1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

LGBT News Was Reagan as anti-gay as people portray him?

Discussion in 'Current Events, World News, & LGBT News' started by QueerTransEnby, Oct 23, 2014.

  1. QueerTransEnby

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2014
    Messages:
    3,708
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Gender:
    Genderqueer
    Gender Pronoun:
    They
    Sexual Orientation:
    Other
    Out Status:
    Some people
    Op-ed: The Gay Truth About Ronald Reagan | Advocate.com
     
  2. Tardis2020

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2014
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New York
    I don't think he was antigay for a multitude of reasons and I think you proved your point pretty well. I'm not to familiar with the AIDS Crisis, so I'm not going to comment on that because I pretty much have no idea.
     
  3. OGS

    OGS
    Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2014
    Messages:
    2,716
    Likes Received:
    728
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I think things are very rarely as black and white as people remember them but for me he will always be the figure-head of a generation of Americans who stood by and watched because all the right people were dying. The notion that he did all that without even believing it personally if anything lowers my opinion of him. I may just be bitter but I watched too many people die and I know too many people who watched almost everyone they know die. If on this particular topic I am bitter at least I feel like I came to it honestly.
     
  4. Pret Allez

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    6,785
    Likes Received:
    67
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Gender:
    Female (trans*)
    Gender Pronoun:
    She
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    Some people
    1) Is it true that he stalled repeal of antisodomy laws?
    2) If so, what criminal penalty did those laws provide?
    3) To what extent were those laws unjust in an extremely violent way?
    4) At what point are we allowed to call "stalling repeal" extremely violent?
    5) How does this sort of behavior merit the distinction "far from perfect" more than "violent criminal"?
     
  5. Randall D

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2014
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Midwest
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Missing the point here people.
    Bottom line, it doesn't matter.
    What matters is that too many republicans, especially republicans with power and in power, march to the beat of the same drum and march in line with their party agenda.

    It doesn't matter if or might Reagan had felt this way or that way about gays.
    We would have never known because the republican party is in itself extremely anti-Gay.
    Then and still today.
    Reagan was owned by that party hook line and stinker.

    What matters is that republicans seldom if ever break away independently from party lines. Party beliefs. Party agenda.
    If one should, they would be ran out of town on a rail.
    And never again elected into public office.
    With no republican money to fund the republican candidate, the republican candidate would never win.
    And remember... they eat their own.
    And to get the GOP funding, you must walk the walk and talk the talk.

    The republican party hates gays as a whole.
    They are allied to the extreme far religious right.
    And we all know exactly how the far religious right feels about homosexuality.
    No need for reminder of that.
    And the sad thing, Republicans still are moving more and more far religious right every day. Every election cycle.
    The republican party is in fact 100% owned and operated.

    Just read the republican party platform election after election. Extremely anti-Gay.
    So if the party says hate gays, they hate gays.
    They will hate gays thru their policies.
    They will hate gays thru their governing.
    They will hate gays thru their ideology.

    It doesn't matter if Reagan was this or was that, or supported anything anyone gay.
    Or if Reagan had close gay hollywood friends, or not.
    It doesn't matter.
    As long as the party believes gays are evil and to be suppressed, the republican in power will comply with party.
    And that fully included Ronald Reagan.

    Reagan did not utter the word HIV, not because he did not have symphaty for his gay hollywood friends dying of aids. Reagan would not utter the word HIV because in the 1980's it suggested sympathy towards gays and suggested concern with what was happening in the gay community.
    Still the republican party ideology both then, and today. To be anti-gay in every way.

    So it doesn't matter with Reagan.
    His lips were sealed.
     
  6. AwesomGaytheist

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Messages:
    6,909
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Gender:
    Genderqueer
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Reagan did absolutely nothing about the AIDS crisis while in office. Zip, zero, zilch, nada, nothing, as at that time, conservatives/Republicans were all but applauding the deaths of millions of LGBT Americans. Though if it weren't for Reagan's Surgeon General, C. Everett Koop, things would have been even worse. The religious right pleaded with Koop to do nothing about AIDS, because at that time it was "god's punishment for the homosexuals, they got what they deserved so let them die." Koop later said "As a doctor who's sworn the Hippocratic Oath, you can't do that."

    Reagan tried to shy away from the topic of gay rights while in office, however on July 12, 1984, he was quoted as saying:

    "Society has always regarded marital love as a sacred expression of the bond between a man and a woman. It is the means by which families are created and society itself is extended into the future. In part the erosion of these values has given way to a celebration of forms of expression most reject. We will resist the efforts of some to obtain government endorsement of homosexuality."

    Reagan had to pander to the Religious Right to get elected in 1980, as most of those people had voted for Jimmy Carter in 1976. He knew that if he was going to be re-elected in 1984 that he needed the support of the far right, and since the popular conservative opinion at that time was that AIDS was a punishment, he had to stand idly by as 21,000 people died over 8 years.

    On a side note, one of the things that I've noticed is that quite a few of the people that worship Ronald Reagan were either not alive or not old enough to understand politics while he was President.
     
    #6 AwesomGaytheist, Oct 27, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2014
  7. Chip

    Board Member Admin Team Advisor Full Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    Messages:
    16,560
    Likes Received:
    4,757
    Location:
    northern CA
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I saw an interview with C. Everett Koop MD, who was the surgeon general during the Reagan era. He was asked why there was such slow response from the US government on the AIDS crisis, and Koop responded that it came directly from Reagan, who wasn't interested in putting any money toward AIDS.

    The interviewer asked if it was out of ignorance. Koop responded surprisingly directly. "Oh, it wasn't ignorance. It was hatred. He had no interest in doing anything to help gay people, even though it was a major public health crisis." The interviewer was skeptical and asked for details, and Koop went into a pretty lengthy explanation of various circumstances where agencies and individuals within them had tried to do things to help, only to receive the message that AIDS was not a priority and funding/support/energy toward the issue was not appropriate. This viewpoint came directly from Reagan, and was supported by many of those around him.

    Reagan also had a long history of telling racist jokes, and making a lot of other bigoted remarks. And he was simply delusional about a lot of things. He did more to destroy, cripple, or otherwise halt social progress than any president in recent memory. To try to imply that he had any positive impact on gay people is simply not an accurate assessment.
     
  8. BryanM

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Messages:
    2,894
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Columbia, Missouri
    Gender:
    Genderqueer
    Gender Pronoun:
    They
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Good thing C. Everett Coop was the Surgeon General, if he wasn't, there may not have been a response to AIDS until the mid-1990s with Clinton.
     
  9. CyclingFan

    Full Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    1,362
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Northern CA
  10. resu

    Advisor Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    4,968
    Likes Received:
    395
    Location:
    Oklahoma City
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Some people
    Actions speak louder than words, and by his actions, he showed a profound lack of human decency and concern for LGBT people. Yes, he might be a product of his times, but there were many others who were able to work past those problems. I often think there must be some profound misanthropy that causes someone like Reagan to switch from Democrat to Republican.