that's pretty good for a first video blog. long? yes. hard to sit through the whole thing? yes. while i commend the effort and the bravery of the video, i don't think it really provided anything new to the debate. it's like yeah..ok, that's what a person of her background is supposed to do...speak up. but it became just another expected angry tirade that can hardly change minds.

weather "marriage" itself as a "necessary human need" is a debatable. "marriage" itself is a practice created by the religious, so obviously, the religious would want to protect it if part of their basic moral belief is challenged...or encroached upon. the problem is all the little perks that the religiously influenced legislature have given to this thing call "marriage". not only the laws give perks for being "married", but social pressure too, especially within traditional communities like asians. "traditions" that we are also trying to protect.

1. If anyone is brave enough to stand up to the ststus-quo and stop sucking cock then maybe, someone else would be recognized in the civil right movement

2. This has to be the most stupidist thing ive ever heard, are only white men queer. delete this question.

3. All the other minorities have benefitted from the black churches being at the forefront of the civil rights movement. Those Civil Right Amendments do not apply only for blacks. I mean getting hung, sprayed, beat and wopped for looking different is not a choice. A white gay man in the 60s still live better than most blacks.

3. Only Asians can express the the social problem in the asian community, same for Latinos

4. Im sorry, but to be honost, I could care less what goes on the gay community

5. Because the church will not recognize a man to marry another man, HOGWASH. Thats your choice. I dont care what those idiotic studies say. Gays do have civil rights, please.

This article might put some since in your heads read it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/nov/20/african-american-civil-gay-rights

Frankly,

i'm just guessing, but you didn't watch the video, did you? I guess this because gigi actually dealt with each one of your points in her video.

i'd appreciate it if you'd comment on the VIDEO, which is what we're discussing here, and not my paraphrase of the video. thanks.

Claire
I shouldve watch the video first and I do agree her with most of her points.

This is a democracy and not a theocracy! No minority group (women, asians, blacks, hispanics, immigrants, etc,) is safe if we accept that one group can be oppressed. If it is ok to oppress gays why not asians? The jump is not that large.