GLR Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Read "Sixteen Propositions" by Michael Denneny in our online-Library!
 http://library.gayhomeland.org/0003/EN/index.htm

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: A Gay Republic?  (Read 4119 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

K6

  • Forum member
  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #12 on: Sat, Jun 17, 2006, 10:08 »

The message of the Gay State shall be Pride, Safety and Confidence for our own people. For the rest of the world, we can offer Mutual Respect, Cooperation and Strength - other Nations shall feel proud to count us to their friends, or likewise think twice to become our enemies. Like any other nation, we would of course pursue our own national interests, while of course offering a helping hand when needed.

If it is to contribute to something beyond its own interest,and for the benefit of mankind in general,an eventual gay independent State will have to devote efforts and investments in two fields and with the corresponding research institutes.One of these research institutes will deal with the issue of modern reproductive technology.The other will deal with the issue of ageing.If its scientific community can master these two phenomenon alongside the respective scientific communities of other countries,a gay State will show the world a path of independence from hethro breeders,by diminishing the demographic importance of the later,and containing their arrogance and political power and influence in more modest limits.A State which would succeed in slowing down or arresting the biological process of ageing,for example,would deal a fatal political blow to the imperial arrogance of hethro breeders.Subsidarily,a gay independent State would protect its own scientific community from the interference and persecution of unenlightened religionist hethro countries and governments.There is a common cause here between the scientist who suffers for the advancement of knowledge and at the hands of uncivilized barbarous religionists,and the gay nation suffering and toiling for existence and independence.The gay people must bring its own contribution to the evolution of mankind,of which it will itself become a beneficiary.

K6

K6

  • Forum member
  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #11 on: Thu, Jun 15, 2006, 00:22 »

If a gay republic comes into existence, it will exert no more attraction upon individual gays than the gay ghettos of great cities currently do. The Castro exists and has for many years, so too does Boys' Town and Chelsea. A great many gays move there every year, and have for many years. Just as you suffered no great privation from the migrations to the ghettos that have been going on for at least two generations, the gay youths of the future will not lack for either company or guidance. As for drains upon economies, the 'millions' that you speak of are unlikely to materialize.

Once an independent gay Republic is in existence,most gays will not move to it.Most will instead try to butter their bread on both sides,remaining in or trying to be admitted to hethro liberal countries.Thus regarding an eventual gay independent Republic as some form of insurance against bad days on the hethro side,in which they could invest economically.A balance of power sort of,between the promesses and guarantees of the hethro political body no gay worthy of that name will ever and entirely trust,and the unknown adventure of self-determination awaiting them in a gay country.Those who will come first,as I once pointed out,will be adventurers and pionneers.There are about 175 million exclusively homosexual males in the world nowadays (at a ratio of 5% of exclusively homosexual males out of a world population currently at 7 billion).20 to 30 million reinforced yearly by gay immigration would make a perfectly viable gay State.As for gay youth,its lack of life experience and its romanticism could cause it to flee in large numbers and thus proportions to a gay independent country.I do not think that gays from the older generation should adopt them.Rather,it is gay youngsters who,in a gay independent and free country,who should be allowed to choose their adult role models,while congregating preferientially within their own age group.They would constitute the hope of older gays,as well as their consolation for not having know at the same age what freedom was.

K6

K6

  • Forum member
  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #10 on: Wed, Jun 14, 2006, 10:22 »


You speak out of my heart - I also have suspected K6 of being a totalitarian at various occasions. >:) This being said, we must not forget that the vast majority of gays live in conditions very distanf from being liberal or at least liveable. For such gays, even the emigration to a largely totalitarian gay country would be a great personal win, even if they were forced to surrender many of their other freedoms (for property, children etc.).

A gay State could not possibly take away from gays what gays have themselves renounced to.The renunciation to traditionnal family life is embodied in our very lifestyle.A gay State will merely ratify this.In its constitution,it may write "By way of his sexual orientation,the gay individual has renounced any private initiative in matters having to do with reproduction.The reproductive function is therefore and in this country of ours
transfered to the competence of society as represented by the State.In this country of ours,gays statisfy their primary physical and spiritual need for continuity and eternity in the public service of the people and of his youth coming from abroad and having escaped foreign hethro rule.Until such time it has been established on a sound scientific basis how a gay sexual orientation is to be determined among human beings,a
moratorium over human reproduction shall be observed in this country".

