I've heard many individuals reference the "gay agenda". The way it's slipped into articles, posts, and conversations, it seems to be spoken with a spit as if the words leave a bitter taste in the mouth of the speaker. I must confess that I don't know what the "gay agenda" is or how it differs from the American agenda.

Contrary to popular belief, there isn't a handbook thats provided the day we come out. There isn't a phone tree or email list, and I certainly haven't received any memos...

So, let's talk rationally about this "gay agenda" business and hopefully we can all be better educated.

__________________

Gay people are motivated, emboldened today like never before. I don't know if it's a DNA thing that many individuals get to a certain point or grasp a certain logic simultaneously (though that has been a long standing theory of mine).
Like everyone wanted cabbage patch dolls (which were really kind of eerie looking to the consumer when they first went on the market), then people thought a common lily was worth thousands of dollars. And in the eighties -remember the eighties ? -everyone was cowboy!--O.K. Those were fads but it still seems remarkable so many people hit on the same trend immediately .

Gays as individuals seem to all be saying at the same time,

"Enough! This is what I'm going to do. And this is the B. S. I am not going to take."

So to some it may have seemed like "an agenda".
I think (if you disregard my DNA theory) it was a social evolution that had it's roots in the womens movement and the black power movement.
And as we are now in a more enlightened state than when those two groups paved the way (with the help and the prayers of gay and straight men and women who either took up a sign or quietly prayed), gays and lesbians can spiritually and mentally jump over some of the more drawn out lessons those movements taught society. Not to say there haven't been deaths and bombings and rape and so on connected with violent outrage and rebellion at the change that must take place.
Growth is painful. Ask any teenager. Societal growth is sometimes accompanied by civil war. But we've already had one of those and the ghosts of our history books, while not being able to quite show us how truly horrible it was, have made us aware of the importance of the lessons learned there. So we follow that precept pretty blindly and good for us.
In the back of her heart if not in the back of her mind, America knows there is another coming of age. But that heart of America is not the troglodyte who dreams up the phrase "gay agenda". It is the good. Always remember that.
The heart of this country is what gives us empathy with another human being.
And good must win or else what? Bad will win. We won't allow that to happen. We are the guys with the white hats.
And I know that seems cliché and it is cliché, but if that explains it then so be it. I can't say it any better. There will always be Potters to our well meaning Mr. Bailey. Always a Scrooge to just begrudge anything to anyone just because he can. And darn it he'll stamp his foot and have his way with 'Id'.
But we all know what eventually happens to the Scrooges and Potters of this world. Either they get on board the gravy train with the rest of us midnight gamblers, or they simply dry up and blow away. Poof!

__________________

OK I'll start with a question for you, do you believe there is a gay political agenda? That is do you believe there is a set of political issues concerning homsexuality which together compose a "gay agenda"?

And just what is an agenda


1 : a list or outline of things to be considered or done <agendas of faculty meetings> 2 : an underlying often ideological plan or program <a political agenda>

Is there a gay societal agenda? Is there a list of issues concerning homosexuality that those who support that lifestyle, behavior, however you want to put it, want considered by society in general?

I think that too many people use the phrase "gay agenda" like a tool to avoid arguing.

It's harder to demonize gays wanting to serve their country in the military, so it's called a "gay agenda" instead. Pseudo-scary words that hide a realistically rational argument in a propagandic term.

So to put it in perspective, if a mother wants her child to grow up happy and healthy, that's a "Parent Agenda".
If a general wants to defend this country against foreign threats, that's a "Military Agenda".
If a Christian wants freedom of religion to worship without discrimination or harassment, that's a "Christian Agenda".

Heck. Why do you think those groups that are definitively anti-GAY keep trying to avoid acknowledging what they are, and keep trying to refer to themselves with the word "family". "Family values". "Traditional families".
yadda, yadda, yadda...

The "Gay Agenda" is a reverse euphemism.
Cause if they don't misrepresent things right out of the gate, then people might realize that it's just an issue of anti-gay people seeking to discriminate / harass gays who are only seeking equality.

I think people use it within thier arguments more than to avoid one.

Then why do people directly address homosexuality in the military as part of the gay agenda?

What is scary about. What it seems is that those who support a gay agenda hide behind discussion of that than the actual issues that make it up.

Yes I think there is a Parent Agenda.

I don't think it is quite that simple but for those that support the military there is certainly a military agenda of issues.

And other issues that come under the Evangelical Christian agenda for sure.


Perhaps because they disagree with your labling.



Seems to me it directly refers to a group of issues that those who support homosexuality bring to the table.

Tell me do you believe there are certain causes those who support homosexuality generally support?

I have a Gay agenda. I try to stay happy every day.

In my experience, that is not the case.
I think the distinction can easily be made by simply substituting another, more neutral phrase in place of "Gay Agenda" to see how the argument is affected.
Typically, saying "Gay Agenda" IS considered an argument in and of itself.


You just responded to my statement, with a question that is answered by my statement: It's harder to demonize gays wanting to serve their country in the military, so it's called a "gay agenda" instead.

