Chairman compares gays to neo-nazis

[Chicken of Bristol]

NEW YORK (AP) -- The City Council's first openly gay leader refused to participate in the nation's largest St. Patrick's Day Parade, blasting its chairman for remarks comparing gay Irish-American activists to neo-Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan and prostitutes.

"I don't even think they dignify a response," Council Speaker Christine Quinn said Thursday of parade chairman John Dunleavy's comments to The Irish Times.

Quinn said she already had decided not to join the 150,000 marchers on Fifth Avenue after organizers rejected her compromise attempts and barred an Irish gay and lesbian group for a 16th straight year.

"I can't deny who I am on any given day," said Quinn, who was arrested in 1999 for protesting at an exclusionary parade in the Bronx.

Dunleavy told the newspaper, "If an Israeli group wants to march in New York, do you allow Neo-Nazis into their parade? If African Americans are marching in Harlem, do they have to let the Ku Klux Klan into their parade?"

Referring to the Irish Lesbian and Gay Organization, Dunleavy said, "People have rights. If we let the ILGO in, is it the Irish Prostitute Association next?"

Quinn said the city's Irish gays had long hoped to march with their own banner, like other groups, but were willing to walk with the City Council as a unified group. "There were moments where I was hopeful that we could have come to some agreement. But that didn't happen."

Dunleavy told The New York Times in Friday's editions that Quinn "is more than welcome to march as the leader of the City Council but no buttons or decorations in any shape or form."

Efforts to let Irish gays march under their own banner date to 1991, when parade organizers first rejected an ILGO application. When 35 ILGO members marched with a Manhattan division of the Ancient Order of Hibernians and then-Mayor David Dinkins, they were sprayed with beer and insults. It was the group's last appearance in the parade, which draws up to 2 million spectators.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who was marching Friday, had urged the Hibernians to change their stance. "I've always believed this is a city where all the parades should be open to everybody, and orientation, gender ... should not be the deciding thing," he said.

The mayor marched earlier this month in an inclusive St. Patrick's parade in Queens.

Link

[Xanthus]

That is nothing short of shocking... even coming from the most reactionary nation on the planet.

[Black Dagger]

Wow, that 'chairman' really knows how to throw out false analogies. Positing queer irish-americans as the KKK and Neo-Nazi's to hetero irish-americans as african-americans and israelis is absurd. It's not the queer irish that are persecuting heterosexual irish people, it's the other way around! Perhaps if the analogy was inverted it would make some sense, but then again 'sense' is not often associated with queerphobic arguments.

[PRC-UTE]

What a headcase.

I hope the boycott against it grows and more people frequent the inclusive version in Queens.

[Sentinel]

Isn't "Saint Patricks day" a reactionary, nationalist holiday with superstitious origins (please correct me if I'm wrong here)?

The question here in my opinion is: why on earth do those gay rights activists want to attend it in the first place?

If you go to reactionaries, you'll get shit like this, it should be obvious. Homosexual christians, as well as homosexual patriots, are concepts I fail to comprehend. But then again, replace the word homosexual with the word worker, and you get the same result:

A sucker.

[TC]

The question here in my opinion is: why on earth do those gay rights activists want to attend it in the first place?

If you go to reactionaries, you'll get shit like this, it should be obvious. Homosexual christians, as well as homosexual patriots, are concepts I fail to comprehend.

I think its really quite obnoxious to just presume someone's politics by way of their sexual orientation. Just because someone's gay doesn't mean they have to be part of your political agenda, or that they're any more 'naturally' part of your political agenda. Who you want to be with shouldn't have any relevence to how likely or reasonable it is for you to be religious or 'patriotic.' (its equally unreasonable for anyone)


I'm sure George Bush would have a lot of sympathy with the 'i just can't comprehend the 'concept' of a gay christian or a gay patriot.'

[Sentinel]

Seems like you missed this:

But then again, replace the word homosexual with the word worker, and you get the same result

It's stupid of anyone oppressed, to demand acceptance from reactionary people like "patriots" or christians, or want to take part in their events. And queer people are oppressed in present day society.

While certain aspects of capitalism might still work to reduce homophobia in society (St.Patrick's day certainly doesn't seem like one to me&#33, a communist revolution would be in our direct interest.

Therefore, I'm not sympathetic to the cause of those 'activists', who are reformists. That's what I meant.

[TC]

Not all gay and queer people are oppressed. Simon Hughes MP is not oppressed, Congressman Barney Frank is not oppressed, Ellen DeGeneres is not oppressed, Rosie O'Donnell, not oppressed, Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana, not oppressed, Giorgio Armani, not oppressed...tons of other filthy rich gay people who aren't celebrities are also not oppressed.

All working class people on the other hand are all oppressed.

Gay people are not a socio-economic class, they therefore do not have unified class interests anymore than white people or asian people have unified class interests.

Acting as if they do is to sterotype them and project your own politics onto a group of people artificially, priviledging your views for theirs.

[Sentinel]

TC, I see what you mean, and agree to a certain degree. People that rich aren't affected by oppression in the same way others are.

They make a very little minority of the worlds population, though. But I admit you are right, not all queer people are oppressed.

These activists, on the other hand (propably petty-bourgeois), clearly felt oppressed, right? In my opinion they should understand that supporting progressive thought and fighting reactionary traditions is in their interest.

They aren't likely to get equal treatment from a bunch of patriotic christians, and if they want to participate in the bullshit traditions of such, they shouldn't complain. But why not attend the may day march instead? And join a movement that fights for equality for all.

Also, christianity is inherently homophobic. That's one reason, I don't understand gay christians. Worshipping a "god" that wants you stoned to death seems weird to me.

[TC]

is the Irish Lesbian and Gay Organization even a gay rights activist group or is it just a new york gay social organization who are only political in that they're pissed off that the St. Patricks Day Parade group is descriminating against them? Their website seems to be broken.