If gay advocates say that homosexuality is no one's business, then why be an activist?

Question

Why be an activist, bringing that which is supposed to be an intimate, private moment out in public, demanding specific rights as a minority? The gay movement holds no boundries and is found across all cultural bounds. In America, everyone has the right of freedom....the question remains; why do gay activists cry foul?

Postscript:
Another question, and please do not take this as bashing or rudeness....
You speak of rights, and you are in America I assume. What rights have you been denied? Free speech? You have that. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Again, it is yours. The right to privacy, viola`! Tis yours! When you come out and say I'm gay, then what you are doing (in my opinion) is saying that I am a target for those who disagree, take offense or hate. To equate yourselves with the rights of the Black population, women, or any other minority group is to set yourself apart because you look different or your belief system is different, when infact the only difference is your sexual preference, which again is a personal choice, not something that is a result of a culture or ethnicity....
Just another bone for you to chew on....

Most certainly, Greg B. would I cry foul...but why would you say that you can't do these things? I understand mind sets, ethics and the like, but if your partner had the ability to legally have you allowed to be with him, then why would you have been left out? The same is for partners who are of the opposite sex...if they do not allow legally for these things, they could very well be in the same position of not being allowed to be with the ones that they love during sickness or dying. As for the marriage portion, what is to say that you can't live as married couples? That is not to say that I advocate such things, it's just to say, because this is America, that right, that freedom is there...it's your choice as to whether or not you take it.
Now, to address the straight/gay issue. Indeed, deep down it is a choice. You have the choice, like anyone to choose who you will be...it's just that some have more of an unction, if you will, to be one or the other, more of a compulsion.

(continued) to follow one path or another. Is it wrong for a person to be of one persuasion or another? If that were a question that was posed to me, I would unequivicably say yes. To pair two of the same is wrong, morally and personally. If you were to ask my daughter a year ago, she would have said no. Yes, she is a Christian, however, that said, the unction for her to explore the feelings that she had towards the same sex were overwhelming. As much as it rubbed my fur the wrong way, she was allowed to explore that. What she decided was that morally, this was wrong...not based biblically, but personally. Because of that, she has grown and developed a testimony and a background that she is able to help counsel youth who are considering thier orientation.
Get a grip? Got it...not a problem. This topic is for discussion, not bashing. You want to bash, take it someplace else

Ok, I agree....sort of. The sanctity of marriage, by the way, is not a right....nope, no place in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution. If folks were able to marry whom they choose, then we would have a whole lot of people marrying people that they just shouldn't....i.e., sisters, brothers, other relatives, underage children, not to mention the odd livestock here and there (levity, please excuse me). This is a moral issue, not a legal one. The fact that marriage between a man and a woman has been an institution that has been passed throughout the millenia, and the only other time that this has ever been mentioned was in the book of Genesis and the discussion/destruction of the city of Sodom. History records that this particular city had no particular rules or laws that prohibited an individual to marry whom he chose, even if that included one of the same sex or even as far as beastiality.
(continued)

(continued)
The destruction of the city was in accordance with God's word, Who, by the way, warned the people prior to the destruction.
As for the Supreme Court decision. Bear with me just for a moment and I will get to that. Just a bit of background here...the Supreme Court is comprised of eight individual judges. They have the power and ability to over-ride any and all cases that are brought before them, including the ones that have to do with moral issues, i.e., marriage, abortion, etc. Considered "hotbed" issues, these eight must form a quorum (six in agreement) in order for the law or decision to pass. Gay marriage is a "hotbed" issue (no pun intended). To concede and to throw out millenia of "tradition" as some call it, puts these eight men and women in direct contrast with the people of the United States...thus also endangering their opinions and lawmaking abilities. Wherever there is mention of sexual discrimination,
(continued)

(continued)
it is in regard to gender, not orientation (Jackson v. Birmingham Bd. of Ed.,shown in slips from 2004 decisions).
In regards to military actions, because the ability to "forge on " is instinctual in most men and not in women (i.e., women are naturally more inclined to be "softhearted" rather than pressing on for "the kill"), women have for the most part been barred from postions that would put them in hand to hand combat. Couple that with the disadvantage of physical strength and that is a compelling reason why women are not frontline. The same (theoretically) hold true for men whose tendencies lean toward feminine. That is not to say that all men who are gay are that way, but that was the initial concensus. As well, then you have the uncomfortableness of working with a gay man and the cohesiveness that a military team should have would be non-existent.