A better question to you would be why don't people directly address heterosexuality in the military as part of the "straight agenda"?
Sounds absurd, doesn't it...

U.S. citizens can understand a desire to serve our country. If that person be black, white, Christian, Jew, man, woman, Republican, Democrat...
But for some reason, a gay person wanting to serve our country is an "agenda"...


I have no idea how you could think that statement rational.
You can search through the "civil rights" section and see all sorts of discussions on topics that some people claim is part of the "gay agenda".
I wouldn't be surprised if this thread is the first attempt on this board to actually discuss the issue of why people proclaim "gay agenda".

Your claim of "what it seems ..." is beyond obviously false.


Then why don't you hear that phrase?
Why don't you hear people proclaiming "This is part of the Parent Agenda"?


Is the labelling of an "anti-gay agenda" inaccurate? Especially when it describes groups that have multi-million dollar budgets fixating on JUST gays?
We both know you have no grounds for arguing "no" to that question.


In which case, if that is all it is, it would be easy to rephrase it without affecting the argument.
My points are valid.
You aren't even trying to contradict them.
All you're doing is saying something else to side-track from the point. As dabateman said: "I've heard many individuals reference the "gay agenda". The way it's slipped into articles, posts, and conversations, it seems to be spoken with a spit as if the words leave a bitter taste in the mouth of the speaker."

That's because for those that speak those words, it does leave a bitter taste. "Some people" would rather gay people be nonexistent than have any rights at all. And usually the people that use the term "gay agenda" aren't using it in a positive manner.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

Why? What's wrong with using the proper English term?


Well I disagree with the premise that is a "demonizing" but being allowed to serve openly in the military IS part of the "gay agenda", it IS one of the issue that make up that agenda.

Feel free to but since it is not an issue............


OK

Why not? Again do you deny there are specific political and social issues that are of particular concern to the supporters of homosexuality and there are certain societal norms and laws they would liked changed?


I have.

I have.


Perhaps, a "pro-heterosexual" agenda might be more the comparison. You know like supporting heterosexual marriage and not teaching homosexuality in elementary schools and kindergartens, that could certainly be considered a pro-heterosexual agenda.


What do you object to about the proper phrasing?

Do you think there is a Union agenda when it comes to legislation? How about an environmental agenda of issues of concern?

What points, I'm reading where for some reason you object to the proper use of the word agenda.

Sounds more like you object to the other side stating thier side of it.

Oh well.

This thread is not entitled "The Proper English Term Gay Agenda".
It is entitled, The "Gay Agenda" to signify the root of the issue.

Fxashun made a comment that I think goes a long way to show "What's wrong"...

fxashun: That's because for those that speak those words, it does leave a bitter taste. "Some people" would rather gay people be nonexistent than have any rights at all.

I have already asked you about other terms like "Parent Agenda".
The response I got was totally incomplete, as I asked about PEOPLE using it.
There are more "Parents" out there than gay people.
Shouldn't the "Parent Agenda" be a more prominent term among normal U.S. citizens than "Gay Agenda"?

I realize you are trying to ignore the connotations of the word and fixate on the denotations, but that's not going to fool anybody.


You don't think utilizing the phrase "gay agenda" is part of demonizing gays?


Going to deny that the earth is round while you're at it?


Dodging the question. How predictable.
The reason we don't call it part of the "straight agenda" is because nobody is trying to demonize straights.
You'll notice the question itself, assuming "straight agenda", creates a sinister presumption regarding the motivations of straights.

WITHOUT even attempting to show that such a motivation even exists. Ignoring the REAL motivations of straights.


Completely a non-sequitur to my point.
As I have pointed out, contrary to your claim, gays do not argue over the term "gay agenda" at the exclusion of other topics.

I have yet to see you provide any reason for the basis of your claim.
I suspect I will not see any either.


I didn't ask why YOU haven't.
I asked why PEOPLE haven't.

If I google "Gay Agenda", I get 376,000 hits.
If I google "Parent Agenda", I get barely over a 1,000, even though there are many more parents than gays.

People typically don't use the phrase "Parent Agenda".
And definitely not in the same way that "Gay Agenda" is intended.


That is "pro-heterosexual" like discriminating against blacks is "pro-white" or discriminating against Jews is "pro-Christian".
You employ propaganda typically reveled in by racists, who proclaim they are "pro-" by denigrating other groups.
Their actions are "ANTI-".


Considering how many times I have explained what the "objection" truly is, perhaps it is time you stop trying to ask that question?
The "objection" is over the connotations of the phrase.


Quote me where I object to the "proper use of the word agenda".
I have explicitly showed what my objection is.

You repeatedly attempt strawmans to ignore the real objections.


When the "other side" can't address the real complaints on the issue, but instead have to obfuscate the issue, that isn't "stating their side".
"Stating their side" would involve addressing the real reasons at hand.
What you pull is like Jack buying a Red Corvette which his wife knows they can't afford, and then Jack asks what's wrong with the color red.


Your tricks fool noone.