June: LBGT Pride Month, per Obama proclamation

[Correction]

Don't get me wrong, I don't find a lot in common between myself and other brownskins, so I guess I could lump in 'brown skinned community.' You're absolutely right though that as time inevitably brings those without civil rights (in this case, they gays and their friends) up to par with the rest of us oppressed folk, gaps and cracks will begin to appear. I can't wait for the first public debate between gay dude and transsexual chick.

This reminds me of an NPR story over the weekend about the viciousness of Vietnamese-American politics. There's a certain amount of cannibalism going on where one calls the other a commie and that will basically blackball them, which is a shame because it weakens their cause as a whole.

[thatwasnifty]

I can't wait for the first public debate between gay dude and transsexual chick.

That's already happened. A couple of years ago, the Senate (I think, I'm pretty sure it wasn't the House) finally came around to discussing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which was originally drafted to bar discrimination against sexual orientation and gender identity. Legislators didn't think that language would fly, though, so they dropped gender identity and the Humans Right Campaign supported the change, arguing that compromise would be necessary to obtain any progress. Gender identity could be added later, when the legislature would be more receptive to it. That pissed off lots of transgender activists, who accused the HRC of only being concerned for the white gay man. Their only transgender board member resigned over this, I recall.

[Yuri-G]

lolHRC

I'm sure they've done a lot for gay rights but for some reason I have a strong distaste for them. I'm not even sure that it's valid, but I do.

[thatwasnifty]

Oh, it's completely valid. Their argument for ENDA was idiotic and a complete sell-out. The bill didn't even pass committee, anyway.

[Yuri-G]

damn, what a bunch of faggots

pun intended

[Kuya]

Agree but only with certain conditions. Otherwise taking that stance can easily allow for problems to be publicly ignored. Keep in mind you come from a very different environment regarding homosexuality than what is the norm in America; we still fire people/beat people/etc just for being gay. When you take your stance in America, you end up with Ronald Reagan-esque stances ("I remember a time in America when we had no race problems").



I "defend" his side-stepping in that I can see why he's doing it. I do disagree on an ideological level with separate but equal, yet from a standpoint of feasible action, I don't think it's the proper climate right now to go all the way- it'd only fuel a wave of right-wing reaction and turn gay marriage into the next abortion. That climate is disappointing, sure.

And even though giving gays marriage but calling it something else is unethical, you have to admit it would be a practical improvement from the current reality of denied health benefits, lack of tax breaks, inability to adopt, lack of visitation rights, etc in so many states.

Think of it this way: I ideologically identify strongly with socialism, and therefor find many things I encounter in my day-to-day life unethical. Despite that, I still have to work within the current structure- I have to work for a boss, still have to buy things, still live in a hierarchical society. The actual changes I can effect, or try to, aren't very big, but it's progress nonetheless. The idea is that eventually the conditions will be there to get things right.

Luckily, I forsee the conditions for gays to get it right will be much sooner than for socialists, lol.

Well i'll have to concede because i can't attack you if you're using that stance. If what you're saying is that granting the status of marriage to gays would be more harmful than good and impractical, then i can't help but agree with you in the sense that there are smarter ways to go about that goal.

[Cyn]

Oh, I don't know. Seeing the trannies picket HRC events right next to the baptist bible thumpers is pretty fucking hilarious to say the least.

[Dimmauk]

New Hampshire Legislature approves gay marriage
AP

By NORMA LOVE, Associated Press Writer Norma Love, Associated Press Writer – 23 mins ago

CONCORD, N.H. – New Hampshire legislators approved a measure Wednesday that would make the state the sixth to allow gay marriage, and Gov. John Lynch said he would sign it later in the afternoon.

He had promised a veto if the law didn't clearly spell out that churches and religious groups would not be forced to officiate at gay marriages or provide other services.

The Senate passed the measure Wednesday, and the House — where the outcome was more in doubt — followed later in the day. The House gallery erupted in cheers after the 198-176 vote.

"If you have no choice as to your sex, male or female; if you have no choice as to your color; if you have no choice as to your sexual orientation; then you have to be protected and given the same opportunity for life, liberty and happiness," Rep. Anthony DiFruscia, R-Windham, said during the hourlong debate.

New Hampshire's law takes effect Jan. 1. Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, Vermont and Iowa already allow gay marriage, though Maine opponents hope to overturn that state's law with a public vote.

California briefly allowed gay marriage before a public vote banned it; a court ruling grandfathered in couples who were already married.

New Hampshire opponents, mainly Republicans, objected on grounds including the fragmented process that required three bills.

"It is no surprise that the Legislature finally passed the last piece to the gay marriage bill today. After all, when you take 12 votes on five iterations of the same issue, you're bound to get it passed sooner or later," said Kevin Smith, executive director of gay marriage opponent Cornerstone Policy Research.

Lynch, a Democrat, personally opposes gay marriage but decided to view the issue "through a broader lens."

Lynch said he would veto gay marriage if the law didn't address churches and religious groups.

The revised bill added a sentence specifying that all religious organizations, associations or societies have exclusive control over their religious doctrines, policies, teachings and beliefs on marriage.

