak for the entire category. Unfortunately, the clergy in general has been too quiet on the subject.

The answer is to say "YES" to the God and to His Word because you don't have to burn in hell: NO ONE DOES. I have preponderance of evidence that it DOES work. No excuses; no rationalizing. Just surrender to the Word of God. No one has to practice homosexuality. There are choices to be made.

In this country, marriage can be a Judeo-Christian covenant (I can speak for those), it can be a covenant in other belief systems (I don't know enough about them), and can be a civil contract.

Phobia is fear. We discriminate against plenty of things that we don't fear. Right is right; wrong is wrong. Fear does not hae to be involved in that process.

J C said:
Can we agree that monogamous relationships should be encouraged whether they are gay or straight. Monogamous relationships would contribute to lessening the spread of this terrible disease that has ravage many parts of the world and is taken a toll within our communities.
No, we cannot. It would be akin to encouraging reading at a 3rd grade level instead of motivating people to earn graduate degrees. Since there are a good number of people who do not achieve at that level, it would help some. However, if that became the standard, society would be destroyed in a matter of a couple of decades.

Try this: Marriage is for heterosexuals. Remain a virgin until you marry a virgin. Develop your marriage relationship and stay married and faithful to that sexual relationship for as long as you both shall live.

Now, what does that sound like?
 
JROCK said:
To give you all a quick synopsis, Cynthia Tucker is one of the most hated journalists in Atlanta?s liberal black community. Albeit sometimes she makes good points, her unabated bashing of African American leaders and institutions are legendary. Consequently, when she does make good points, her message is overshadowed by the perpetual and negative "cow towing" that she has done on behalf of extremist conservatives. To give you all an idea, she is a staunch believer that HBCU(s) have outlived their usefulness. Her attack on the civil rights community is the rule rather than the exception. The compliment that she gave Corretta Scott King in this article is one compared to 99 insults. :lol:

In my and others' opinions, she has not lived. She acts as if her experience in life is limited. There are so many things that she has not recognized or noticed. While I will say that some Black leaders needs to retire, her bashing of them is too simplistic. Her attitude of public HBCUs is quite negative.
 
J C said:
Can we agree that monogamous relationships should be encouraged whether they are gay or straight. Monogamous relationships would contribute to lessening the spread of this terrible disease that has ravage many parts of the world and is taken a toll within our communities.

Good Point. Punks aint the only ones spreading HIV.
 
BLAQUE PRINCE said:
There isn't much to discuss...the message is pretty cut and dry.

As for staying on topic...if you are going to discuss gay MARRIAGE then you really can't have a discussion without the bible. Taking part in homosexual activity is a sin like any other and we should not hate them any more than any other sinner and for that matter any more than ourselves. But it is not hate to state the homosexuality is wrong any more than it is to state that fornication is wrong. We have got to get off this hate labeling crap just because someone states the facts.

No one sin is greater than the other Phil, so whether you just told a bold face lie to your boss and why you called in sick last week or if you just ran threw the entire football team. A sin is a sin. We are all sinners. So stack rape, lying, stealing, over eating, laziness, and gayness in the same boat.

BLAQUE PRINCE said:
To tell the truth gays are doing more to force the DL mentality than anyone. It does not help that they have gay pride month and parades to go out of the way and let everyone know their sexual preferences. And now corporate America is getting in on supporting these activities. Thats bringing attention to your sexual preference in the work place when we could all leave that at home where it should be. You end up with folk that don't want that spotlight on them and go the DL route to hide the fact.

Agreed. Who gives a fugg who you sleeping with? I do not want to know about any of my coworkers sexual Hookups, victims, partners, or spouses. That type of behavior should not be tolorated at the workplace....whether it be gay, straight, with a dawg or whatever. Corporate America is turning into one big Reality Show anyway.
 
dacontinent said:
I am a clergyman and I am black, but I cannot speak for the entire category. Unfortunately, the clergy in general has been too quiet on the subject.

The answer is to say "YES" to the God and to His Word because you don't have to burn in hell: NO ONE DOES. I have preponderance of evidence that it DOES work. No excuses; no rationalizing. Just surrender to the Word of God. No one has to practice homosexuality. There are choices to be made.

In this country, marriage can be a Judeo-Christian covenant (I can speak for those), it can be a covenant in other belief systems (I don't know enough about them), and can be a civil contract.

Phobia is fear. We discriminate against plenty of things that we don't fear. Right is right; wrong is wrong. Fear does not hae to be involved in that process.


No, we cannot. It would be akin to encouraging reading at a 3rd grade level instead of motivating people to earn graduate degrees. Since there are a good number of people who do not achieve at that level, it would help some. However, if that became the standard, society would be destroyed in a matter of a couple of decades.

Try this: Marriage is for heterosexuals. Remain a virgin until you marry a virgin. Develop your marriage relationship and stay married and faithful to that sexual relationship for as long as you both shall live.

Now, what does that sound like?

DaContinent, A compliment, you are consistent. I realize we come from two separate positions. Your profession is spiritually based and I respect your position. I come from a purely secular position when discussing issues such as the ones in this thread and try to deal in the here and now. Now don't get me wrong, the general teachings of Christ have shaped my views (love, tolerant, respect, fairness). I am not a literalist (Christian conservative orthodoxy). I have seen where biblical scriptures have been used to justify inhumane treatment of other humans and believe it continues today. Not all of Christianity of the 1st millenian applies to the modern world. We will have to agree to disagree on such issues. Never interpret it as being personal. Peace
 
Back
Top