Not to start the gay flame wars again, but why is DADT a bigger deal than ENDA to the gay community? Honest question, no snarking.
A Question
This post is in: Domestic Politics
A Question
Reader Interactions
183Comments
Comments are closed.
Come for the politics, stay for the snark.
Give the craziest people you know everything they want and hope they don’t ask for more? Great plan.
How can republicans represent us when they don’t trust women?
People are complicated. Love is not.
So it was an October Surprise A Day, like an Advent calendar but for crime.
Republicans seem to think life begins at the candlelight dinner the night before.
“I never thought they’d lock HIM up,” sobbed a distraught member of the Lock Her Up Party.
“Squeaker” McCarthy
Whoever he was, that guy was nuts.
I know this must be bad for Joe Biden, I just don’t know how.
I like you, you’re my kind of trouble.
A snarling mass of vitriolic jackals
“Can i answer the question? No you can not!”
Yeah, with this crowd one never knows.
Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.
Consistently wrong since 2002
Motto for the House: Flip 5 and lose none.
if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.
Bad news for Ron DeSantis is great news for America.
New McCarthy, same old McCarthyism.
Not so fun when the rabbit gets the gun, is it?
My years-long effort to drive family and friends away has really paid off this year.
We cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation.
The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.
Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.
geg6
That’s one that puzzles me, too, John. I hope someone comes and answers.
stacie
Honestly, I think DOMA is a bigger issue than those. It’s disgusting to me that legally married gay couples in the states that allow it still face discrimination in taxation, survivor’s benefits, and every other federal marriage incentive.
aimai
I’m not gay but I’ll take a whack at it. I think DADT took on a special life of its own because it seems like it would be so easy for Obama to overturn it and we’ve seen that major social change sometimes requires just that effort from the top. Look at MA and equal marriage–before the ruling and right after we heard all the usual screetching about societal change by fiat and how no one would stand for it and MA would erupt into flames (or flaming) and lo and behold…crickets. Lots of happy married gay couples. Lots of happy school kids. And now even the MA teabaggers (check roy at alicublog for the link) came out in favor of it and tried to sever teabaggery and small gubmint talk from anti gay talk.
So if I were gay I’d see DADT as a “gimme” to the Obama campaign. Easy to do, astonishingly important short and long term consequences, and an insult in that its not being done. Its precisely because its *not* as big a deal as ENDA, in some ways, that it seems so problematic that they keep pushing it off. He promised to do it and he is sort of refusing to do it. That’s somehow worse than a much bigger deal that he didn’t promise to do, or that seems harder to do.
aimai
stacie
Oh, and if I had to guess about the gay establishment’s focus on DADT, I would think it has something to do with gay male commentators bemoaning strong, valorous men doing honorable, manly things and getting slapped down for it.
Too simplistic? I don’t know. I’ve wondered as well.
Cassidy
Historically, social change has been preceeded by integration in the military. Therefore, the precedent has been set that if gays can gain open acceptance in the military, then society won’t be long to follow. Tactically it’s logical.
toujoursdan
It’s not to this gay person.
I think some of heat is over a (flawed in my understanding) notion that all Obama has to do to is sign an Executive Order and the problem is solved. And that Obama, by not choosing to sign it, really doesn’t like us.
I think ending DADT is much much more complicated than this and that the Executive Order route may do more harm than good, but I have been called an Obamabot for suggesting this.
Ash
I’ll take a stab at it:
something about the military being all macho and the fact that gays (well, I guess this only really applies to gay men, even though lesbians are the most effected by it…) are generally stereotyped as overly effeminate at the fact that this plays into that?
I’m 99% sure I’m wrong.
de stijl
Because it hasn’t been a big issue in the press. DADT was the first Conservo freak out for Clinton.
ENDA is unknown to the general public, Hell, it was unknown to me until you posted this and I googled it.
PS – e-mail Andrew Sullivan on this. It will be interesting to see his reaction. His Obama HRC speech coverage was almost entirely focused on DADT and how Obama was a total FAIL on the matter.
Napoleon
@aimai:
Your theory is the one I would think is right.
Glenn
John, not sure I accept your premise that DADT is more important to “the gay community” (whomever you think that is) than ENDA.
But to the extent it is true, I would suspect that it’s partly due to the fact that so much of the country — or at least the “centers” of gay activism — are already covered by state and local nondiscrimination laws.
bobbo
Me, I’m a gay, and I think repealing DOMA is more important. I don’t know I agree with you that my “community” thinks repealing DADT is more important. Anyway, if “we” do, maybe it’s because DADT is lower-hanging fruit. If you will.
Ted the Slacker
Not sure it is a question over what is a bigger deal – I think DADT is seen as a more likely win at the moment, that’s why it gets more headlines.
But I’m not teh ghey either, so happy to be corrected.
Ash
@toujoursdan: You’re probably right, and I guess aimai too. Sullivan’s freak out has largely been focused on “Just sign the order dammit!!!”
Just Some Fuckhead
Damn you, I had the best FTW evah.
Hugh
Hey I’m gay so I’ll speak. What the hell is ENDA?
The Grand Panjandrum
@stacie: Word. This legislation causes everything related to marriage equality to go sideways. The The Federal government always recognized interracial marriages as valid. Federal employees were never discriminated against as long as they had a legal marriage certificate from any state. But for some reason that is not good enough for the Feds now. Why? DOMA. Revoking that legislation would seem to be a much higher priority to my mind.
Same sex couples who are now legally married here in NH, and are Federal employees, should be given the same benefits as all other legally married couples. This seems to me to be a no brainer, well except for the part where DOMA is now the law of the land.
R-Jud
@aimai:
I’m also not gay, but this seems to jive with what my gay friends in the US think of the situation.
Ash
@Hugh: Employee Non-Discrimination Act
toujoursdan
I should add that the stuff I read on the gay activist blogs is very different than the conversations I have with most of my gay friends and acquaintances. Everyone seems to understand that making change is a slow winding process and they are willing to be patient.
There is also some residual distrust over Bill Clinton’s administration who made similar promises and then stabbed the gay community in the back with DOMA and DADT. Social and political realities were different then, but memories are long and many still believe that Obama is going to “pull a Clinton” on us now.
Hugh
Love that Google. Question answered.
Martin
Run away! Only pain awaits ye at the end of this post!
Hugh
And thanks, Ash.
General Winfield Stuck
Guessing, but Maybe not being able to serve your country is more important than serving at fries the local homophobe burger death. That’s a little snarky, but only toward cholesterol. I’m prejudice that way.
