Quote:
|
Originally Posted by martinguerre
For a queer person to "pass" and accept the benifits of being percieved as straight, and then turn around and participate in policies that harm people just like them...
I don't care if they've figured out that this is wrong, or what their reasons are. It's hypocrasy, pure and simple. And a harmful one at that. If you believe that you personally deserve the respect of society, but that other people do not...i'm going to call foul.
|
It would be hypocrisy if disrespect were one of their aims. If their aim really is, and is with good intention, welfare reform or the removal of hate crime laws, and they mean no disrespect, then I don't see the hypocrisy.
edit: irate covered the other possibility here.
If the policies hurt themselves in addition to people like them, then I don't see the hypocrisy. "I don't think the government should sanction ANY same-sex marriage" is not hypocritical.
Is the policy in question directly attacking the benefits that the closeted politician keeps, or is the attack due to societal trends that can be
but aren't necessarily associated with the policy? To give an example, are all those against hate crime legislation automatically against gays gaining full societal acceptance? Is it not possible to be against the former but in favor of the latter?
Quote:
Using the community so that you don't live in a world where queer witch hunts are common, and physical violence (even from law enforcement) is the norm...and then harming that very community for personal gain?
How is that not treason?
|
Yeah, if personal gain was the only motivation, then it'd be treason. But a gay man/woman could easily be against hate-crime legislation on
principle and the same is possible for an anti-gay marriage position. If that situation's still treason, then it's a treason I don't attach much significance to. Treason could be the correct choice.