From: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (William M. Porter)
Subject: Re: Closet Bigotry (was Re: Buchanan's speech)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 07:44:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug23.034110.16240@news.ysu.edu>, ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley
Miller) addresses some remarks to me:

>It was not your comment about having gay friends I was refering to, Mr.
>Porter, it was what you went on to say after that about not feeling they
>should be entitled to the same rights you as a heterosexual take for
>granted.

I did NOT say they were not entitled to the same rights I take for granted:
that is a rather general point and I was being more specific. I said that my
respect for my gay friends and acquaintances does not require me to support the
idea of legal recognition of gay "marriages." Is this an idea you support?

>         I HAVE read the text of the speech, several times, and I stand
>by my assessment that Mr. Buchanan is the worst type of hate-monger...he
>hides behind his faith, and cites it to justify his hatred.

I'm sorry, but you are simply dodging this issue here with a display of
steadfastness, as a newspaper does when, in the absence of any proof that its
remarks do not amount to slander, it nevertheless continues to "stand by its
story." What I was hoping you would do--instead of simply expressing your
incredulity with signs such as "!!!", and instead of simply labelling as a
"hate-monger" Mr. Buchanan and anyone who is willing to think for a minute
about what he says--what I was hoping you would do is actually quote or refer
to some part of the speech in which you find him mongering hate, so to speak. I
have yet to hear anyone quote a passage from Buchanan's speech and say "THERE!
Look at that! Blatant racism."

>What you expoused in your tretise on your gay friends was exactly that,
>tolerance.  I don't know about you, Mr. Porter, but friendship is about 
>support, not tolerance.
>Tolerance is a term used to describe one's feelings toward something
>one does not aprove of.  I, and people like me, do not desire tolerance,
>we desire acceptance, complete and unconditional.  Ask your gay friends
>if tolerance is acceptable to them.  I'll wager that they'll say they would
>perfer equality.

Well, here we have a slight semantic problem. I did not make the distinction
between tolerance and support in the context of personal relationships such as
friendship, but in the context of social relationships. (In the personal
sphere, I think it was quite appropriate for V-P Quayle to speak of
"supporting" his daughter, even if she had an abortion that he disapproved of.)
You are confusing these two spheres, by asking me to extend my personal support
for my friends to political support for gays as a group. 

One other small point: friendship or even love does not have to mean
"acceptance, complete and unconditional" unless you are completely incapable of
making distinctions. My mother visited me last weekend. I love my mother and I
was delighted that she could visit us. However, the most virtuous response I
could muster to her constant cigarette smoking is tolerance. The desire of
some--not all--gays to present themselves as simple, unitary packages on a
"take all of me or else" basis is bound to result in precisely the kind of
stereotyping and discrimination that I and so many other people abhor.

>No, you didn't suggest blacks and gays be prevented from voting, but
>by your tone, that's where you would draw the line.

Mr. Miller, most of us find it quite challenging enough to respond to one
another's actual words--especially here on the nets, where there are no
allocutionary cues such as facial expression. You are too ready to damn both me
and Mr. Buchanan on the basis of what I think is a misreading of "tone." I do
not or try not to condemn anybody on this basis. 

>                                                  Add to that your
>full acceptance of what Mr. Buchanan said in his speech, and it is 
>obvious that you have would have no problem with denying any further
>rights to gay people.

First, I'm not sure where you found me expressing "full acceptance" of
what Mr. Buchanan said. I did not vote for Buchanan and do NOT support
everything he said. I entered this thread simply to ask a question that has yet
to be answered: Where--in what words--does Buchanan express racism, sexism,
homophobia or any of the other vices he has been charged with?

Second, I am still uncertain what specific rights you think I do or would deny
to gays. My original complaint with you, Mr. Miller, is that your remarks,
while exhuding hostility and resentment, are very vague. Could we speak about
specific rights, please? This is what I regard as absolutely necessary to
rational discourse. We have got to get beyond hurling insults at one another.

William Porter
wmporter@jetson.uh.edu                      
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh