Institute for Marriage and Public Policy.
Post Office Box 1231 • Manassas, VA 20108 • (202) 216-9430 • Email: info@imapp.org


WWW iMAPP

Support iMAPP
Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

Join the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy mailing list
Email:
Weekly Archives

Blogger!



Tuesday, December 09, 2003

RACE AND SSM: Josh Baker

The Washington Post had an article this morning describing yesterday's press conference held by the newly-formed National Black Justice Coalition. I had a chance to sit in on the event, and thought I'd share a few
thoughts.

Pulled together in response to Jay Lindsay's recent article describing resentment in the black community over frequent comparisons between the fight for SSM and the civil rights movement, the event seemed to have two
conflicting themes: (1) the press has misrepresented black opinion on gay marriage/SSM is not a divisive issue in the black community; and (2) we need to educate the black community in order to combat widespread homophobia.

A handful of random observations from my notes: (1) The goal of the coalition is to oppose the FMA and educate about SSM in the black community by raising $100K for marketing to the black community through primarily black TV and print media; (2) the speakers disputed, but made no effort to rebut, the polling data showing African-Americans opposed to SSM by a 2-1 margin; (3) the coalition will be launching a website and hosting additional events early in 2004; (4) speakers acknowledged significant racism in the gay community, and didn't really respond directly to a question about whether the national gay rights groups would ignore
the black community; (5) the coalition will be pressuring the NAACP, SCLC, and other national civil rights groups to support SSM and oppose the FMA; (6) their organizers/spokespeople (Keith Boykin and Donna Payne) are young and articulate; (7) Ken Reeves, a city councilor from Cambridge, MA had intended to attend, but was stuck in Boston due to snow; (8) In response to a question from a reporter (WashBlade?) about how
transsexuals fit into the SSM debate, Mandy Carter of Freedom to Marry initiated a discussion of how "sexual orientation" isn't a broad enough term, suggesting "identity" as a replacement; (9) the debate continues to
focus on benefits, with reference to the GAO report as well as "having to pay two deductibles on insurance policies."

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

home | marriagedebate.com | resources | about imapp | contact

Copyright Institute for Marriage and Public Policy