Softail
I agree that partly it seems like it would be easy for Obama to overturn it or at least issue a stop loss order and also partly because of the precedent of Harry Truman integrating the military. Also I think there’s some cold political calculus involved. DADT is about “heroes” who are being badly treated while ENDA is about waitresses and stuff. There are a lot of really appealing “poster soldiers” for DADT. For ENDA not so much. Really though they’re the same issue just military vs civilian. I never wanted to be in the military so DADT is a pretty theoretical issue for me. Personally I agree that ENDA is of more practical importance.
Howlin Wolfe
I think Aimai is right. Obama could overturn it with an executive order, unless I’m mistaken about that. Repealing DOMA would be a major legislative campaign.
So the “big deal-ness” of it is relative. It’s an issue that can be engaged and there are some examples and victims that illustrate it very well.
With the DOMA issue, on the other hand, putting forward a couple, saying “these guys want to get married, and now they can’t!” doesn’t have the same persuasive value as a good soldier harassed out of the army, or discharged simply because of it. There are many of those [email protected]aimai:
JGabriel
aimai:
Truman desegregated the army with an executive order. So, with that historical antecedent in mind, it’s understandable that people would think Obama can set an example by overturning DADT himself — whereas people know ENDA can only be ended by lobbying Congress, and therefore isn’t amenable to single point pressure on the president.
The Obama administration, it should be noted, believes DADT can’t be overturned by executive order, but must also go through Congress. There are studies that say otherwise. I don’t know which is, in fact, the case. But the perception that Obama can do it himself may be a factor here and might be influencing the debate, or at least its focus.
.
bobbo
Weird how I saw ENDA and immediately translated it in my head to DOMA. Guess ENDA isn’t even on my radar.
General Winfield Stuck
@Martin:
A little pain says your alive.
Ash
@JGabriel: I’m sure this has been explained multiple times, but DADT IS legislation. This whole executive order blah blah blah stuff has to do with suspending the law until it’s repealed.
de stijl
I’m astounded that people supporting DADT/DOMA, etc. haven’t actually read the 14th Amendment. It’s fairly clear, actually.
I really don’t understand why this is a big deal for most folks.
toujoursdan
My understanding it that even if Obama signed a “stop loss” or Executive order, all that would do is put those charged under DADT into legal and career limbo. They may not be discharged but that couldn’t serve either because they are still in violation of the legally existing policy.
How this would work in a combat situation is beyond me. Presumably a serving soldier charged under DADT couldn’t give orders to a subordinate. (S)he would be dead weight wouldn’t (s)he and be stuck waiting for something to happen. This seems to be a fate worse than discharge (assuming they are honourably discharged.)
I could have this wrong.
Lee from NC
Aimai, Bobbo and JGabriel for the win. I’d be curious what John means by “the gay community” by the way. We’re pretty much just as diverse as the rest of you. Are you speaking about so-called “leaders” of the gay rights movement? People like Somonese don’t represent the rest of us very well, no more than Al Sharpton represents all blacks.
Martin
Thank you, Johnny Cash.
Ash
@bobbo: The ENDA bill has been around for like 15 fucking years or something ridiculous like that. This seems to be a time when it might actually get passed though.
toujoursdan
An Executive Order can’t override DADT and force integration. Only Congress can end DADT. Obama may be able to stop the prosecutions of soldiers charged under DADT but as I mentioned above, it may put them into legal and career limbo, which again, may be a worse fate.
Persia
There was also a big clusterfuck the last time ENDA came up on whether or not transsexuals should be included. It’s hard to feel good about that particular can of worms, I suspect.
JGabriel
@JGabriel:
Grrr. Please, please, please to return editing?
.
betamu
Ending DADT seems more urgent to me because it really seems to have hurt our national security; plus there are so many stories out there about men and women who make the selfless choice to defend the rest of us and the US Govt. spits in their face over it; the damage this policy has inflicted is more noticeable. ENDA is also very important, but even though I live in a very conservative area, I have worked in a very gay-friendly industry for 27 years and have had very little personal experience with bigotry in the workplace or domicile.
stacie
@Howlin Wolfe: DOMA doesn’t prevent gay couples from marrying in the states where it’s legal, it prevents them from receiving federal marriage benefits that heterosexuals take for granted (read: tax preferences, survivor benefits, etc.) and allows other states to decide that these married couples are legal strangers to one another once they cross the state line.
that colored fella
EDNA is not a front burner issue to the gay community because the majority of gays/lesbians (at least the ones with the militant agenda) live in large metropolis’ with non-discrimination laws already on the books and/or work for companies/corporations that provide the same.
As far as DADT, I think it is challenging the hypocrisy of American ethos that if you do your job well (and at the same time serve your country), no one can take that way from you.
Hugh
I suspect some of the difference is because gay people are just as responsive to media focus as anyone and, using myself as an example, have not been very aware of ENDA. Now why are the political advocacy groups who should know better more focused on DADT? Not sure. It might be because the military is so iconic that finding equality there packs a much bigger emotional punch. It gets a lot more traction in the general population. It’s also nice as a gay man to have recognized that gay men can be just as aggressive, nasty, brutal, honorable and loyal as straight men. Goes against the stereotype.
Cassidy
Stop loss has nothing to do with Exectuive Order or DADT.
Comrade Mary
DADT can be overturned by executive order fairly quickly. And if Congress then got off its ass and passed binding legislation as well (or is that even permitted after an executive order?), it would be a permanent or near-permanent change. (There are a number of paths to Gilead still, folks.)
But I can see why Obama would want it done right via Congress, even if it takes some months longer.
1) If Obama signed the executive order first, would enough member of Congress be ready to burn political capital to pass legislation?
2) Would a conservative-driven media frenzy derail big things like health care?
Meanwhile, it looks as if some ducks are getting in rows in Congress anyway. I think DADT will be overturned before midterms in 2010.
Anna Granfors
I’m queer, so I’d like to see it repealed just because it’s egregious discrimination. That having been said, once it’s repealed, I’d switch all energies to a campaign to dissuade GLBTs from joining the armed forces. Unfortunately, our armed forces are involved in illegal, stupid wars right now, guided by “honorable leaders” like McChrystal and frankly, nobody, GLBT or otherwise, should want to be a member.
stacie
@Persia: I think that ENDA has to contain protections for transgender folks. As a queer person, I simply don’t rights conferred on the backs of the next despised minority. All of us or none of us — we’ve learned to take care of ourselves pretty well by now.
