• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are Homosexuals Oppressed?

Are Homosexuals oppressed in America?

  • I don't know

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    63
Would a moderator check the poll votes please?

I think someone just skewed them through visitor voting.
 
Obviously. Do we have it better in America than other places? Hell yes. Do we experience true equality? Hell no.

This is not opinion, this is fact, based on the definition in the OP.

Oh, and haha, real funny to whoever spammed the poll.
 
Wake.

I think the question is another attempt by you to feel good about your (IMO) ignorant, homophobic beliefs.

You included the dictionary definition in an attempt to force people to argue a limited understanding of oppression. Words have both denotations and connotations. Learn them both before discussing a big concept like oppression.

Homosexuals are discriminated against every day. To believe otherwise is ignorant. When people are discriminated against, this can lead to both subtle and overt forms of oppression.

If a homosexual teenager is afraid to speak out in school or even go to school he/she is being oppressed and treated in a manner contrary to the ideals of our country. People like Rick Santorum want to move our country backwards.

For people who really want a backwards Theocracy, I'm sure their are other places they can live and be happy.

HAZ
 
In many (although not all) areas of the country, efforts are being made, both socially and politically, to keep homosexuals and homosexuality out of the public spotlight and to stigmatize the practice. These efforts take many forms and result in very real limitations on the ability of homosexuals to express themselves, plan for the future, feel secure in their employment, and otherwise lead "normal" lives. The most chilling effect is on young people, many of whom feel so stigmatized by their families and their peers that they have to lie for years about what they feel, or worse, take their own lives.

No, gays are not being rounded up, imprisoned, executed, or experimented on. But I don't think those are the sole hallmarks of oppression.

What areas of the country? I'd like to see some specific examples of these social and political efforts. Are these isolated incidents or pervasive?
 
Actual vote is 22 to 11.

I've PM'd CC about it. Hopefully he'll locate which person those fraudulent votes belong to, and fix the poll, basically. I think it can be discerned with an IP check.

Back to the issue, I agree that some negative things that happen to homosexuals are wrong, but I think it cheapens the usage of "oppression" by equating the gay marriage issue to Nazi Germany/Slavery.

Imo blocking the redefinition of marriage isn't the same as actual oppression.
 
Alright...let's move on from this "oppression" crap, since it seems to me like almost all of Wake's threads turn into substanceless semantic debates over words rather than real issues.

Most of us agree on the following things that homosexuals experience in this country:

1) Most of them cannot marry the person they love, except in a select few states
2) Some of them are barred from adopting children.
3) Many, if not most of them experience family problems due to their struggles with their orientation, and social alienation and ostracization in wider society.
4) Going off of the above, they also experience housing and employment discrimination.
5) They are denied the legal and fiduciary benefits of marriage that many straights take for granted.

The list goes on. Whether or not this actually consists of oppression, can we all at least agree that this is wrong, and an injustice?
 
Permit me to give my response, even though you did not ask for it.

If humans sexually reproduced with male pairs or female pairs, then I would completely agree that it made no sense for government to sanction opposite sex marriage. Were I heterosexual in such a society I wouldn't demand that the mainstream of society change itself for my decidedly minority proclivities.

I would, however, push for civil unions, or something like it, so that I could have the rights you refer to when it came to my spouse.

Response appreciated, but I have to say that the legal institution of marriage has little to do with reproduction or the ability to reproduce, so I fail to see why that should be a factor when it comes to what kind of marriage government should or should not sanction.
 
Alright...let's move on from this "oppression" crap,(1) since it seems to me like almost all of Wake's threads turn into substanceless semantic debates over words rather than real issues.

(2) Most of us agree on the following things that homosexuals experience in this country:

1) Most of them cannot marry the person they love, except in a select few states
2) Some of them are barred from adopting children.
3) Many, if not most of them experience family problems due to their struggles with their orientation, and social alienation and ostracization in wider society.
4) Going off of the above, they also experience housing and employment discrimination.
5) They are denied the legal and fiduciary benefits of marriage that many straights take for granted.

The list goes on. Whether or not this actually consists of oppression, can we all at least agree that this is wrong, and an injustice?

(1) I disagree with the baseless hyperbole.

(2) I neither support or oppose gay marriage. Negating the redefinition of marriage isn't oppression.

I'll agree that homosexuals should be allowed to adopt. Housing and employment discrimination isn't good imo. However, families do have the right to voice their opinions regarding their belief. If my child were living in my house, over the age of 18, and refused to work/go to school and planned to be a prostitute... well, I don't know what I'd do tbh.

