Week Twelve - Civil Rights and Gay Rights
Share an idea or two from this week's reading. What was most interesting to you? What was most strange? How does the reading this week fit into issues and discussions we have had in this class?
Week Two - The Emergence of Civil Rights as A National Issue in the United States
Share an idea or two from this week's reading. What was most interesting to you? What was most strange? How does the reading this week fit into issues and discussions we have had in this class?
This week's reading concerning Civil Rights and LGBTQ Rights largely centers around the comparison of the Civil Rights Movement and the Gay Rights Movement. In the article "Are Gay Rights Civil Rights" by ABC News, the quote by Pastor Garland Hunt really struck me; in it, he is quoted saying, "Same-sex marriage has nothing to do with civil rights, this is an issue of morality." I find this ironic, because this argument could have been applied similarly through the institutions of slavery and the Jim Crow South, could it not? I firmly believe that definition of civil rights has transcended and evolved to encompass issues both issues of race but also beyond race into issues of livelihood. In this way, I argue that lgbtq rights are civil rights as well, regardless of belief system. The case of Obergefell v. Hodges is largely reminiscent of the Loving v. Virginia case deeming interracial marriage as legal. As the NPR article also mentions, race and sexuality are extremely intersectional. The pivotal Black Lives Matter movement was founded by queer African American women. Although I do think lgbtq rights are civil rights and that they are oftentimes intersectional, I do believe that there is a distinction between the two realms of sexuality/gender and race.
ReplyDeleteI highly agree with Lamisa. I think that to deny gay rights as civil rights does an injustice to a large marginalized group in America. Though the fights for these two different types of rights have been different, they nevertheless represent the importance of having civil liberties as citizens. Additionally, both have fought not just civil rights, but basic human rights. Protests like the Stonewall Riots and the March on Washington stand for far more than just needed changes in legislation. They were for the lives of victims lost due to their identities.
DeleteI will also agree with Lamisa on her observations. And though certainly distinct from each other, with their own sets of unique issues and caveats, racial rights and LGBTQ rights are certainly not mutually exclusive. I would not call it a common misconception, but there are certainly those that feel strongly about advances in LGBTQ rights hurting the status of minorities and marginalized racial and ethnic communities in the country. I think that as a country we need to acknowledge that a slight to one marginalized group is harmful on all groups pursuing justice. And officials must acknowledge that all are entitled to the pursuit of happiness, regardless of race, color, or creed.
DeleteFrom this week’s readings, I found the NPR interview on comparing the gay rights movements to the civil rights movement to be a particularly interesting work. I agree with the first part of the article which pushed back on lumping the civil rights movement and the gay rights movement together as African Americans faced serious forms of discrimination, segregation, and disenfranchisement based off of the color of their skin, something that could not be hidden. The interview raised some good points differentiating between the discrimination faced between gays and African Americans in that while African Americans could not go about their daily lives without escaping discrimination and prejudice based upon their race, gays could in a lot of sense go about their normal lives without facing the same obstacles. Although the two groups face share many similar struggles in their quests for equality, I agree that they should not be completely regarded as facing the same types of obstacles and responding with the same types of movements.
ReplyDeleteThis week's readings addressed what qualifies as "Civil Rights." A perspective from Reverend Ron Sailor aptly summarizes the distinction between politically protecting civil rights, and maintaining personal opinions that may differ from political ones. He says: "no matter how he feels personally or morally on the issue, it makes him uncomfortable to take this issue to the state or federal constitution" (ABC News, pp. 2). Despite the political conservatism that bore the civil rights movement of the 60s, this leader is able to empathize with the legalized oppression experienced by the LGBTQ community, because of the legalized oppression his own community faced and struggled to overcome. Perhaps this perspective isolate the question of what civil rights is: legalized discrimination against a group of people based on something they cannot change.
ReplyDeleteI found the news reports for this week interesting in regards to the debate over equating civil rights and LGBTQ rights. LGBTQ rights are not an issue of morality or behavior. I do not see how they this is not an issue of civil rights. What are addressed as "civil rights" issues have changed over time. It used to largely refer to labor rights, then it came to encompass discrimination in various settings against African Americans. So why can it not encompass issues of legalized discrimination against LGBTQ people? It makes no sense to me. Sure, the scenarios are different, but the general problem of legalized discrimination against an aspect of a person's identity is congruent. Marriage, labor rights, right to use public facilities, discrimination by private businesses, all of these are problems that I think safely fit inside the realm of "civil rights" issues.
