Kerry Sorry for Past State Dep't Discrimination Against Gays


#1

From ABC News:

Secretary of State John Kerry is publicly apologizing for the State Department’s institutional discrimination in the past against gay and lesbian diplomats.

In a statement, Kerry says discrimination suffered by homosexual State Department workers has gone on since the 1940s. He says denying some people jobs and forcing diplomats out of the foreign service was “wrong then” and “wrong today.”

Speaking on behalf of the department, Kerry on Monday apologized to all those who were discriminated against and said the department was committed to “diversity and inclusion for all our employees, including members of the LGBTI community.”

abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/kerry-past-state-dept-discrimination-gays-44654847


#2

This stuff gets under my skin, because what exactly is he apologizing for? and if it wasn’t himself who did it, then what’s an apology from him for? and if it’s a generalization of an apology, then who exactly is it for and over what? what’s the event that happened that he is apologizing for?

What’s this ‘institutional discrimination’ he is referring to? what does that entail? Does it still exist? and if so, what’s been done to correct it? It’s way too vague and thus meaningless. Way to appease everyone and at the same time no one and not stand up for anything.

What’s next, am I supposed to be apologizing for the Church’s teaching on marriage?

If people bashed up homosexuals back in the 1940’s and committed other abuses, they should be apologizing. I didn’t exist in the 1940’s though.

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh


#3

This is just another reason why I am glad they were voted out, reminds me of Kevin Rudd. Kevin Rudd apologized to the aboriginals, which was okay, but he didn’t specify what for exactly, nor where we apparently stand now? It was just a sound bite to appease people and it didn’t appease anyone because no one was on the same page with it.

I’m a white Australian, I didn’t exist back then, but okay, am I supposed to say to the first aboriginal I see “I am sorry my ancestors probably stole some of your land, which wasn’t defined or anything, your ancestors were a nomadic native population, so for all we know your ancestors probably never even visited where I live, maybe one ancestor somewhere took a dumb on my property hundreds of years ago and so it’s his etc etc and so I will leave now and return it to you.” :confused:

And how far back do you want to go? England, France, Germany? …The Middle East? :confused:

I hope this has helped

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh


#4

Was it discrimination or for their own safety depending on the host country were they might be assigned? There are some countries with strict laws against homosexuality.
Just a thought. I really don’t know what Kerry is talking about or why he feels he should be the one to apologize.


#5

What does the “I” in ‘LGBTI’ stand for?

Isn’t supposed to be a “Q”?


#6

What does Q stand for anyway?


#7

‘I’ is for ‘Intersexed’ (which is the only letter I don’t really find anything objectionable about, apparently it’s when someone is born with both male and female genitalia, but one or the other wont be formed properly or something and it’s left up to the medical professionals to determine how best to proceed on a case by case basis, I’m sure they don’t just ask a 4 year old what they want to be and blind themselves to the physical make up of their child like transgenderism).

Believe it or not ‘Questioning’

There is also an A in other versions which apparently stands for ‘Asexual’

The full thing goes LGBTQIA, sometimes it’s just LGBTQI or LGBT or LGBTI.

… It’s about time Kerry apologized to the ‘questioning’ community if you ask me, and I can’t believe he left out the asexual community, how discriminatory of him! :stuck_out_tongue:

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh


#8

thanks for the clarification for “I” and “Q”. I wouldn’t have figured those out on my own! :tiphat:


#9

No worries :slight_smile:

Unfortunately it’s come with trying to get a handle on this ‘Safe Schools’ program being advocated for school kids in Australia. It’s very clever, because it’s under the guise of an anti bullying program, so your immediately vilified for questioning it, because what kind of a parent doesn’t want a school to be safe? but in actuality, they are using it to push gender theory onto kids, and they teach what all of the letters stand for in LGBTQIA among other things.

Transgenderism, the way they treat and view it, is the one I am most concerned about. It really is just madness their philosophy when it comes to their idea of ‘helping’ those suffering from varying degrees of gender dysphoria.

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh


#10

The Q used to stand for questioning, but now stands for queer, I think.


#11

It definitely doesn’t stand for Queer.

Queer Define:
Adjective

  1. strange; odd.

Verb

  1. spoil or ruin (an agreement, event, or situation).

‘Queer’ would be an offensive word I believe.

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh


#12

Yes, it does.

tahoesafealliance.org/for-lgbqtia/what-does-lgbtqia-mean/
now.org/blog/now-updates-acronym-lgbtqia/


#13

I guess I was wrong, they must have changed it. So they are referring to themselves as ‘odd’ and ‘strange’ now? :confused:

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh


#14

No, they have pretty much embraced a seemingly negative word and turned it into a positive one. Unfortunately in college, they have classes that focus on “queer studies.” Not a major, though…thanks be to God.

May God bless you all! :slight_smile:


#15

gay used to mean happy. marriage used to mean the union of a man and a woman. the classical liberal is closer to what we call conservative today. words can change meaning, sometimes by people who want it to fit their narratives.


#16

Some of us do, yes. It’s called reclaiming a slur.


#17

Pretty soon we will have every letter in the alphabet…:wink:


#18

lol :slight_smile:


#19

Thousands of people were fired by the federal government or were prohibited from holding government jobs for being gay, especially in the State Department, CIA, etc. because it was considered to be a national security threat. According to the blurb from the dust jacket of the book by David Johnson, The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government (University of Chicago Press, 2006):

The McCarthy era is generally considered the worst period of political repression in recent American history. But while the famous question, “Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?” resonated in the halls of Congress, security officials were posing another question at least as frequently, if more discreetly: “Information has come to the attention of the Civil Service Commission that you are a homosexual. What comment do you care to make?”

Historian David K. Johnson here relates the frightening, untold story of how, during the Cold War, homosexuals were considered as dangerous a threat to national security as Communists. Charges that the Roosevelt and Truman administrations were havens for homosexuals proved a potent political weapon, sparking a “Lavender Scare” more vehement and long-lasting than McCarthy’s Red Scare. Relying on newly declassified documents, years of research in the records of the National Archives and the FBI, and interviews with former civil servants, Johnson recreates the vibrant gay subculture that flourished in New Deal-era Washington and takes us inside the security interrogation rooms where thousands of Americans were questioned about their sex lives. The homosexual purges ended promising careers, ruined lives, and pushed many to suicide. But, as Johnson also shows, the purges brought victims together to protest their treatment, helping launch a new civil rights struggle.

The Lavender Scare shatters the myth that homosexuality has only recently become a national political issue, changing the way we think about both the McCarthy era and the origins of the gay rights movement. And perhaps just as importantly, this book is a cautionary tale, reminding us of how acts taken by the government in the name of “national security” during the Cold War resulted in the infringement of the civil liberties of thousands of Americans.

This is partly what Kerry is apologizing for.


#20

And we’ll have to bake a cake to celebrate.

:thumbsup:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.