The whole marriage issue is still being debated, so it's not like we can broadly declare/assume one side victorious/right.

Let the people decide on the gay marriage issue. Just don't misuse words to elicit emotional appeal.
 
(1) I disagree with the baseless hyperbole.

(2) I neither support or oppose gay marriage. Negating the redefinition of marriage isn't oppression.

I'll agree that homosexuals should be allowed to adopt. Housing and employment discrimination isn't good imo. However, families do have the right to voice their opinions regarding their belief. If my child were living in my house, over the age of 18, and refused to work/go to school and planned to be a prostitute... well, I don't know what I'd do tbh.

The whole marriage issue is still being debated, so it's not like we can broadly declare/assume one side victorious/right.

Let the people decide on the gay marriage issue. Just don't misuse words to elicit emotional appeal.

1) The rights of the minority should not be subject to the whims of the majority.

2) You didn't actually answer my question. Is this an injustice, or is it not? I have not misused any words, and there is nothing wrong with emotional appeal - precisely because this is an emotional issue for many - as long as you have used facts to back it up. Which I have.
 
Let the people decide on the gay marriage issue.
Absolutely not. I don't how many times this has to be repeated: The rights of a minority should never be voted upon by the majority.

Also, gays still suffer oppression according to the definitions in your OP.
 
(1) I disagree with the baseless hyperbole.

(2) I neither support or oppose gay marriage. Negating the redefinition of marriage isn't oppression.

I'll agree that homosexuals should be allowed to adopt. Housing and employment discrimination isn't good imo. However, families do have the right to voice their opinions regarding their belief. If my child were living in my house, over the age of 18, and refused to work/go to school and planned to be a prostitute... well, I don't know what I'd do tbh.

The whole marriage issue is still being debated, so it's not like we can broadly declare/assume one side victorious/right.

Let the people decide on the gay marriage issue. Just don't misuse words to elicit emotional appeal.

Just because you personally disagree does not make it less than it is. I am sure some thought the same about other situations where oppression was taking place. Look at it this way I am sure a slave dealer thought it was okay to sell people. Yes it is a different brand of oppression and a higher degree but it still states the same thing. Because this dealer didn't think it was oppressive did that make it correct? No it does not justify discrimination because a person doesn't think it so.
 
Currently, do you think homosexuals are oppressed in America?


Google

your definition at face value, common sense and reality points me to only one answer: YES

any other answer is based off of some other thought process and additional qualifiers not mentioned to chance the definition posted to something else more subjective.

Logically how could anyone answer no :shrug: I cant see any logic supporting that
 
Last edited:
always funny how these polls get spammed every time. Gay rights polls always get spammed by trolls LMAO

wow people are insecure
 
oppressed
Verb:
1.Keep (someone) in subservience and hardship, esp. by the unjust exercise of authority.
2.Cause (someone) to feel distressed, anxious, or uncomfortable: "he was oppressed by worry".

1. No
2. No more than my ex-wife oppressed me with her BPD.
 
Absolutely not. I don't how many times this has to be repeated: The rights of a minority should never be voted upon by the majority.

Also, gays still suffer oppression according to the definitions in your OP.

I love it when society deems and decides except when society shouldn't...
 
1) The rights of the minority should not be subject to the whims of the majority.

Why not... it worked for the Jews living in Germany in the 30's and 40's.
 
Why not... it worked for the Jews living in Germany in the 30's and 40's.

Sweet Godwin right there... I guess Congress works like Germany and the Jews too since the majority vote wins huh?
 
Wake;1060284621Let the people decide on the gay marriage issue. [/QUOTE said:
Bad idea... letting a majority of emotionally and sexually insecure people vote on an issue like this is a terrible idea.
 
Sweet Godwin right there... I guess Congress works like Germany and the Jews too since the majority vote wins huh?

I am not even sure what you are trying to say here...
 
I am not even sure what you are trying to say here...

You know what a Godwin is ... so I'll skip that.

The U.S. Congress passes laws which affect millions of people by majority rule. According to your prior statement, that's the same way Germany worked things with the Jews. Do you agree?
 
You know what a Godwin is ... so I'll skip that.

The U.S. Congress passes laws which affect millions of people by majority rule. According to your prior statement, that's the same way Germany worked things with the Jews. Do you agree?