Ash
@Cassidy: There seems be a LOT of confusion around this. If you google it, you find tons of articles saying stop-loss is all it requires. Then you find tons of other ones that say gay members would STILL have to be discharged even if there was a stop-loss order.
My guess is that no one really knows how the fuck it works.
Cassidy
@Comrade Mary:
Not true. It would be an unlawful order. Servicemembers are obligated to not follow unlawful orders.
mcc
The gay establishment isn’t focused on DADT really at all. The gay establishment is narrowly focusing on an incrementalist approach where DADT doesn’t come up until after ENDA. However the gay establishment has terrible blog outreach so you’d be unlikely to hear much of anything from them.
The gay grassroots meanwhile (or at least the part of it which dominates internet discussion) is warring with the gay establishment, and the gay grassroots is largely ignoring ENDA and focusing on DADT. I still don’t understand why.
I think I mentioned this in a previous thread, but Andrew Sullivan was at one time opposed to ENDA, because of that whole conservatism thing. This year he has been fastidiously avoiding addressing ENDA (though he has written multiple angry screeds expressing his opposition to the hate crimes bill), in fact avoiding talking about ENDA so carefully this causes me to suspect he still opposes it and just doesn’t want to discuss this in public. If he’s even mentioned ENDA on this blog this year I haven’t been able to find where that happened– I’ve been periodically scanning the front page of his blog on days this year that ENDA has some kind of major movement forward and there’s just no mention at all.
soonergrunt
People forget that DADA is simply the operational form of a federal law. DADA is how the federal law against homosexuals serving in the military is enforced or rather, dealt with.
DADA could be changed with an executive order today, and it won’t change the fact that homosexuals will still not be allowed to legally serve in the armed forces.
One reason that this is so important–to overturn this law and its supporting policy of DADA is that integration and full social acceptance of better or more equal treatment of women and minorities has historically been preceded by their military service, and the attendant realization that these people are fighting and dying for us but they do not get to claim all of the benefits pertaining to that.
It’s easier to show a fundamental wrong that must be corrected (because the target group has ‘earned’ it) than it is to simply say “this is wrong and we’re going to fix it because it’s the right thing to do.”
BombIranForChrist
@Hugh:
I think this is a really good point. There are probably two phases to this:
Phase One: Some kind of mix between activism and media attention brought DADT front and center.
Phase Two: Once DADT was front and center, it got even more media attention because it was front and center, and became, for some, the Big Gay Issue on Obama’s plate, simply due to the attention.
Not sure how Phase One happened, but Phase Two seems like a no brainer.
Cassidy
@Ash: Well, it is true that my interpretation of “stop-loss” is alittle narrow. Traditionally a stop loss/ stop movement is put in place to stop Soldiers from ETSing or PCSing out of a deploying unit. So I guess that technically a “stop loss” order to not chapter out homosexuals could be enacted, but that’s not what it’s designed for.
J.R.
There is no hierarchy for civil rights. If we are all equal, then all discriminatory laws would be struck down.
But that’s not how it works, so we’ll have to do it law by law.
I think DADT has gotten a lot more attention recently because of all the public discharges that have happened since the beginning of the Iraq War.
It’s also surprisingly popular. I’ve seen a ABC News poll going as high as 75% approval for overturning DADT.
There was also a bit of a rift recently over ENDA being Trans gendered inclusive. Some people felt it was better to get a non-inclusive bill passed and then adding protections for trans gendered people down the road (Barney Frank, HRC), while others felt it unfair to cross that finish line by throwing trans people under the bus (Me).
Da Bomb
@toujoursdan: Correct. It also is not easily done by an executive order.
Please see this link, commenter Cat48 showed a link that explains why an executive order is not the greatest idea evah, as acclaimed to be.
http://blog.reidreport.com/2009/10/harry-truman-barack-obama-and-the-mythic-executive-order/
Ash
@mcc:
I remember he wrote some stupid bullshit months ago that if it was up to him, employers could fire whoever the hell they wanted for whatever reason since that’s all cool and libertarian like.
Jack
It’s tactics, really.
Here in NH, a tactical move allowed for the passage of fairly sweeping gay marriage legislation. A gimme that was handed out to no one in particular: Language protecting clerical conscience that mattered not one bit in real life, and voila, gay marriage.
A successful tactical move that allowed NH to join five of six NE states, in a broader strategy of “swell building” (Six by Twelve).
So too with DADT. Everyone knows about it because the military is national and federal. The burger joint might be part of a national chain, but its employees don’t have federal significance.
Get DADT repealed, and you have a tactical wedge, a fulcrum point for addressing the obviously broader issues of DOMA, et al.
And, as others have noted, because the burger worker is a political non-entity, especially in comparison to a decorated war veteran, who the hell knows about ENDA without recourse to Teh Googles?
General Winfield Stuck
@toujoursdan:
I think a CiC can do a lot of things dealing with the military during wartime under the national security banner. Probably that would extend to suspending application of Public Law. I am just guessing here, but they are wary of doing it that way because it’s tenuous status and possible legal challenges from wingers and the ensuing uproar that is likely to follow such an order. AND I am not saying that’s a good reason or excuse. I think they are trying to figure a way quietly to not enforce it, or someway to let gay service members to continue to serve out their commitment until it can be repealed.
Plus this.
Joe M
I wasn’t under the impression one was “more important” than the other, actually.
I think DADT occupies the political and gay rights discussion more than ENDA because many companies, cities, states, etc. do have protections guarding against discrimination based on sexual orientation and DADT is a more of a universal rule of institutionalized discrimination and, I believe, one of the last ones. Fighting it is harder because the military has it’s own rules and regulations apart from civilian life. Bottom line: people are dishargesd from the military for being queer at a rate of two a day. No protections exist for them. A lot of the groundwork for ENDA has been fought for and laid down – a cursory look at gay rights history shows we’ve fought state by state, city by city, town by town, company by company for these protections over the last 3 to 4 decades. ENDA is important because it would make it federal and thus protect many of the most vulnerable people who live in areas where these protections have not passed. So, perhaps it does not dominate the current conversation the way DADT does. You don’t see many far right assholes arguing that employment and housing discrimination against gays is ok, because a stark majority of people disagree. But you see quite a few far right assholes arguing that gay people will destroy the military because that is still widely acceptable to do, so that’s where a lot of discussion and arguing takes place. Optics does play a part. But just because optics makes one issue appear to be “more important”, does not mean it is. Make any sense? I hope so.
