Everyone wants to use our story. Everyone with a beef, advocacy issue or pet project, invokes the image of black oppression in order to legitimize their case. In the second presidential debate President Bush compared the plight of the “unborn” to Dred Scott’s attempt to escape from slavery. He isn’t the only guilty party. Animal rights activists compare the lot of the lab rat with that of lynching victims.

There is a tacit admission that black people have suffered the worst human rights abuses in America. Yet no one else really wants any connection with us. It would be nice if those who use us for their own purposes would occasionally advocate on our behalf.

The issue has emerged again because of efforts to legalize gay marriage. The question of whether same sex marriage should become legal can be a deeply emotional one. Homosexuality is contrary to the teachings of most religions and many see it as an affront to deeply held spiritual beliefs. Others who are not so religious are still uneasy at the prospect of such a tremendous change in the definition of marriage. The combination of religious belief and the anger caused by opportune comparisons to racial oppression makes for a combustible mix, but that should not prevent black people from discussing the rights issues of other groups.

Opposition to gay marriage in the black community tends to follow the narrative that discrimination against gays is trivial or even acceptable. Therefore, gay marriage cannot be a civil rights issue. It is true that the demand for civil rights for gays is not the same as the demands for civil rights for black people. Gay people were not enslaved, segregated, or forced to live under the threat of death from mob rule. None of which means they haven’t faced discrimination. Gays were subject to job discrimination, anti-sodomy laws that mandated prison terms, and forced treatment in psychiatric hospitals.

These risks were avoided by staying in the closet. Anyone passing for straight could live a comfortable life. A Faustian bargain is not the equivalent of slavery, but it is difficult to claim that it doesn’t create discrimination.

The very public coming out of New Jersey governor Jim McGreevey is a case in point. He believed that he could run for public office only if he had a wife and kids by his side. If he hadn’t lived a lie, he would never have been elected. McGreevey achieved his career goal but at a very high price.

It is imperative to discuss rights issues without comparing the suffering of one group against that of others. Otherwise the foolishness occurring in the black community because of the gay marriage debate will only worsen.

Too few black preachers appear to be interested in making their voices heard about the occupation of Iraq, the beginnings of an American police state, or rates of incarceration and unemployment that render the idea of black family life moot. The same people who are silent on these issues have no problem finding a microphone to denounce gay people.

The sleaziest among them even endorse George W. Bush because he is right on what they see as a moral issue, having defined immorality purely by sexual activity. Waging war or kidnapping an elected head of state are apparently not worthy of mention when morality is discussed. One particularly foolish reverend, Gregory Daniels of Chicago, made this unforgettable statement: “If the KKK would oppose gay marriage I would ride with them.”

Just as anti-abortion activists designate fetuses as the Harriet Tubmans of the 21st century, the right wing have been allowed to appropriate the history of black oppression to fight against gay rights. Their misuse of black history is no less offensive than anyone else’s and should not be accepted, least of all by the clergy.

The recent decision by a Massachusetts court legalizing gay marriage set off a frenzy of calls for a constitutional amendment and for state laws banning gay marriage. Without these laws, the rest of the 49 states would have to recognize gay marriages performed in Massachusetts.

As these efforts move through the states the black clergy are immediately targeted and too often succumb to the temptation to act out. They are able to do so because there is no consensus in the black community in favor of gay marriage, and because too many gay black people stay closeted, in church and out. What do they think when they sit in church and hear themselves called sinners, if the pastor is generous, or demon possessed, if he isn’t?

The other danger inherent in this narrow debate is the assumption that gay doesn’t mean black. That is obviously untrue, but speaking of gay and civil rights as separate issues allows the deception to continue. There are many McGreeveys in the black community too.

Gay people have not suffered the same degree of oppression as black people, but their desire to marry whomever they want is a genuine rights issue. Besides, if their ability to stay married is no better than that of straight people a large number of them won’t stay together anyway. If gay marriage opponents want to discourage homosexuality they might want to rethink their position.