From Toodles: The Stonewall Riot

[ApologiaPhoenix]

I'm not the only one writing. Let's talk about Stonewall.

The link can be found here

The text is as follows:


What happened at Stonewall for the homosexual movement? Let's talk about it on Deeper Waters.

Normally, I don't really share the blog with anyone, but my wife has been making a study lately on the homosexual movement. Now for those who don't know, she did have surgery yesterday for a deviated septum, so it could be awhile before she posts again. I myself could be posting later on today again. For now, all that follows comes from her.

June 27th, 1969, at the Stonewall Inn, in New York's Greenworks Village, a deadly riot was created and lasted for several days. But before we get into what happened at the riot, let us go back to what life was like for the homosexual before the riot.

Homosexuality was illegal. If you were caught doing any homosexual activities, you were not only arrested, but you were also permanately listed on maps as basically a sexual deviant, and could not get a license for any sort of business or job. You were also often beaten severely and called very offensive names such as "faggot." You had to live in secrecy. If anyone found out your sexuality, you would pretty much be cut-off of society. Homosexuality was even listed as a mental disorder. You would be taken to a special mental institute for gays and would get things such as electroshock therapy whenever you were turned on by an image of the same sex, or you were given a pharmacudical pill that would essentially give you the feeling of drowning, similar to waterboarding. Life as a homosexual was very difficult. When you'd finally find a place where you could be yourself as a homosexual individual, police officers would eventually raid those areas (such as gay bars) and make plenty of arrests. Again, you would often be severely beaten.

Now, let's go to the Stonewall event. On the evening of June 27, 1969, six police officers raided a popular gay bar known as the Stonewall Inn, which like many gay bars, were owned by the Mafia. Many people were outraged by this and surrounded the Stonewall Inn. There was a huge crowd yelling and throwing objects at the police officers. Trash cans were also set on fire. The crowd surrounded the police officers. The police officers were then trapped inside the Stonewall Inn. More police officers then came to the site with helmets and shields. Drags known as "Queens" taunted to poilice officers doing the rockettes dance and singing,

"We are the Stonewall girls
We wear our hair in curls
We wear no underwear
We show our pubic hair
We wear our dungarees
Above our nelly knees"

Eventually, the police officers and the crowd were beating each other. The cops would beat people with clubs, while the people in the crowd would continue to throw things and even bite the officers. The police reports recorded this information on the first day of the riot:

David Van Ronk assualted Officer Gilbert Weisman by throwing an unknown object which struck the officer's right eye, causing injury.
Raymond Castro, Marilyn Fowler, and Vincent Depaul assaulted Officer Charles Broughton by kicking him.
Wolfgang Podolski assaulted Officer Andrew Scheu by striking him on his left eye, causing him to fall and fracture his left wrist.
These are only a few of the reports. On the second day of the riot, more people began to join in the riot, including "straight" people, causing the rioting to become even more intense. People in the crowd were not only hit on the back, but also serious injury to the head. This lasted for six days when it finally ended. Many bodies layed on the ground. The crowd had consisted from hundreds of people, to thousands of people involved in the rioting.

One year later, Gay Pride week was created, where homosexuals would march around Christopher St in a parade, promoting their sexuality. This still continues every year to this very day, celebrating what the men and women did on that very day.

Now that we've taken a peak into history, let's take a look at this at both point of views.
The homosexual community was being treated improperly. They were being exploited and beaten. It is no wonder they reacted the way they did. Does this make what they did right? Not at all. Beating people is never the right thing to do. The way how the police force treated homosexuals was wrong, but rioting and throwing objects at them and biting and kicking them, as well as taunting them, was wrong as well. Here's another interesting fact to compare then to now. When these riots were going on, the homosexual community were not concerned with having same-sex marriages. In fact, they were trying to get away from the pressures of family and marriage. But today, they are pressuring not only to make it legal to have same-sex marriages, but for the rest of the world to also accept same-sex marriage. Why has this all of a sudden changed? Why is it that then they didn't care about marriage, but now they're arguing for same-sex. With my research, I am trying to only stick with the facts for both parties. This is only the beginning of my research and I hope you will follow along this journey with me, and that we will examine our hearts in the process.