Gay rights encompasses so many issues, John. Too many to count. But they all serve the same general idea of equality. You may not get many Google hits from gay blogs by typing in ENDA than you would typing in DADT, but that doesn’t really tell you anything other than which one of the thousands of issues is du jour. Also: you are better off Googling porn.
JGabriel
@Ash:
Yes, and the Geneva Conventions are the law of the land, too. Didn’t stop Bush from approving torture.
Also, while DADT is definitely on the books, it’s not entirely clear to me whether DADT is on the books as legislation passed by Congress or as policy regulation via executive order. And even if it is there via Congressional legislation, there’s still the question of whether the president is within his means to revoke it via his authority as commander-in-chief.
Anyway, to take the opposite tack of Jonah Goldberg (always a smart move), that’s NOT central to my point. My point was that, whatever the case, the perception exists that Obama could overturn DADT himself. And that makes people believe that pressure on the president to overturn it could be more successful than pressure to enact ENDA, whatever the actual reality is.
,
Brick Oven Bill
We had a gay in our unit, who was an asset. He kept it to himself and this is the proper way to maintain discipline in a military unit and incorporate gays who wish to serve. If gayness is allowed openly, you will get the flamer who is looking to provoke some discrimination lawsuit and weaken ‘the establishment’, which is the US military.
I suspect that the root of the importance of DADT to the Left is to weaken the military. This is likely due to fear of authority figures and a perceived Christian/Jewish/Islamic style judgment. This is really short-sighted as gayness is tolerated in our current society more than most throughout the history of the world.
Proper military discipline protects our society as it currently exists, and thus DADT protects gay behavior. A Logical gay person would support it.
Zifnab
Also, Obama really did campaign on ending DADT. I mean, he brought it up repeatedly on the campaign trail and in speeches from the White House. People are tired of being jerked around.
We’ve seen the same sort of thing from him on Gitmo and on troop deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. People aren’t interested in letting the Congress slowly work this up to a conclusion. Bush wielded his power like a hammer, and we’re just used to seeing the President step in and make things happen.
I would like to know how many soldiers have been discharged via DADT since Obama took office, however.
Ash
@Cassidy: Oh no, I was agreeing with you.
http://aver.us/aver/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=37:dadt-v-stop-loss&catid=28:press-releases&Itemid=42
Da Bomb
@mcc: And Sully is a complete shitty twit!
de stijl
I’d be curious what John means by “the gay community” by the way. We’re pretty much just as diverse as the rest of you.
Zifnab
@Brick Oven Bill:
Wow. Really? Did you really just make that joke?
You’re a horrible person, BoB.
glenn
As a non gay person my own view is that DADT is more important because it helps to slow down the conversion of the military into an openly Christianist/conservative political force in the U.S. Although I don’t think there’s much chance of the military ever becoming actively involved in politics, I still get uneasy when I consider that a monopoly on effective armed force in this country (hunting rifles don’t count) is held by an organization institutionally committed to believing that homosexuals are inferior and icky.
Hugh
Brick oven. Well then how did you know he was a “gay”?
General Winfield Stuck
Me too, at least for the past 6 months of his term.
Cassidy
Plain and utter horseshit.
FlipYrWhig
@stacie:
You know who didn’t support protections for transpeople in the last go-round with ENDA, and vented loudly about it? John Aravosis, catalyst for the recent unpleasantness.
glenn
My own view (nongay) is that it is good for everyone for the military to represent a cross section of the U.S. We’ve never had a coup, but the chances increase when the military becomes increasingly alienated from the rest of the country. The Christianist domination of the Air Force Academey is a sign of possible problems to come.
Update: sorry for the repeated comment from Glenn above I am new to this and thought my first had been rejected. Also I am not the first Glenn in the thread, worthy person though he might be.
McDevite
Wow, late to the party.
I don’t think DADT is easy to overturn; ENDA is comparatively easier to pass. It held the votes in 2007, but lacked the supermajority to get past a presidential veto. It’ll pass now, so it’s somewhat heated.
Jack is closer to the truth; DOMA is illegal and should be overturned, but the Supreme Court is too homophobic to read the law correctly. DADT looks particularly silly in wartime, especially when you say “Gay Arabic Translator” after “armed services has shortage of strategic language speakers.”
At the same time, it hits at a more salient sense of citizenship than working at a burger joint. You can avoid discussing your boyfriend at a burger joint, but I want my citizenship to be of equal value if I’m supposed to fight and die for something. We don’t make Jewish war dead use Crosses or pretend to attend Church, consequently, my identity should be of equal value. I’d also like a rebate on my taxes.
Houston
DADT is bigger than ENDA to this Gay person because it was never an honest deal. They (the homophobes in the various branches of the military) never stopped asking. The homophobic attitudes in the military also subject a lot of lesbians to sexual harrassment, as in, “if you don’t put out to me, you must be a lesbian.” So, DADT is an ongoing fraud that subjects Gays and Lesbians who are trying to work and mind their own business to petty, career-ending harrassment. ENDA is coming along just fine. Many cities and states with significant Gay and Lesbian populations already have anti-discrimination ordinances in place, so I don’t see the same pressure as with DADT. As for DOMA, that’s also coming along at a fairly fast rate of change. They’re all connected, y’know.
Cassidy
@Hugh: It’s actually quite common. Mostly in support units. Generally speaking, the unspoken language of DADT is that a Soldier’s private business is just that, and the Chain of Command has no right to intrude on said business just because he could possibly be gay.
Jack
@glenn:
I’m not sure that would necessarily counter the penetration of the armed services, by crusader types, but in support of your point about that infiltration:
http://www.alternet.org/rights/50696/
Martin
Fix’d for 1947ness.
General Winfield Stuck
@Cassidy:
Hey what else would it be? It’s whackadoo Bobaloo.
Brick Oven Bill
In a close-knit military unit, personal details cannot long be hidden Hugh. But gayness should not be allowed to be expressed openly, as this would only lead to problems.
mcc
@Cassidy, Comrade Mary:
The Palm Center has concluded that the President, under the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law, has the power to suspend the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law in times of emergency. Given we are fighting two wars and have critical shortages of several types of servicemembers which have been worsened by DADT (arabic linguists discharged under DADT are the most commonly cited example), it is likely that the current moment counts as such an emergency.