Yeah I know Godwin and the other part was a joke based on how badly it turned out for the Jews... sorry, I thought it was obvious. (no offense intended).
 
Socially homosexuals may be oppressed. People may be disgusted or not approve of homosexual affection or whatnot, but any group of people can receive this kind of treatment.

And IF a given group of people was indeed being mistreated by another group on the basis of the targeted group's perceived membership in that group, and such mistreatment was socially condoned, then YES that would be oppression as well. The fact that oppression can happen to more than one group of people doesn't magically unmake the fact that it is currently already happening to some.

Honestly...where the bleepity-bleeping-bleep does this nonsense come from?!?

I've been cursed out, judged, threatened with violence, and lost friends over my Christian beliefs and social stances.

And homosexuals are cursed out, judged, threatened with violence, and lose friends and relatives over simply BEING gay.

There are at least two obvious differences, however.

First, it's genuinely difficult to find substantial social endorsement of cursing anyone out or threatening them with violence based upon their religious beliefs. It still happens, but it is not looked well upon and most people -- along with the dominant direction of law -- works AGAINST such mistreatment.

Second, one's religious observance and principles are a matter of choice and conduct, while homosexuality is not. Religion IS a lifestyle, while sexual orientation is not. That doesn't make harassment of people based upon religion OK, but it does mean that people who are being mistreated on the basis of an identity (rather than conduct) have nowhere to run.

Despite hysterical paranoia to the contrary, Christians are PRIVILEGED, not persecuted, when it comes to religion in the United States. That's why harassment of Christians (for adhering to Christianity or at least claiming such) is not oppression. It's still bad and stupid, but it's not socially condoned and it doesn't have the requisite institutional power behind it to warrant identification as oppression.

The mistreatment of homosexuals, on the other hand, DOES meet all the following criteria of oppression:
  • mistreatment: check
  • of a group (homosexuals): check
  • by a group (misc. "straights"): check
  • which is socially condoned: check (yes, a growing minority of people vocally oppose such mistreatment, but there are still few if any reliable social consequences for engaging in homophobic oppression)
  • and institutionalized: check (religious institutions, government, and private employers all back discrimination against homosexuals to varying degrees).

People in this world are intolerant of many views and lifestyles,

Playing video games between bong hits, or jetting out to one's favorite golf courses between high level executive meetings...are lifestyles. Choosing to acknowledge and act upon one's completely natural biological urges is not.

and it may be "oppression" to a certain level, but I don't think it's fair to call homosexuals oppressed as a distinct minority group.

Opinions about the "fairness" of an empirical definition are irrelevant. It is ACCURATE to identify them as oppressed because they are, in fact, oppressed. Their status as homosexuals is the basis of the mistreatment, and thus YES, they are oppressed *as homosexuals*.

This is the kind of evasive nonsense that drives me batty: treating empirical questions as if they are a matter of opinion.
 
Why not... it worked for the Jews living in Germany in the 30's and 40's.
Do you live there? Is that the nation we are discussing? OH how were gays treated in Nazi Germany by the way?

...upon the rise of Adolf Hitler, gay men and, to a lesser extent, lesbians, were two of the numerous groups targeted by the Nazi Party and were ultimately among Holocaust victims. Beginning in 1933, gay organizations were banned, scholarly books about homosexuality, and sexuality in general, were burned, and homosexuals within the Nazi Party itself were murdered. The Gestapo compiled lists of homosexuals, who were compelled to sexually conform to the "German norm."

Between 1933–45, an estimated 100,000 men were arrested as homosexuals, of whom some 50,000 were officially sentenced.[1] Most of these men served time in regular prisons, and an estimated 5,000 to 15,000 of those sentenced were incarcerated in Nazi concentration camps.[1] It is unclear how many of the 5,000 to 15,000 eventually perished in the camps, but leading scholar Ruediger Lautman believes that the death rate of homosexuals in concentration camps may have been as high as 60%. Homosexuals in the camps were treated in an unusually cruel manner by their captors.

After the war, the treatment of homosexuals in concentration camps went unacknowledged by most countries, and some men were even re-arrested and imprisoned based on evidence found during the Nazi years. It was not until the 1980s that governments began to acknowledge this episode, and not until 2002 that the German government apologized to the gay community.[2] This period still provokes controversy, however. In 2005, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on the Holocaust which included the persecution of homosexuals.
Persecution of homosexuals in Nazi Germany and the Holocaust - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The persecution even continued after the war.
 
Back
Top Bottom