It also clarified that church-related organizations that serve charitable or educational purposes are exempt from having to provide insurance and other benefits to same sex spouses of employees. The earlier version said "charitable and educational" instead of "charitable or educational."

The House rejected the language Lynch suggested two weeks ago by two votes. Wednesday's vote was on a revised bill negotiated with the Senate.

The vote was supporters' last chance this year in New Hampshire.

[thatwasnifty]

OK, Rhode Island. You're the only state in New England left. Awesome job, New Hamphsire. Except:

It also clarified that church-related organizations that serve charitable or educational purposes are exempt from having to provide insurance and other benefits to same sex spouses of employees. The earlier version said "charitable and educational" instead of "charitable or educational."

I look forward to seeing this challenged in court, as a violation of equal protection.

[Beckwin]

Well i'll have to concede because i can't attack you if you're using that stance. If what you're saying is that granting the status of marriage to gays would be more harmful than good and impractical, then i can't help but agree with you in the sense that there are smarter ways to go about that goal.

I see federal legislation as a second term possibility, maybe. Doing it now would ignite the right wing, giving them the only possible angle for winning in 12/gaining significantly in 10 for Congressional elections: social reactionism (see nixon).

Give it 6 or 7 years, when hopefully we'll be up to at least 10-15 states that have passed gay marriage legislation/court rulings on their own, and a lame duck Obama could probably push this through the senate without potentially committing political suicide for the mainstream left. Building up to that, he can end DADT, extend anti-discrimination legislation, and get things rolling with "equal" unions.

That's the way I see it could possibly happen. When the economy eventually normalizes, and as we finally exit Iraq (and hopefully Afghanistan), shift focus away from the laughable "War on Terror", and Obama wins another election, I feel like conservatives wouldn't be able to mount a significant social reaction movement.

[archibaldcrane]

^I generally agree with you Beckwin - I just have a hard time putting -that much- faith in any president, even one I generally like as much as Obama. (which is why I criticize his current position)

We'll see.

And never underestimate the ability of conservatives to mount a significant social reaction movement.

[Beckwin]

I'm only saying it's a possibility; I'm not 100% convinced it will happen. I am fairly convinced that things will continue to get better for gays though.

I also feel like the current standards of social conservatism are on their way out, barring any major turn of events.... how long it will take, idk. it's just almost shocking that socially, conservatism has managed to hold most of it's ground for like.... 35 years.

I just can't wait for Nixon's silent majority to die off, leaving the Reaganites old and marginalized and the fundiecons a small minority.

[Rocl]

What is the proper way to celebrate

[Beckwin]

be all gay in front of a government building I guess?

[Restrat]

YouTube - Brian Williams Ask President Obama About Gay Marriage

finally gives something a little specific as an answer about a gay rights question!

[Beckwin]

bump:

Obama to extend benefits to gay workers - White House- msnbc.com

babysteps looks to be the plan for Obama's civil rights agenda. again, I'd love to see more and faster, but something is undoubtedly > nothing.

[Demosthenes11]

hay maybe if I do this they will forget about DOMAz

[Leif]

Federal recognition of state same-sex marriage, ENDA, benefits for federal workers - all good.

Hate crimes, Matthew Shephard, gay pride month, "I love the gays" talk, courts finding make-believe right to "gay marriage" in the consitution - all bad.

There's been steps in the right and wrong directions. I won't proclaim victory quite yet.

[Kuya]

bump:

Obama to extend benefits to gay workers - White House- msnbc.com

babysteps looks to be the plan for Obama's civil rights agenda. again, I'd love to see more and faster, but something is undoubtedly > nothing.

While you may find this, as little as it is, to be positive, many in the gay community are only being angered even further by it.


AMERICAblog News| A great nation deserves the truth: Obama won't issue executive order, won't include health benefits

First off, Chuck Todd on MSNBC said that because this is only a "memorandum," as he called it, it will expire when Obama leaves office. Lovely. Second, health benefits for federal employees won't be covered. Why? Because of DOMA, so says the Advocate.

Also ironic, which I wrote about earlier, is that health care reform likely won't cover us either, since they'd have to include us as "families" and "dependents" - and let's face it, they just compared us to incest and pedophilia, does anyone think this administration or this congress is going to define us as "family" in their health care package? (It's also not clear that DOMA would let health care reform provide us any benefits anyway.) In any case, Obama's inaction on DOMA, and outright defense of DOMA, is now undercutting his other efforts, meager that they are, to help us. It's all tied together.

Obama to offer benefits to gay partners of federal employees - Los Angeles Times

comes days after the Obama administration sparked outrage by filing a legal brief defending the law forbidding federal recognition of same-sex marriage. Obama opposed the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act during his presidential campaign....

As a candidate for president, Obama was a staunch supporter of gay and lesbian rights. He called for repealing the federal Defense of Marriage Act and also the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which forbids openly gay men and women from serving in the armed forces. He promised to help lead the fight.

Since taking office, however, Obama has disappointed many gay activists by not just keeping silent but, lately, by defending some of the policies he criticized.

Conclusion on Obama on gay rights? Complete bullshit.

[EternityEnd]

What else is new? Politicians are fucking hypocrites.

Should have elected Hilary.