For more information on the Stonewall Riot, here are some resources.

http://socialistalternative.org/lite...stonewall.html
http://www.outhistory.org/wiki/Stone..._June_28,_1969
http://biblethumpingliberal.com/2011...-1969-to-1984/

[Leonhard]

Who did the bigger crime? The people who revolted, or the mistreaters of the gays?

I can agree that what was done by the gays here was wrong. Not the Gay Pride parade, but definitely how that riot got out of hand. I'm not sure standing up to the policemen was a bad thing. There comes a point where systematic harrasment has gone too far. "Disobedience to tyrants, is obedients to God" However its always easy to come after history and dictate from an armchair how things out to have been.

What would you have done back then Nick? As a Christian apologist, or as a gay man if you can imagine yourself as one. Are you aware of apologists back then speaking up for the humanity, and proper treatment of gays?

My emotions are getting the better of me in this post. I want those policemen to answer for the crimes that they did. So many gays have been mistreated throughout history, beyond any degree of sanity and reason. And the people who did that haven't answered to anyone for it. The crimes of the gays against the public, drown, in comparison with what they've gotten. The rage I feel wants these critters, those beat-stick wielding and uniform wearing pigs, these filthy please-men hung out in shame and infamy for all eternity. The policemen who survived that riot (didn't they all), went home to a life hardly any different. They didn't get to feel just a fraction, of a fraction, of a fraction of the pain and suffering these gays had felt all their life. Oh to have made them see.. Precisely like I wanted my bullies to see and feel, exactly what I felt. If I had the ability to cast a curse that would give them that.. I'm not sure I'd be virtuous enough to hold back from using it.

And that's not right either! Its not the right solution! The best thing is forgiveness, which is especially hard for the victim. How on Earth do you forgive someone who doesn't regret anything? Not even God wants to forgive an unrepentant sinner. The offender doesn't get to say anything in my book, forgiveness is easy for them, they never see what they destroy. Those policemen did what they had been told to do.. it was all fair, after all it was a mob run bar, and those men were crocked. They were doing society a favor. Ugh.. I'm doing it again.. sigh, I hope you get the point?

After the Apartheit system fell in Africa, the solution to the conflict was universal forgiveness for what had happened, and a truth commission that would tell the stories of what had happened fairly.

I'm biased, I might weigh the crimes against homosexuals stronger and notice less the crimes of homosexuals against others. Its hard because I am one. I'm sure its also hard for Nick, because you're a US evangelical Christian apologist. I hope this viewpoint helps.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Who did the bigger crime? The people who revolted, or the mistreaters of the gays?

I would not favor homosexuality as illegal any more than adultery and I don't think a Natural Law thinker like Aquinas would disagree. There are some freedoms you're willing to allow for the greater good of not intruding on everyone's lifestyle.

I can agree that what was done by the gays here was wrong. Not the Gay Pride parade, but definitely how that riot got out of hand. I'm not sure standing up to the policemen was a bad thing. There comes a point where systematic harrasment has gone too far. "Disobedience to tyrants, is obedients to God" However its always easy to come after history and dictate from an armchair how things out to have been.

What would you have done back then Nick? As a Christian apologist, or as a gay man if you can imagine yourself as one. Are you aware of apologists back then speaking up for the humanity, and proper treatment of gays?

I would say that I think homosexuality should not be seen as illegal. Of course, I still see it as sinful. I would also think that the crowd was wrong in how they treated the police and I can't blame the police for how they acted after that.

My emotions are getting the better of me in this post. I want those policemen to answer for the crimes that they did. So many gays have been mistreated throughout history, beyond any degree of sanity and reason. And the people who did that haven't answered to anyone for it. The crimes of the gays against the public, drown, in comparison with what they've gotten. The rage I feel wants these critters, those beat-stick wielding and uniform wearing pigs, these filthy please-men hung out in shame and infamy for all eternity. The policemen who survived that riot (didn't they all), went home to a life hardly any different. They didn't get to feel just a fraction, of a fraction, of a fraction of the pain and suffering these gays had felt all their life. Oh to have made them see.. Precisely like I wanted my bullies to see and feel, exactly what I felt. If I had the ability to cast a curse that would give them that.. I'm not sure I'd be virtuous enough to hold back from using it.

What evil do you have in mind that the police did?

