[Fundies have been reacting to the news of an "ex-gay" singer not being allowed to perform at an MLK concert.]
32 comments
All a bit meh this - I'm perfectly happy that there may well be people who were attracted to one sex who became attracted to another over time - people change - that McClurkin attributes it to a god without attributing the original attraction to a god is logically a bit specious but not a reason to prevent him singing.
The post is a bit silly because of its use of the trope of the 'gay lifestyle' but not fundie.
Interestingly, I have quite a few gay friends, both IRL and online and not a single one of them has stated that they were once straight but chose to adopt the gay lifestyle. Some of them had straight relationships before they admitted to themselves that they were gay, but that's not the same as what's described above.
But even granting that this could be what the OP means, then yes, I applaud anyone who stops lying to him- or herself and starts being honest about their sexuality. If honesty is a liberal trait, compared with lying as a conservative one, then being a conservative is something shameful.
It is only a consequence of religious brainwashing that we could see done one claiming to be "ex-gay" could be perceived as a good thing.
I was tall but have entered into a short lifestyle. Sounds stupid, doesn't it, angelka?
If a person is happy being attracted to people of the opposite gender now, while that person was happy being attracted to people of the same gender before, I have no problem with that. If the person is suppressing his/her same-sex attraction, and forces him/her-self to live with an opposite-gender partner, then I DO have a problem with it.
Let's take it again:
Because it's usually accompanied by a lot of Christian propaganda which amounts to bullying gay people for the way they are. And because of the cases of gay men who said they were no longer gay but turned out to be still gay.
I tend to think he should not have been asked to step aside. He did so willingly, saying MLK Day was the time to bring people together. He wouldn't have been singing about being ex-gay, after all. I'm unhappy with all the religious stuff that was associated with the 50th anniversary of the March, but MLK was a preacher, after all.
Straight people enter into the gay lifestyle queer culture because they enjoy and appreciate some aspect of it or another, but they're still straight all the samejust like how some "ex-gays" apparently "enjoy" and "appreciate" being self-loathing tools of their oppressors, but they're still gay as can be.
But there's one little caveat: the former is harmless, although admittedly somewhat uncommon, while the latter is demonstrably self-destructive and stands against pretty much everything MLK stood for.
Anyone who thinks that a straight person could enter a gay lifestyle obviously has orientation issues of their own.
Seriously, for anyone who is truly straight, could you ever imagine going gay just to try it or something? I can only imagine it is the same thing for the truly gay.
There are bisexuals who may, at different times of their lives, choose partners of one sex or another. That is a whole different matter from deciding to be "gay" or "straight". Also, though I don't think most people are born one way or the other, I think "orientation" happens beford we even know what's going on.
"Why is that such an issue for them?"
"There's a rock and roll singer on the television
Welllll ... okay. Nobody "turns gay," but I'll bet you dollars to donut-holes that there are plenty of straight people (and maybe a few gay people) who have turned bi .
Sexual preference is, in part, an acquired taste. (No one is born with a shoe fetish, for example.)
Why is it, that liberals have absolutely no problem with a straight person entering into a gay lifestyle
Even if a straight person could "turn gay", it just wouldn't matter. That's why "liberals" have no problem with it. What is applauded is the courage it takes for someone to come out of the closet despite the fact there are fundie bigots, such as yourself, who want to shove them back inside.
yet, they will scream to the top of their lungs if a gay person leaves the homosexual lifestyle? Why is that such an issue for them?
Because being ex-gay all about lies and coercion. It's all about pushing your religious agenda onto others.
@ Old Viking
I once decided to enter the fundy lifestyle. As a result I lapsed into a lengthy coma.
Congrats. You made it, then.
---------------------------------------------
When I was a little bitty baby I had a bootie fetish.
--------------------------------------------
>> they [liberals] will scream to the top of their lungs if a gay person leaves the homosexual lifestyle? <<
Does this happen?
1) There is no such thing as a "gay lifestyle".
In sum - we have no problems with a gay person coming out as such, all the more in the face of real persecution. Straight people entering into a gay lifestyle are unheard of to the best of my knowledge. But ex-gays or people who pose as such have by and large, if not entirely, been sock puppets with a blatant and oft-reminded tag who encourage discrimination of those with a different sexual orientation. The notable focus on "ex-" also comes with it a narrative of overcoming, played for poignance and presumed empowerment where there never was any to start with. To add to all those who probably said it before me, it's little more than coercion into imposing a religious agenda that promotes bigotry and intolerance outside the in-group.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