K6

K6

  • Forum member
  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #9 on: Wed, Jun 14, 2006, 10:08 »

Well, a state can't make its right of existence a subject of consent by general public, even if this general public is a gay public.

The purpose of the State is to the represent the national interest of the people.All for the best if then the interest of the people coincides
with his will,just too bad if under certain particular circumstances it doesn`t.As gay separatists we may be condemned by our contemporaries,that doesn`t matter: history will absolve us.If ever a gay independent State comes into existence in the centuries beyond us,those free gays of the future will expectadly produce some beautifull movie about our quest for self-determination and freedom.In it,will be casted in the role of vilains those who said or wrote that all gays should remain forever under the hethro jackboot,or that foreign hethro rule was for us such a wonderfull experiment and event that it was to be tried or rehearsed eternally.Foreign hethro domination has cost us enough over the last millenia,and we should cut our losses now.

K6

Mogul

  • Viktor Zimmermann
  • Administrator
  • Guru
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 691
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #8 on: Wed, Jun 14, 2006, 03:09 »

I don't think any Gay Kingdom should be called the Gay Kingdom, unless every Gay Man and Lesbian Woman votes YES for that, because no Kingdom/Republic has the right to steal the voice of the people. I think a Gay Majority Kingdom should be all inclusive of all people that wish to live and support an "Equality For All" idea. 

Well, a state can't make its right of existence a subject of consent by general public, even if this general public is a gay public. The outmost of courtesy is to grant those opponents the right to refuse the citizenship of that Gay State. There is also nothing to be said against more than one gay states - just as there existed 2 german states (along with Austria and Switzerland), two or five gay states could peacefully co-exist with a gay-friendly countries like Netherlands or even Kingdom of Fridet, shall it be established on the world's map.  :T As long as no organization/state lays the all-consumptious claim over the entire gay population, I see no source of conflict.

1)  Even if every gay man & woman moved to a new Republic/Kingdom, what would happen to those that are born in Russia or America and must live there for 16-18 years before even the chance of moving?   How would this continue to scar homosexuals abroad, perhaps even to not admitting that they are Gay or Lesbian because there is no Older Generation to help them along (as there was when I came out).  And even if they did come out and move, how would this drain the economy of the Republic/Kingdom to continue to take in millions of immigrants each year?

There is no need that every gay man and woman moves to the Gay State - it is of course, not capable to solve all problems of gay community. It will solve, however, many serious problems which can't be solved by any other approach: for example, the question of gays born in extremely hostile countries like Iran, Zimbabwe etc. Certainly, we will hardly be able to bring them home untill they are 16 or 18 and can leave their countries "as tourists". But what is the alternative? Leave them there for the rest of their lives? Certainly not - in the meanwhile they would at least have some light at the end of the tunnel. As for the missing gay generation, at such places like Russia or Iran the older generation is not visible anyway - we would not "steal" the role models from the gay youth there, on contrary - knowing of our state, they will have many opportunities to become informed of many bright, honorable individuals as example of what they can be. Having much better ressources for propaganda via ouwn state SAT television we would break through any attempted informational blockade from homophobes. Just think of all those gay educational and cultural programs we could offer to those poor isolated fellows if we had the ressources of a state.

To the economy: our human ressources would be renewed by immigration, requiring 2-3 years of integrative courses for newcomers - this is not overly much in comparison with those 16-25 years of nurturing and educating kids in any other society. Beyound this, why shall the gay state face some particular economic difficulties? Certainly, many poor immigrants would not allow the same social standards as in Western Europe, but aren't many countries (the majority of this world, actually) scratching at the edge of poverty? I think it would be not a particlarly shameful stand if we could achieve some medium level of prosperity - this is more than most other states can claim for themeselves.

2)  How would the Republic/Kingdom keep alive, providing that Gays & Lesbian relationship do not have children unless they are bisexual, adopt children, or have artificial insemination?  What would happen when these Children are str8?  Would reverse discrimination happen?  Would the Gay Republic/Kingdom set a good example to the rest of the world?

Well, by immigration - thanks to nature, our folks are constantly born at a constant rate ewerywhere. If we assume that gay people migrate to the gay state in the age of 20 - 40 (average: 30), we can calculate the medium life span in the gay state as approximately 40 years. This would suggest that our yearly regeneration rate must be of 2.5%. In other words, a city-state of 1 million people would require  25.000 newcomers each year - this isn't overly much. This process would be much the same like the usual work force migration to any larger european or northamerican city - nothing dramatic.