The White House has rejected this proposal because they want a “sustainable and durable”, legislative solution. In other words, a suspension of DADT based on emergency powers would last only as long as the emergency situation itself. The White House also seems to place a large amount of emphasis on getting the Pentagon on board with the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell repeal, and frequently makes reference to its efforts to “work with” the Pentagon on this subject. There seems to be some progress in this direction already.
It seems to me that the main reason we have Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in the first place is that Clinton made the dual mistakes of trying to just bowl over the military and the Congress, and attempted to integrate the armed forces by executive order alone. I think that the White House’s strategy of carefully trying to work with the Congress and the Pentagon in repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is most likely carefully tailored to avoid repeating these mistakes, and that it is in fact the strategy most likely to be effective. I think that it would be nice if Obama would suspend Don’t Ask Don’t Tell by executive order pending a legislative repeal, but I can also see how doing it that way would potentially endanger a legislative repeal.
Mark S.
How do these laws have 185 co-sponsors and they all die in committee? Is any other country’s legislature as dysfunctional as our Congress?
JGabriel
Brick Oven Bill:
The gay panic is strong in this one, ObiWan.
DADT is abused by the military to oust any gays, even those who only mention their orientation outside of the military. Your point fails even if it was a legitimate argument, which it was not.
.
General Winfield Stuck
@mcc:
Yes, You says it better than I, again.
kay
@General Winfield Stuck:
Truman signed the executive order only after his entire civil rights agenda had been scuttled by the southern Democrats in Congress.
He signed it after there was a huge battle at the 1948 Democratic Convention where Humprey put forth a robust civil rights agenda for the Democratic Platform, and Truman wouldn’t back it, but instead put in an a moderate civil rights “plan” and the delegates over-ruled Truman, and put Humprey’s proposal back in, and the whole southern delegation walked off the floor.
He signed it after a civil rights group, The League for Non-violent Civil Disobedience Against Military Segregation announced they were going to refuse military orders.
I love Harry Truman, but let’s look at what actually happened here. It was a series of losses that led to his action. He had lost the Dixiecrats. He had lost Congress. All he had left was an executive order.
J.R.
@Zifnab:
The last numbers available are for January 2009:
These are the last of the Bush era discharges.
Martin
Somalia’s, but I think with a few more filibusters we might be able to beat them and then it’s foam finger time!
Jack
@McDevite:
I think this bears continuous repeating. DOMA is not remotely constitutional. If DOMA were tossed out, a lot of the rest might fall into place, so to speak, with greater ease.
But DOMA is not going to get tossed out by the Roberts-Scalia-Thomas Court. And I don’t think the Dems really want a DOMA fight going into mid-term elections, even if match-ups favor them.
stacie
@FlipYrWhig: Yeah, Sully was strongly against as well. I appreciate that both men are out and loud on a lot equality issues, but I consider them establishment voices who don’t speak for me.
Cassidy
That’s not an abuse of DADT. That’s kinda how it works.
mcc
It will. The versions of ENDA introduced in both the House and Senate are inclusive. The persons responsible for dropping us last time (HRC, Barney Frank) have promised they won’t be supporting a gambit like that again.
joe from Lowell
DADT is not a bigger deal to the gay community.
It’s a bigger deal to a faction of internet-based gay activists for whom emotionally-satisfying oppositionalism is more important than the furthering of any agenda.
To Protest People, the most important thing is their self image as Protest People.
JGabriel
@McDevite:
Just to be nitpicky (it doesn’t affect your argument), DOMA is unconstitutional . It’s kind of a narrow distinction, but it seems an important one to note.
.
General Winfield Stuck
@kay:
Important historical analysis. Though I am curious as to the moral of your story, or point as it applies to the current situation of DADT.
Comrade Mary
Thanks mcc and others for the clarification.
So kay, Truman may have integrated the forces by executive order — which took several years to be fully complete — only because he had no legislative options left to him (and, as mentioned before, because he expected to lose the coming election anyway?) This isn’t exactly the “buck stops here, give ’em hell, Harry” of legend, but it does seem to be the way a canny and effective politician works.
Ash
@General Winfield Stuck: I think the point is that the whole thing has been sort of whitewashed into this story of Truman just picking up a pen and ending discrimination, when in fact it only happened that way because he couldn’t get Congress to act on it at all.
stacie
@Brick Oven Bill: Yeah, I think the military should make it illegal for straight male soldiers to discuss their wives and children. I mean, it’s no one’s business, right? They shouldn’t be allowed to carry their wives’ pictures either, or wear wedding bands or the like. That kind of “in your face” stuff is really contrary to good order and discipline.
JGabriel
Cassidy:
Yes, but BOB’s argument assumed that only people who were open about it in a military context were discharged. I was merely pointing out that wasn’t the case.
.
General Winfield Stuck
@Martin:
Yes, but they live in a Thunderdomacracy.
kay
@General Winfield Stuck:
Truman had exhausted every other option. He had already lost the southern Democrats. His civil right’s agenda was in shambles. There were two racially-motivated horrific crimes against black servicemembers that spring that one would think would sway public opinion, but that didn’t happen, so he didn’t have public opinion.
My point is that it was a last resort. Nothing “stroke of the pen” about it.
General Winfield Stuck
@Ash:
Thanks, I kinda thought that was what Kay was saying, but wasn’t sure.
de stijl
…where Humprey put forth a robust civil rights agenda for the Democratic Platform…
Humphrey was a fucking stud. Imagine the different America that would have been if he’d won in 1968.
Da Bomb
@General Winfield Stuck: Also the army didn’t become fully integrated until 1953. So even though an executive order was issued, it still took 8 years to get the military integrated. While if Congress would have cooperated and create a bill for Truman to sign, integration most likely would have occurred faster.
cmorenc
A lovely bit of tangential irony in the gay community seizing on Harry Truman as the poster-Presidential example of using executive order to end segregation in the military as the poster-example of why Obama should use the same tactic to end DADT by executive order is that Harry Truman’s favorite frequent vacation spot was Key West, Florida, and so it is today with many in the gay community.
I think I shall decline to riff any speculations on whether that parallel has any meaning, or else is what late author Kurt Vonnegaut called a “granfaloon”.
General Winfield Stuck
@kay:
Gracias Senora:)
toujoursdan
I also think what needs to be addressed is the rise of the religious right in the military and the danger of a military with significantly different values than the country it guards poses.
An Episcopal priest recently wrote an article in our church newspaper warning about how fundamentalism is taking hold there. Most of what is happening is occurring under the radar.