Just a few more things for you to ruminate on.

Answer 1

You've got two concepts crossed.

An individual's sexual activity is their own business. Activists' activities are not bringing any "private moment out in public," except when others, such as the police, have already done so; I am thinking specifically here of sodomy cases which have gone to the US Supreme Court because sodomy laws were selectively applied only to homosexuals.

We are not demanding "specific rights."

What we demand is that our individual rights are upheld and not abridged. The American Consitution has amendments which have been in the hopes that they will guarantee that freedom is allowed to all people. That has been done because of institutionalized discrimination against people of this country.

We cry "foul" because there are freedoms that are denied to us, that continue to be denied to us, and that we have to fight to attain because of the discrimination, the violence, and the very lack of freedom in our lives.

Answer 2

What is meant by "no one's business" in the activist movement (which, I might add, is far from a cohesive group; HUGE differences of opinion on a number of topics there) is that gay people getting the rights we're asking for almost always has NO EFFECT on straight people. Other american citizens have both a right and a potential obligation to serve their country in the military. Gay Americans, then, are seen as set apart from other citizens. It's not quite the same as an ethnicity, but it might analog well to a religious belief. Is it really freedom of religion if you're not allowed to tell anyone; or LET anyone find out, even if they're doing all kinds of snooping? I didn't read too far through your followups because I didn't think I'd remember it all, but I certainly hope you weren't saying that excercising one's rights SHOULD put them in danger of violence? Also, freedom of speech? Sort of. Gay organizations (who pose no threat of violence) are being illegally spied upon.

Answer 3

Well, you can disagree all you want, but in America, the Supreme Court said this in 1967:

"The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men"

Kinda hard to say that gay people shouldn't fight for things like marriage, or that marriage isn't a right when the highest court in American says otherwise.

So to recap.

Marriage is a right.
Gay people can't marry.
In fighting for the right to marry, activists are fighting for their rights.

What is the problem here?

Answer 4

The same reason any other social or ethical minority feel the need to speak out. They want certain recognition or certain rights that majorities have. As well as their need to feel acceptance in society.I however think that if people would stop making such a public issue out of everything..... people would possibly become a little more excepting of things. When any opinion or view is shoved down societies throat it causes more animosity. People in general fear or reject things they do not understand. It is similar to religion if you are not a spiritual person and you have someone constantly preaching to you ....you come to despise that person. Do not take that last statement as "I personally have hatred toward homosexuals" that is far from the truth.

Answer 5

We cry foul because we have been beaten and discriminated against for too long.

When we advocate or protest, we don't talk about our intimate private moments. Neither did women or African-Americans when campaigning for equal rights.

I wish that every American were given equal freedoms without regard to thier orientation. But until gaybashing stops, the gay teen suicide rate drops, and marriage between any two people is affirmed, you will see me and many others in the lobbies and in the streets, crusading for justice and peace.

Answer 6

What they're saying is that if you want to remain "in the closet" and do not wish to discuss you're sexual orientation with others, then that's your right to do so. Personally, I consider my private life private unless I choose to make it anyone else's business, but of course there are a bunch of bone-heads out there that think I should be shouting from the rooftops that I'm a queer, but in reality, it's nobody's business.

Answer 7

If you aren't gay, how do you know it's a personal choice?
When did you "decide" to be straight? How old were you?
How did it happen? When was the exact time and date that you said to yourself, "I'm straight".?
Utter nonsense....

If you weren't allowed to marry the person you loved, would you cry foul?

If you weren't allowed to visit the person you loved in the hospital, would you cry foul?

If you weren't allowed to say good-bye to the love of your life when he was in the hospital dying, would you cry foul?

Now does it seem that gays have the same 'rights' as the straight world?
Get a clue.

Answer 8

bleh. It means it shouldn't be anyone's business. But, a few weeks ago, there was a thing in the Senate trying to make a constitutional ban on same sex marriage. So, someone thinks it's their business. And they're wrong.

Answer 9

Because it is an easy way for them to meet other gay people of course.