The straight children might indeed constitute a "problem" with respect on gay structure of the population. We have discussed this issue in here and here extensely but came to no satisfying solution, as the opinions were divided. My personal suggestion is that only adult homosexual individuals can become citizens of the Gay State, while children of citizens would be allowed the permanent residency. If they are are straight, they will be in need to seek citizenship from countries where their parents came from to the Gay State. If straight children would choose to stay, they by no means shall be forced out - but they would not be granted the political rights connected to the citizenship. Because of the general migration in the modern world and the possibilities to marry outside of the Gay State, this solution appears to me as connected to a minimum of evils.

3)  What message would the Gay Republic/Kingdom set to the rest of the World?  Would it be a message of Equality, Love, and Peace?  Would it be a message that those of us that do not move for any reason would feel like supporting or PERHAPS could the a Gay Republic/Kingdom (with no other name) send a bad message to the World and make Gay's look worse?

The message of the Gay State shall be Pride, Safety and Confidence for our own people. For the rest of the world, we can offer Mutual Respect, Cooperation and Strength - other Nations shall feel proud to count us to their friends, or likewise think twice to become our enemies. Like any other nation, we would of course pursue our own national interests, while of course offering a helping hand when needed.

Sometimes I think that while we take Israel as a good example of successfull state foundation, we by times draw to close parallels to the developement of this state to our own future developement. When you were asking about a "bad example", were you thinking of concentration camps filled with straights and living in poverty and oppression, while evil gays are shooting their ragged and hungry children for sports? This mustn't be this way. When we restrict immigration to homosexuals only, we will rather resemble any other nation-state which limits immigration to those who fit its national ideal: in their case they young professionals, in our case gays and lesbians. Beyound these restrictions, the Gay Nation shall contribute to the global peace and prosperity in coperation with other nations.

On the other hand, I agree with Feral - nation-building is probably not that much about sending messages to others, but rather about getting one's own business managed. Shall the Gay State turn into reality, the government will have enough to do with building homes and feeding the people, the foreign politics are redundant.

So you would in a sense force people not to have children, whereas there are millions of Gay & Lesbians that want children?  I don't call this a step forward but rather a step backward.  Life should be more about Freedoms not CONTROLING your citizens.  Besides this would be a democracy no?  So wouldn't the PEOPLE decide on this issue?  And why does my neighbor or president have the right to tell me if I can have children or not?

Your ideas tend to be very totalitarian...

You speak out of my heart - I also have suspected K6 of being a totalitarian at various occasions. >:) This being said, we must not forget that the vast majority of gays live in conditions very distanf from being liberal or at least liveable. For such gays, even the emigration to a largely totalitarian gay country would be a great personal win, even if they were forced to surrender many of their other freedoms (for property, children etc.). Please note that I do not propagate such a regime - if we can have a democratic and free society, why shall we choose the worse alternative? But I almost tend to the assumption that even the worst autocratically ruled gay state would be a wonderfull place to start - it would be up to us to make it any better.
« Last Edit: Wed, Jun 14, 2006, 03:21 by Mogul »
"Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right!" Salvor Hardin

Feral

  • Official Flying Monkey Smiter
  • Administrator
  • Hero member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 262
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #7 on: Wed, Jun 14, 2006, 02:20 »

Quote
1)  Even if every gay man & woman moved to a new Republic/Kingdom, what would happen to those that are born in Russia or America and must live there for 16-18 years before even the chance of moving?   How would this continue to scar homosexuals abroad, perhaps even to not admitting that they are Gay or Lesbian because there is no Older Generation to help them along (as there was when I came out).  And even if they did come out and move, how would this drain the economy of the Republic/Kingdom to continue to take in millions of immigrants each year?

There but one activity that "every gay man & woman" shall do -- we shall, in due course, die. This is an over-simplification, of course, but it would be a grotesque error to imagine that ALL gays will ever do anything with unanimity. If a gay republic comes into existence, it will exert no more attraction upon individual gays than the gay ghettos of great cities currently do. The Castro exists and has for many years, so too does Boys' Town and Chelsea. A great many gays move there every year, and have for many years. Just as you suffered no great privation from the migrations to the ghettos that have been going on for at least two generations, the gay youths of the future will not lack for either company or guidance. As for drains upon economies, the 'millions' that you speak of are unlikely to materialize.