Episcopal Life: Among military chaplains, fundamentalism is taking hold
Even when DADT is overturned, I wouldn’t hold my breath that the plight of gay people (or any non-fundamentalists) is going to become rosy.
Jack
Sometimes Wiki chomps donkey bottom. Sometimes, though, it does not:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_LGBT_civil_rights_animation.gif
Perhaps the regional variations might explain why DADT (which is policy not really beholden to the States, even if it becomes a local campaign issue) is a better wedge tactic than ENDA or the currently Sisyphean effort of overturning DOMA.
soonergrunt
Bill apparently hasn’t served in the last twenty years or so. The troops today know who the gays in the unit are, and don’t care.
My brother is my brother, and as long as he kills the enemy, and I know he’ll be there when I need him, I don’t care what he does in his off-duty time.
kay
@de stijl:
I don’t want to be cynical, and I don’t know what Humphrey was thinking, but there was a sector of the Democratic Party, including one of Truman’s advisers, who thought civil rights was good politics.
They saw that whole Dixiecrat thing as a stupid losing electoral strategy. Pretty progressive, still, but maybe in more of a self-interested way.
Brick Oven Bill
‘Normal’ behavior is defined by the religious texts. ‘Deviant’ behavior ‘deviates’ from normal behavior.
Right now the US is pretty frickin’ tolerant of deviant behavior. Those who enjoy practicing it should be careful about pushing too hard. If you want to serve, fine, but keep your desires about other men to yourself.
We had another gay who did not keep it to himself. Believe it or not his name was Mohammed. He made a practice out of sitting in the toilet stall and watching others shower through the opening by the hinge. This did not go over well with everybody and he was properly sent home unhurt.
kay
@General Winfield Stuck:
I feel as if Obama’s going to exhaust options, in a very deliberate Obamaesque fashion. He’s freaking maddening, but Truman was a little slow off the dime too.
Jack
@Brick Oven Bill:
A “religious text” defines normative conduct?
I raise you the:
http://www.amazon.com/Satanic-Bible-Anton-Szandor-Lavey/dp/0380015390
toujoursdan
@Brick Oven Bill:
Uhhhh… have you read the Old Testament lately? What passes for “normal” there is a death penalty offence in some states.
Jack
@toujoursdan:
Never mind all that Tanakh described temple prostitution, or the entire Book of Judges…
de stijl
Who would have thought at the time that the Dixiecrats would become the face of the now Republican party? Strange times.
Oddly, the “Southern Strategy” has both won the Republicans the White House a few times, and it will kill them in the end.
(Which is coming soon if they don’t get their act together soon and reimagine themselves a la the Tories in GB.)
de stijl
Brick Oven Bill,
Read Leviticus and get back to us.
soonergrunt
How is it normal to walk out to the edge of town, dig a hole with a wooden paddle, take a shit, and walk back?
How is it normal to commit incest with one’s daughter while drunk and thereby father a child?
I could go on and on and on and on…
kay
@de stijl:
I never count them out. They’re endlessly inventive. The group they’re demonizing changes, in any event.
Are they fresh out of groups, to set one against the other? Maybe. There’s still urban versus rural, or was that what Sarah Palin was getting at? I had no idea what she was talking about. Was the weird and inexplicable attack on Chicago, Illinois a hint?
fraught
ENDA is a big can of worms in the glbt community. If you think the infighting about DADT and DOMA are bad the whole “throwing under the bus” meme bursts into flames when ENDA gets debated on Americablog. The trannies are afraid of being left behind, many gays think that trans will try to push for sex reassignment surgery to be included in their employment benefit packages thereby skewing the debate away from the “normal” gays. Araavosis wants to take the t out of glbt when it comes to ENDA and that trans should wait and stop riding on glb’s coattails. It’s very nasty.
MoBurn
DADT is the federal government itself stating that lgbt people are 2nd class and not good enough to serve their country. It’s saying the the Constitution does not apply to you. Somehow that strikes deeper than the random business schmoe or landlord who doesn’t want queers working for him or living in his building.
Alex
Employment Discrimination laws are crude but sometimes necessary tools which were devised primarily to change the severe economic harm to classes of individuals who are the targets. Gays are undoubtedly subject to employment discrimination as individuals, but as a class they are not economically disadvantaged the way many other minorities are.
IMO, this makes civil rights such as marriage or the right to join the military more significant, because as a group these barriers are much more substantial than the economic barriers posed by discrimination.
Bob (Not B.o.B.)
@Brick Oven Bill:
Fixed.
de stijl
kay’s killer incisive comment:
What is it that makes Republicans so effective when they’re on the attack? From a 27% position they have a freakishly efficient means of getting their memes (see Death Panels) into the mainstream media.
Allan
Others have said it well. It’s an issue where it at least appears that the administration could act unilaterally, and it appears as if they aren’t going to do so, and that continues to affect real-live service members every day.
And some smart, articulate and photogenic ones with good stories like Choi and Fehrenbach are coming forward and doing a good job of spotlighting the issue. Groups like Knights Out are using the Obama play book – the story of self – to win hearts and minds and they are doing a great job promoting their best spokespeople and getting them on-air with Keith and Rachel, etc.
It’s good organizing.
And sincerely, John, thanks for asking.
Bob (Not B.o.B.)
@Brick Oven Bill:
…and then Bill woke up from a wonderful dream.
This reminds me of the time my 70 year-old Dad said of my gay neighbors: “That’s OK, as long as they don’t ‘try something.'”
Yeah Dad, becuase you are just such a stud, the two 30 year-old dudes might “try something.”
Laura
Queer chiming in here: It’s about low-hanging fruit. As others have said, DADT isn’t more important than DOMA or ENDA. DADT can be taken care of quickly; besides that Obama campaigned on it.
I can’t say that ENDA is the shit-storm that fraught mentions. I know that there are some queers who are not so happy with transpeople being part of that bill, but plenty others are more than thrilled to go all out for anti-discrimination in employment for everyone. (By the way, it’s worked well in Maryland, where the GLBT state equality organization, Equality Maryland, has lobbied very heavily for trans rights.)
One thing to keep in mind here is that the movement is more like herding cats than the political machine that the religious right has become famous for. In any given group of queers, you’ll find a spectrum of opinions of which efforts we should concentrate on. As the partner of a former soldier who earned a Purple Heart serving in Somalia, I’d like to see DADT repealed and quickly. I have a soft spot for the partners of gay and lesbian military personnel who are invisible and left in the dark. Besides, it seems the most likely issue to be embraced by the country and upheld by Congress.