And that's not right either! Its not the right solution! The best thing is forgiveness, which is especially hard for the victim. How on Earth do you forgive someone who doesn't regret anything? Not even God wants to forgive an unrepentant sinner. The offender doesn't get to say anything in my book, forgiveness is easy for them, they never see what they destroy. Those policemen did what they had been told to do.. it was all fair, after all it was a mob run bar, and those men were crocked. They were doing society a favor. Ugh.. I'm doing it again.. sigh, I hope you get the point?

Yes. I also agree. You don't forgive someone who doesn't repent, but you maintain a spirit of forgiveness. Holding a grudge does you no good and I have to help the Princess with this. She was bullied a lot growing up. I have to maintain this for my last employer who fired me. I still have no job.

After the Apartheit system fell in Africa, the solution to the conflict was universal forgiveness for what had happened, and a truth commission that would tell the stories of what had happened fairly.

Thank Desmond Tutu and his devotion to the gospel of Christ for that.

I'm biased, I might weigh the crimes against homosexuals stronger and notice less the crimes of homosexuals against others. Its hard because I am one. I'm sure its also hard for Nick, because you're a US evangelical Christian apologist. I hope this viewpoint helps.

I know that that's where you're coming from. Yes. That bias is something to avoid. For me, there's nothing in here essential to the faith. If a Christian does something stupid, they do something stupid. If they do something wrong, they do something wrong. I'm meant to defend the faith. I'm not meant to defend everything anyone does in the name of Christ.

[Whag]

The way how the police force treated homosexuals was wrong, but rioting and throwing objects at them and biting and kicking them, as well as taunting them, was wrong as well.

Stonewall was a turning point precisely because this reached that boiling point. To say the reaction was immoral reflects a rather sad naivete of how revolutions start. That was a real revolution that ended a great evil.

Here's another interesting fact to compare then to now. When these riots were going on, the homosexual community were not concerned with having same-sex marriages.

At that time, gays themselves knew very little about the genetic component of homosexuality other than their feeling their orientation was cemented early on. Religion has quite necessarily had to step aside in deciding whether homosexuality is acceptable and normal. Now societies decide this based on incoming data. Now a new component of morality has been introduced into society. Shame is now attached to discrimination and harassment of homosexuals, whereas it was almost non existent less than 30 years ago.

Since there are far more gays in society than we knew back then, more voices will necessarily bring about more demands. Since there's no logical reason why women oriented to the same gender don't have less meaningful relationships than a heterosexual couple, there's no reason why the concept of legal coupling cannot be expanded to accommodate our new understanding of this historically maligned human condition.

If you're going to argue the slippery slope fallacy, please be careful and don't use silly arguments about people marrying petunias. Be original, please. =)

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Stonewall was a turning point precisely because this reached that boiling point. To say the reaction was immoral reflects a rather sad naivete of how revolutions start. That was a real revolution that ended a great evil.

Even if it was, that does not mean the way to handle it was moral. The moral status of actions is not determined by the results alone.

At that time, gays themselves knew very little about the genetic component of homosexuality other than their feeling their orientation was cemented early on. Religion has quite necessarily had to step aside in deciding whether homosexuality is acceptable and normal. Now societies decide this based on incoming data. Now a new component of morality has been introduced into society. Shame is now attached to discrimination and harassment of homosexuals, whereas it was almost non existent less than 30 years ago.

Shame is a working part of any society. However, discrimination goes both ways. Discrimination is done to those who don't agree. Note also that my stance is we do not need religious arguments to determine if homosexuality is right or wrong. That is in our other thread. I will deal with it there.

Since there are far more gays in society than we knew back then, more voices will necessarily bring about more demands. Since there's no logical reason why women oriented to the same gender don't have less meaningful relationships than a heterosexual couple, there's no reason why the concept of legal coupling cannot be expanded to accommodate our new understanding of this historically maligned human condition.

First off, how many homosexuals are there? Give me a source. Also, no one is saying anything about the relationships shouldn't be entered because they wouldn't be meaningful. To say there is no reason why marriage should be left between a man and woman makes me think you have not read or listened to any real argumentation in support of traditional marriage.

If you're going to argue the slippery slope fallacy, please be careful and don't use silly arguments about people marrying petunias. Be original, please. =)

Why? What's silly about those?