Quote
2)  How would the Republic/Kingdom keep alive, providing that Gays & Lesbian relationship do not have children unless they are bisexual, adopt children, or have artificial insemination?  What would happen when these Children are str8?  Would reverse discrimination happen?  Would the Gay Republic/Kingdom set a good example to the rest of the world?

Gay people come from the same place that str8 people do. No matter how many gays choose to move to San Fransisco, New York, Toronto, or some hypothetical gay republic, more gays will be born to str8 parents everywhere. While there is no agreement anywhere on why gay people exist, it is clear that they do, and their production is an ongoing process -- a process carried out in the customary manner by str8 people. The gay population in the Castro and surrounding areas has, unless I am very much mistaken, grown over the years, and is likely to do so. The gay community in San Fransisco concerns itself with many issues, but somehow running out of gay people is not among them.

As far as setting good examples -- good people should do what is right. Outside of those parameters, it is a waste of effort to deliberately set examples.

Quote
3)  What message would the Gay Republic/Kingdom set to the rest of the World?  Would it be a message of Equality, Love, and Peace?  Would it be a message that those of us that do not move for any reason would feel like supporting or PERHAPS could the a Gay Republic/Kingdom (with no other name) send a bad message to the World and make Gay's look worse?

I cannot agree that the founding of countries or the settling of communities sends any kind of "message." Nation-building is not an exercise in communication. Self-determination and the liberty that comes from it is its own reward. As an aside...if you will examine what the critics of gays actually believe, you will see that it is quite impossible to look "worse" in their eyes. I would have to out-do Stalin by at least 3 times to even live up to their expectations, and I have no intention of imitating people such as that.

Quote
I enjoy reading this forum, and there are very many good ideas here, but I think alot of thinking and pondering is needed and I hope my questions help in that regard.  A Perfect World would be every Gay Child being welcomed in open arms, where children can decide there future rather than being forced a society lie or what they determine right or wrong so that societies leaders' can further control the people and benifit from it.

For myself, I agree with you in large part. There is an entire universe of thinking and pondering to be done. The gay people exist in every country on the planet. Consider that for a moment. There is no language on Earth that is not spoken by gays. There are no gods that are not worshipped by gays. There is no political or economic philosophy anywhere that is not adhered to by gays. There is no question that we will misunderstand each other. There is no question that we will disagree with each other. This is not a reason to refuse to try.

I am glad you like the forum. I like your contributions to it. Discussion is a good thing, particularly when we disagree. If you feel strongly about some point, feel free to explain it to us. I, at least, have changed my mind somewhat on many things thanks to the views expressed by other posters on the board.
Stonewall was a riot.

K6

  • Forum member
  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #6 on: Wed, Jun 14, 2006, 01:13 »

There is a reason there are heterosexuals, bisexuals, and homosexuals.  It is for variety.  Seclusion will not work.

You are teaching me something I didn`t knew and hadn`t noticed: how happy is our present life in the company of non-gays (sic).

K6

fridet

  • Forum member
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
  • Forward Now!
    • Fridet
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #5 on: Wed, Jun 14, 2006, 01:01 »

Your own scenario,insofar as I can assess it,leads just to another hethro majority within two or three generations.An hethro majority and political regime is something we already have,so I see no point in establishing another one of our own making.This would teach us nothing that we do not already know.I would prefer a complete secession from the heterosexuals for a change.

K6

I disagree.  First I do not have a problem with Heterosexual people, and the establishment of Fridet is not cornered on Gays but rather Freedom.   Second I do not see Fridet becoming a Majority Hetero Kingdom with 3 Generations due to continued immigration and support from the Gay Community.  Also births of Homosexuals and Bisexuals will be higher in our Kingdom due to the openness of our Kingdom, and lack of anyone in the closet since Hate Speech will be illegal.  Even in very liberal nations around the world, you still have religious groups that put down homosexuals under the guise of religion.

Your totalitarian views do no include the views of the Gay Community at large, and I see very little people moving from bad to worse just because they are homosexual.  Restricting freedoms will not help, but rather send a negative message to the rest of the world giving them ample ammunition to continue to harass gay people as "bad" people.

There is a reason there are heterosexuals, bisexuals, and homosexuals.  It is for variety.  Seclusion will not work.