IndyLib
@toujoursdan:
I’ve been following this story for quite awhile and I think it’s creepy as hell that the Chaplain corps in the military (especially Army and Airforce) are being overrun by fundies. But as a practical matter you shouldn’t conflate this with the military being overrun by them.
From the experience I’ve had in 12 years of being a Navy spouse the Chaplains don’t run anything except the base Church. The sailors are not required to go to church and if they choose not too, don’t have more than minimal contact with any of the Chaplains or their staff. The Chaplains are always present at official events and they usually offer an Invocation. Beyond that, you don’t see much of them unless you seek them out.
In the last 13 years I’ve met Chaplains who were Greek Orthodox, Buddhist, Methodist, Presbyterian and Southern Baptist.
When my husband was stationed on an aircraft carrier in Japan the Chaplain on the ship was required to conduct Wiccan services.
At least in the Navy, what the Chaplain personally thinks about homosexuality will not be a major issue when DADT is discontinued.
My husband is an NCO and he and 95% of the senior enlisted sailors he works with can’t wait for DADT to go the way of the dinosaurs, so they don’t have to deal with it as an administrative issue.
Jack
@de stijl:
What makes them so effective? The “liberal press.” You know, the ones owned by leviathan corporations doing defense, government contract, marketing, entertainment and real estate business to the sweet tune of billions upon billions of dollars.
cat48
“just sign the order dammit” Ok, just like Truman, right; who was the bravest ever pres. for doing this, right? He was so brave that he signed order in 1948 and 8 years later the military was integrated. Is that the way you want this pres. to handle DADT? Sign an order now and actually have it effective 8 years later??
Frankly, I think this was brave of Truman; but the amount of time it took shows he was a “ditherer” like Obama is accused of being by several groups of people.
The problem is that there is a rule for every action a soldier takes in the military. Brushing teeth, spit shining shoes, pressed uniform, folding of clothing, interacting and showing affection for the opposite sex. You name it and there is probably a rule for how to do it the military way. So the military will have to have rules updated to include openly gay soldiers.
I guess my point is he can’t just sign an order and the military will magically adapt to the new policy. They need their rules to function. Considering everything, I think a law to repeal it would be better. It would be more difficult to overturn, and the military could be involved in updating the rules.
Cassidy
@toujoursdan: I think you’re blowing this out of proportion. While I don’t disagree that the Chaplain corps has become more fundamentalist, I would say that they have been that way for a long time. But you also have to remember that each unit only has 1 Chaplain. Hospitals may have upwards of 5 but that’s not the norm. Said Battalion also has 1000+ Soldiers; fundamentalism is not the norm.
Cassidy
To add: Anecdotally, I’ve noticed an increase with Mormon Chaplains, which might be what’s skewing the numbers towards higher rates of fundamentalism.
AaronLaperle
sorry, haven’t read the comments, but i thought i’d try for an answer. Which probably means peeps before have said it.
I think its simply that it is an easier rallying cry to put DADT over ENDA. Gays wanting to fight for their country when its in two wars makes for a better picture (i hate to put it this way, but better PR) then ENDA.
Of course, technically, i guess they’re both about wrongly firing Teh Gays. But as many other people in the thread i’m sure have said, I’d prefer to get rid of DOMA first…
Chuck Butcher
Politically speaking, rather than making gay assumptions (oh I know), DADT is the issue with the best chance currently to be dealt with. It has media attention, wars, heroes, and all the other trappings to defuse it for enough people. I make no representation of who thinks it is most important.
Eric U.
I was in the military when DADT was put in place. It caused a shitstorm among republicans and their lackeys in the media. At the time I thought it was a good first step, but the amount of crap Clinton took for it he should have just gotten rid of the discrimination. There have been gays successfully integrated into our military from the first, they just couldn’t tell anyone.
@de stijl: Its funny that the Democrats of my youth are now in charge of both parties. Southern Republicans could sometimes be more progressive than the Southern Democrats back then, they weren’t getting elected anyway. When Reagan stole all the southern Dems, he didn’t exactly do his party any favors.
Michael D.
@Brick Oven Bill:
BoB, three questions:
1. Would you fuck off and DiaF?
2. Are you saying that a gay person who talks about his partner is a threat? Is a straight soldier who talks about his wife a threat?
3. Why am I responding to you?
Chad N Freude
@toujoursdan, @Cassidy, and anyone else who’s interested in an evangelical military: This is a serious problem at the Air Force Academy. I recommend reading Jeff Sharlet’s article in Harper’s and googling “Mikey Weinstein”. “Infiltration” is not too strong a word.
toujoursdan
I am glad to hear my fears about this are overblown. This is one time I don’t want to be right.
sheiler
@stacie
DOMA only works for American gays …in states that allow same-sex marriage. Forget it if one MA resident who’s queer wants to marry someone of the same gender who’s not an American. America hates foreigners, especially ye olde gay ones.
DBrown
@McDevite: You don’t know much about that asswipe scaila, do you?
Joe Mondo
As a gay man, DADT is my lowest priority – so it’s a bit of a mystery to me.
My guess is that the focus on DADT is more strategic than anything else, in 2 ways:
1. With a long unpopular war going on, there’s probably no better time to make the case for keeping skilled service members on the job, and
2. Once you have gay/lesbian people openly serving in the military it gets harder to deny them civil rights.
There’s a sad 3rd strategy too, which is even somewhat more anti-gay people might be more comfy letting us die than letting us live happily, so it may be the path of least resistance.
Cassidy
In a strange way, and one I’m sure BOB didn’t me, this isn’t unwholly inaccurate. One of the key parts of guidance when it comes to enforcing DADT is protecting a Soldiers individual privacy. For instance, if I believed one of my Soldiers was gay, I couldn’t follow him around to try and prove it. I would realistically face charges for that. Anecdotally, I can say with 100% confidence that all my past CDR’s would hammer my ass for that conduct.
Cassidy
@Chad N Freude: I am aware of that, but that is one institution. And once again, 1 fundamentalist Chaplain in a Battalion of 1000+ personnel does not mean a major cultural shift.
Chad N Freude
I don’t want to sound snarky — it’s usually pretty obvious when I do — but I don’t understand all of the speculation on BJ about what’s legal, what a President can or cannot do, and the likely legal consequences of any particular action by Obama. These are legal issues, and if you’re not conversant with relevant law (I’m certainly not), at least cast your speculations as questions. Some very good articles have been linked to in this and other threads; the speculative commenters should take a look at them, you know, like fact-finding. Maybe someone claiming to be a lawyer could post a few actual [dramatic pause] facts.
