...when they should be in the forefront...
There is news that the 2010 census will, for the first time, include unmarried gay couples. To me, this is a step in the right direction, as I believe all citizens should be counted in the official census. This policy reversal should be celebrated by all, especially the White House, who in recent days needs all the positive news it can get. But, as James Withers says in the blog, it's typical Obama, in that all his policy moves occur below the fold. With a group that hasn't seen Obama embrace them fully, policies like this, that signify inclusion should cause Obama to move away from his modus operandi.
As I said upon Obama's inauguration, when the president is right, he will be praised. He should be celebrated for the moves he's made thus far on GLB"t" issues, such as extending benefits to the partners of GLB"t" federal employees, even if it doesn't go far enough. Though he still insists he's a friend of the GLB"t" movement, I believe the movement will alow him to punt only so many times (we're gonna have a problem if he goes through with repealing a ban on enlistment based on HIV status). The president should be used to acting "now" without waiting for Congress to act, or at least have time to read bills. Obviously, equality for gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and "transgendered" is not as high a priority as selling our future to the highest bidder.
Ok, I'm calm...
I call on the president to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" despite his belief that Congress must act first. He should use the bully pulpit, or the Blue Goose, to stand on the side of freedom (for once in his fledgling administration) and explain why this disastrous policy needs to be placed on the ash heap of history. Considering his reaction to the pleas of soon-to-be former 2LT Dan Choi, we already have our answer...
For the record, I disagree with Debbie Schlussel about the impending doom this extension of recognition will cause.
This marks my 100th post on Blogger.com...there'll be drinks and finger foods on the table in the back.
Have a great day...
Showing posts with label Dan Choi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dan Choi. Show all posts
27 July 2009
Obama: Don't look at my record, only my words...
Gay Community: That's why we have a problem...
I can't say that I have too much sympathy for members of the GLB"t" community who supported Obamessiah, knowing his stance on gay issues. I wait for the day when the GLB"t" community and blacks come to the realization that at the heart of outright discrimination, lies a Democrat. They've been doing it since the founding of the nation and don't plan on stopping any time soon. That's not to say the GOP hasn't had its moments of racial and homophobic faux pas, as Democrats and liberals make everyone aware of them. The gay community has yet to learn that they are political tools used by Democrats to achieve their ends. It was evident in the Election of 2004, when liberals were outraged that states began banning "gay" marriage, without focusing on the reasoning behind it, Democrats who felt that the courts were a better avenue for making it possible, rather than the legislature. It was evident in 2008, when Democratic-leaning groups decided to bypass the voters and used the courts to trump them. It was even evident before then, when in 1993, President Clinton and a Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee reached a compromise called "don't ask, don't tell." Oh, and let us not forget Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO)...
Undeterred, gays overwhelmingly continue to support Democrats. Since President Obama took office, over 260 members of the GLB"t" community have been drummed out of the military, one of which appealed to the president, in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief, to put a halt to the policy. Obama, in a reply to another request, said that he has to consult with Congress on the matter, thereby punting the issue. The President has the authority to suspend charges of homosexuality without congressional action. The president should concern himself with readiness, not his political capital. According to research from the Palm Center, 24 foreign militaries allow gay members to serve openly, and they have not indicated that the inclusion of gay members adversely affects military readiness, unit cohesion, and morale. In my experience in the military, the average member doesn't give two shits about whether their friends are gay or straight, let alone members in their units.
I don't mean to rope all Democrats as being anti-gay, as New York Senator, Kristen Gillibrand (D), has tried to convince members of the Senate Armed Services Committee to hold hearings concerning the repeal of DADT, despite Obama's rhetoric. Steve Benen has more. I am one of those who came around on DADT, although the policy is selectively enforced, I felt that straight men (and women to some extent) would feel threatened by having a known gay servicemember standing beside them. The fact that the policy is used as a bludgeon against gays, used by some members as retaliation, is yet another reason, and a chief one at that, for the policy to be rescinded. Right now, the military is in dire need of Arab linguists, and other hard-to-fill jobs, and DADT has been one of the reasons why the military continues to face difficulty in finding qualified people to fit those billets. Military readiness is the key in achieving victory in any mission.
I am deadset against discrimination based on sexual orientation. I believe, and will continue to believe, that more protection needs to be extended to members of the GLB"t" community, because some people will use their wrong-headed perception of gays in their efforts to harm them. I understand that some oppose gays for what they believe are moral reasons. Those reasons should not be used to deny a qualified gay person a service or position they deserve as a US citizen.
Have a great day...
I can't say that I have too much sympathy for members of the GLB"t" community who supported Obamessiah, knowing his stance on gay issues. I wait for the day when the GLB"t" community and blacks come to the realization that at the heart of outright discrimination, lies a Democrat. They've been doing it since the founding of the nation and don't plan on stopping any time soon. That's not to say the GOP hasn't had its moments of racial and homophobic faux pas, as Democrats and liberals make everyone aware of them. The gay community has yet to learn that they are political tools used by Democrats to achieve their ends. It was evident in the Election of 2004, when liberals were outraged that states began banning "gay" marriage, without focusing on the reasoning behind it, Democrats who felt that the courts were a better avenue for making it possible, rather than the legislature. It was evident in 2008, when Democratic-leaning groups decided to bypass the voters and used the courts to trump them. It was even evident before then, when in 1993, President Clinton and a Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee reached a compromise called "don't ask, don't tell." Oh, and let us not forget Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO)...
Undeterred, gays overwhelmingly continue to support Democrats. Since President Obama took office, over 260 members of the GLB"t" community have been drummed out of the military, one of which appealed to the president, in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief, to put a halt to the policy. Obama, in a reply to another request, said that he has to consult with Congress on the matter, thereby punting the issue. The President has the authority to suspend charges of homosexuality without congressional action. The president should concern himself with readiness, not his political capital. According to research from the Palm Center, 24 foreign militaries allow gay members to serve openly, and they have not indicated that the inclusion of gay members adversely affects military readiness, unit cohesion, and morale. In my experience in the military, the average member doesn't give two shits about whether their friends are gay or straight, let alone members in their units.
I don't mean to rope all Democrats as being anti-gay, as New York Senator, Kristen Gillibrand (D), has tried to convince members of the Senate Armed Services Committee to hold hearings concerning the repeal of DADT, despite Obama's rhetoric. Steve Benen has more. I am one of those who came around on DADT, although the policy is selectively enforced, I felt that straight men (and women to some extent) would feel threatened by having a known gay servicemember standing beside them. The fact that the policy is used as a bludgeon against gays, used by some members as retaliation, is yet another reason, and a chief one at that, for the policy to be rescinded. Right now, the military is in dire need of Arab linguists, and other hard-to-fill jobs, and DADT has been one of the reasons why the military continues to face difficulty in finding qualified people to fit those billets. Military readiness is the key in achieving victory in any mission.
I am deadset against discrimination based on sexual orientation. I believe, and will continue to believe, that more protection needs to be extended to members of the GLB"t" community, because some people will use their wrong-headed perception of gays in their efforts to harm them. I understand that some oppose gays for what they believe are moral reasons. Those reasons should not be used to deny a qualified gay person a service or position they deserve as a US citizen.
Have a great day...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)