K6

  • Forum member
  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #4 on: Wed, Jun 14, 2006, 00:47 »

Your ideas tend to be very totalitarian...

Your own scenario,insofar as I can assess it,leads just to another hethro majority within two or three generations.An hethro majority and political regime is something we already have,so I see no point in establishing another one of our own making.This would teach us nothing that we do not already know.I would prefer a complete secession from the heterosexuals for a change.

K6

fridet

  • Forum member
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
  • Forward Now!
    • Fridet
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #3 on: Wed, Jun 14, 2006, 00:33 »

Demographics of a gay independent State: (1) renewal of the population solely through gay immigration from heterosexual countries (2) no human reproduction of any kind,activity in that field nationalized and limited to research in the field of new reproductive technology as well as the origins of sexual orientation in humans.

K6

So you would in a sense force people not to have children, whereas there are millions of Gay & Lesbians that want children?  I don't call this a step forward but rather a step backward.  Life should be more about Freedoms not CONTROLING your citizens.  Besides this would be a democracy no?  So wouldn't the PEOPLE decide on this issue?  And why does my neighbor or president have the right to tell me if I can have children or not?

Your ideas tend to be very totalitarian...

K6

  • Forum member
  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403
Re: A Gay Republic?
« Reply #2 on: Wed, Jun 14, 2006, 00:12 »


2)  How would the Republic/Kingdom keep alive, providing that Gays & Lesbian relationship do not have children unless they are bisexual, adopt children, or have artificial insemination? 

Demographics of a gay independent State: (1) renewal of the population solely through gay immigration from heterosexual countries (2) no human reproduction of any kind,activity in that field nationalized and limited to research in the field of new reproductive technology as well as the origins of sexual orientation in humans.

K6

fridet

  • Forum member
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
  • Forward Now!
    • Fridet
A Gay Republic?
« Reply #1 on: Tue, Jun 13, 2006, 23:44 »

I have a few serious thoughts I will to bring up (or bring back up).

1)  Even if every gay man & woman moved to a new Republic/Kingdom, what would happen to those that are born in Russia or America and must live there for 16-18 years before even the chance of moving?   How would this continue to scar homosexuals abroad, perhaps even to not admitting that they are Gay or Lesbian because there is no Older Generation to help them along (as there was when I came out).  And even if they did come out and move, how would this drain the economy of the Republic/Kingdom to continue to take in millions of immigrants each year?

2)  How would the Republic/Kingdom keep alive, providing that Gays & Lesbian relationship do not have children unless they are bisexual, adopt children, or have artificial insemination?  What would happen when these Children are str8?  Would reverse discrimination happen?  Would the Gay Republic/Kingdom set a good example to the rest of the world?

3)  What message would the Gay Republic/Kingdom set to the rest of the World?  Would it be a message of Equality, Love, and Peace?  Would it be a message that those of us that do not move for any reason would feel like supporting or PERHAPS could the a Gay Republic/Kingdom (with no other name) send a bad message to the World and make Gay's look worse?

Having said that.  I think a Majority Gay Kingdom is a great idea, though not designed to take the whole world's Gay Population.  It should be designed as an International Beackon of Hope and sending a Strong Message.  I think it should be a place full of Love, Peace, and most important Equality for ALL PEOPLE.  I don't think any Gay Kingdom should be called the Gay Kingdom, unless every Gay Man and Lesbian Woman votes YES for that, because no Kingdom/Republic has the right to steal the voice of the people. I think a Gay Majority Kingdom should be all inclusive of all people that wish to live and support an "Equality For All" idea.   I support a Kingdom because a Gay King or Lesbian Queen can fully stand continuesly for Equaltiy in all respects.  I do think its possible and urge people to consider Fridet.  We came upon a name the means Freedom, because thats what its all about.  I know several str8 people that are FULL ON for this NEW FREEDOM.  Being Gay has defined my life, but I see a FUTURE in Fridet where being Gay Means Nothing other than who you sleep with or marry.

I enjoy reading this forum, and there are very many good ideas here, but I think alot of thinking and pondering is needed and I hope my questions help in that regard.  A Perfect World would be every Gay Child being welcomed in open arms, where children can decide there future rather than being forced a society lie or what they determine right or wrong so that societies leaders' can further control the people and benifit from it.
Pages: [1]   Go Up