Hours before Copeland’s death, Hemant Mehta, who runs the popular religion blog Friendly Atheist, noted that Copeland did not appear to have bigoted views toward transgender people or people who simply enjoy cross-dressing.
“There’s a story making the rounds about an Alabama preacher/mayor who secretly dresses in drag and adopts the persona of a trans woman on social media,” Mehta tweeted. “The problem? It’s not clear he’s a hypocrite. If he’s not a bigot, why is he being outed?”
I think there is a good argument to be made for outing someone closeted who is using their power to oppress LGBT+ people, but there is also a trend of labeling any homophobic politician as being in the closet when a lot of them are just plain old bigots.
I'm sorry, but I must vehemently disagree. There is absolutely no reason to discuss publicly someone's private sexual preferences. Otherwise, you have the society they want where witch-hunts can be started over rumors.
there is also a trend of labeling any homophobic politician as being in the closet
But if your oppressor is LGBTQ+ and oppressing you for being LGBTQ+ it is "rules for thee..."
Tell me I'm wrong, you nut.
Most importantly, in this case I don't think we should be defending the rights of an oppressor over the rights of the oppressed.
Edit:
I could go on. The exact reason someone would not want to be outed is because of the social stigma created by the oppressor. So your stance is doubly absurd.
But if your oppressor is LGBTQ+ and oppressing you for being LGBTQ+ it is "rules for thee..."
Yes. He is "rules for thee..."ing you.
But when you out him you become the one not abiding by your own rules. Twice. Once for the outing, because you don't want to be outed. And again for not holding yourself to your own standard of not having rules that don't apply to you.
I don't think we should be defending the rights of an oppressor over the rights of the oppressed.
If you think that some people don't deserve to have their rights protected, then you are the oppressor.
Yes I'm saying it's ok to be queer and not ok to be intolerant.
What the fuck is wrong with your reading comprehension?
No one is saying that it is ok that he was outed.
They're saying he was making rules as a Republican official that bound LGBTQ people and the instant those rules would apply to him he killed himself..
That quote is ignoring the fact that it was his fellow conservatives who went after him to destroy his life. It is his fellow conservatives -- the ones he chose to stand among and support -- that enjoy this outcome.
You cannot be surprised when bullies bully. And the people who hang out with bullies because it benefits them to do so? They are also bullies.
And unfortunately, I think that's exactly why you're wrong. The issue isn't partisanship. The issue is bigotry. These people outed him because they hate and want to destroy LGBT people. There's no shades of grey here. There is no moderate position. This story happened even with no one from the opposite partisan position being involved.
I don't see anyone making that argument. What I do see is people saying that being conservative removes your pass to be queer. And that's just atrocious.
No one has a pass to be conservative, especially a queer person. No one. Not one person. It is not acceptable to be a bigot, a bully. It's not acceptable to be cruel just because you believe there is a certain social hierarchy that ought to be enforced. All the tenants of conservatism are unacceptable. And if you are queer, you now have INTIMATE knowledge of what it is like to be on the receiving end of that hatred and oppression and should know better than most to take no part in it.
You don't have to apologize. Your silence will suffice.
You seem to be thinking that just cuz someone is LGBTQ that makes them a good person inside.
You don't have to speculate about what I think. I've explicitly stated it on clear and uncertain terms. A person's sexuality is their own private business and there's no reason to be outing anyone.
Your reading comprehension is shit.
I don't think you have demonstrated enough reading comprehension to sit in judgement.