ReplyDeleteThe articles assigned this week focused on the question: Are gay rights Civil Rights? While I think that gay rights qualify as Civil Rights, I do not believe that they have gone through anything remotely comparable to what blacks have gone through throughout the course of history, and therefore, a distinction should be made. The Civil Rights Movement should refer solely to the black Civil Rights Movement, and gay rights should be entirely separate. I could see how blacks would feel offended by the notion of joining the Gay Civil Rights within the African American Civil Rights Movement because they are wholly different.
ReplyDeleteLike others have stated, I found the debate over if gay rights are civil rights to be particularly interesting. I believe that all movements for equality are strengthened through an intersectional approach. The argument that says calling gay rights civil rights demeans the African American Civil Rights Movement it is restrictive and limits the push for the most equitable America possible. It is especially limiting for those who identify as both African American and a member of the LGTBQ+ community - people who already tend to be the most at risk for poverty, discrimination, and suicide. All people who identify as advocates for racial equality should also identify as advocates for women, LGTBQ+ people, immigrants, impoverished people, and all others who are marginalized. Only through this intersectional approach can America even begin to undo the many systematic and social institutions that hinder equity.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Isabel's testament. In order for a movement to grow in a way that is inclusive and beneficial to a vast number of individuals, an inter-sectional approach is necessary. By limiting a movement to one particular group, you are also limiting an individual who may identify with an outside movement. Rather than focusing on the factors that supposedly divide a movement, we should instead look for ways that will allow a connection to be formed between each space. In this way, an individual may express all forms of their identity rather than being limited to a singular way of being.
DeleteThe point of embracing intersectionality has become increasingly important. Trying to create divisions under what should be classified as civil rights has an isolating effect. I also agree with Britney's point that the focus needs to be finding connections rather than fixating on the differences.
DeleteI completely agree with Blakely. There is a need to engender intersectionality in our discussions of gay rights and civil rights. Any kind of exclusivity in social justice movements is detrimental to both the folks who are excluded and the movements themselves. LGBT folks must be included in the broader discussion of the advancement of Civil Rights.
DeleteI think the debate over whether gay rights should be considered civil rights begins to touch on a larger trend that I've noticed in politics and political organizing over the last year or so. I wonder, is the way in which the fracturing of group movements into contemporary identity politics hindering civil rights progress? (Demilio, p. 27 provides context for this) What does the shift from movements where people gathered to fight for an identity that was not guaranteed full rights to movements centered around highly-individualized personal/political experiences mean for our ability to successfully organize? For example, it seems to me that rather than trying to gather different people around a topic or movement, only people with that specific identity or experience are allowed to speak/take civil action toward the end of education/policy change. Perhaps controversially, I would move to consider gay rights as civil rights in hopes that as many people as possible would begin to see that the injustices faced by LGBTQ people are not so dissimilar from other forms of discrimination (i.e. racial discrimination), in hopes of activating them to advocate for LGBT rights alongside group members.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think this debate is very interesting because of how relevant it is today. I believe that members of the LGBTQ community are deprived of certain rights and deserve complete access to all civil rights. In the article entitled, “Are Gay Rights Civil Rights”, I thought it was very interesting to think about how conservative African American pastors have accepted the LGBTQ movement as a civil rights movement. For example, “Rev Joseph Lowery” states, “’When you talk about the law discriminating, the law granting a privilege here, and a right here, and denying it there, that’s a civil rights issue. And I cant take that away from anybody.’” This quote illustrates that civil rights are vital to living a free life.
ReplyDeleteWe spoke in class about gay rights being argued as an equal protection issue but when I read the opinions (not concurrences) that isn't what I see. Had these issues been argued under the equal protection clause, the Court and subsequently the government would need to acknowledge that homosexuality is first not a choice and second that LGBTQ is a protected class. Instead my understanding is that these issues were argued as matters of privacy. As the Supreme Court hears arguments tomorrow regarding a baker refusing to make a cake for a gay couple, I hope that they will change their argument from privacy to equal protection asserting that LGBTQ are, in fact, a class that should be recognized under the Court and under federal law.
ReplyDeleteI remember where I was when the Obergefell v Hodges decisions was made. I had just returned from a church camp in Texas and was hanging out in my friend's house in Dallas. We were jubilant. This brief was written so beautifully well, and is a wonderful piece that reads like prose. However, this decision has set a precedent not just nationally, but worldwide, with countries such as Australia and Indonesia recently passing pro gay-marriage laws.
ReplyDelete