Let the stoning begin.
Chad N Freude
@Cassidy: All I can say is read the Harper’s article and check out Mikey Weinstein. It sure doesn’t look trivial to me.
Commonwealth
Joe M is correct. DADT is active, ongoing discrimination by the Federal government, whereas ENDA just defines rules against discrimination not perpetrated by the gov’t, but by individuals engaging in commerce. DADT, like DOMA, is far more insidious.
Also, if you think about it, getting rid of DADT before enacting ENDA would parallel the trajectory of the Civil Rights movement more closely. Truman integrated the military before the Civil Rights Act and Supreme Court enacted protections against discrimination, and anti-miscegenation laws weren’t completely abolished until 1968 (last).
Cassidy
@Chad N Freude: I din’t say it was trivial. I just don’t think it’s as big as an issue it’s made out to be.
Mousebumples
On the topic of why Obama doesn’t just do an executive order for DADT –
(1) As mentioned before by others, I’m afraid that doing that would make it less of a priority to pass legislation on the subject from Congress.
(2) Without said legislation, what’s to stop President Sarah Palin (God forbid – or whoever is the next GOP president) from writing a contrary executive order reinstating the practice?
Others have also mentioned the potential issue of being in “limbo” if DADT is not repealed but prosecutions are stopped. Can you imagine what a nightmare it would be for these people if DADT is suspended and then reinstated?
Commonwealth
To amend my comments:
Not that the Civil Rights Act or SC decisions like Heart of Atlanta Motel did not strike down insidious forms of racism and discrimination, they absolutely did. They are important moments in the history of the law and in the development of what society deems acceptable conduct.
A decision like integrating the military or public schools however, came first because it requires more political force to end private discrimination than for the government to end it’s discriminatory conduct. Both types of discrimination are equally damaging to society.
Commonwealth
To amend my comments:
Not that the Civil Rights Act or SC decisions like Heart of Atlanta Motel did not strike down insidious forms of racism and discrimination, they absolutely did. They are important moments in the history of the law and in the development of what society deems acceptable conduct.
A decision like integrating the military or public schools however, came first because it requires more political force to end private discrimination than for the government to end it’s discriminatory conduct. Both types of discrimination are equally damaging to society.
Chad N Freude
@Cassidy: Well, let’s agree that we see the threat differently and then go have a beer.
bobbo
On the bright side of DOMA, it only allows states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages from other states, it doesn’t require them to. Which means that it may end up being irrelevant before it is ruled unconstitutional – history seems to be on the side of more and more states legalizing same-sex marriage. Or at the very least, states can do like California, where thanks to a new bill Arnie signed this week you can get gay-married in MA and your marriage will be recognized in CA.
Cat G
@IndyLib: It’s my impression that the increase in “fundamentalism” has been primarily in the Air Force, with the focus being the Air Force Academy in Colorado. There have been pretty overt incidents there. It seems reasonable to assume that those attitudes then influence the Air Force broadly. Gen (my god is greater than your god) Boykin is also Air Force.
Chad N Freude
@Cat G: Yep. See @Chad N Freude.
de stijl
As a gay man, DADT is my lowest priority
What do you think is the highest priority?
(God, I think I just elected you the Al Sharpton of Gay America with that question, but I actually am quite curious at your response.)
Tattoosydney
Hot men in uniforms. Duh.
Tattoosydney
@Brick Oven Bill:
I haven’t read the thread to see if anyone else has said it, but fuck off Bob you insane whinging dickhead.
PhoenixRising
Speaking as a gay activist: Because ‘Expensively trained Arabic translator thrown out of Army; now cleans pools in Phoenix’ is a better headline than ‘Library of Congress rescinds job offer to Steve when he shows up at work as Denise’.
SA2SQ.
I could pretend it’s a hell of a lot more complex than that, and there are some details above, but bottom line: Sometimes it’s fun to, you know, pick a fight you can win; a fight in which 75% of Americans and the President and a majority of Congress agree with you; a fight which will result in military spouses and dependents being permitted to play on the front lawn with a Labrador puppy for the cameras.
We don’t have a lot of those kind of fights to choose among.
But note that in the federal case against DOMA, filed in MA and joined by the state, one of the plaintiffs is a state police office whose wife and kids depend on her salary and need the security of her pension and other federal benefits.
(If I were her, I’d watch my back, because there is only one way for that story to get more compelling. Drive carefully, Officer!)
Bob (Not B.o.B.)
@Tattoosydney:
Hey now, some of us real Bob’s don’t want ot be lumped in with Billy-Boy/
de stijl
Bob (Not B.o.B.)
It would totally suck if this had to become your new handle.
soonergrunt
@CatG 149
LTG Boykin is a retired Army officer.
There’s not a lot of fundamentalism in the Army. I’ve heard third and fourth hand about problems in other units, but so long as grunts are taking Penthouse Forum to the field and referring to it as the “platoon bible” as in “2nd squad is doing bible study at the machine-gun position” I don’t think it’s too much of a problem.
Comrade Mary
I count at least 3 gay references in comment 156. Trifecta!
JGabriel
@Brick Oven Bill:
So belief in evolution — which, by the way, the Catholic church, the Episcopals, and most other denominations accept — is ‘Deviant’ behavior by your definition.
C’mon, BOB, come out as a Creationist. You know you want to.
.
de stijl
Comrade Mary,
“Handle” is gay? Color me me fascinated. “Suck” I totally get that one.
What’s the third? “Bob?”
(I’m not a Gay American but I usually have pretty decent gaydar. Is “Bob” the third ref?)
Hugh
I couldn’t respond sooner due to a little thing called my job. But… when I asked Brick Oven how he knew the guy in his unit was gay the point was that the soldier hadn’t in fact kept this information to himself. Either that or somehow the others in the unit intuited the soldier’s gayness. It doesn’t really matter. The point is the unit’s awareness of the solder being gay did no harm. This means that Brick Oven was reasonable enough to see that being gay in and of itself is not a problem. Good for Brick Oven! He described this soldier as an asset.
If DADT is repealed the truth is that gay soldiers will not suddenly release their maximum gayness, heretofore suppressed by DADT, as Brick Oven suspects. Instead they will behave like soldiers. Based on what he said in his original comment Brick Oven and others like him will most likely respect that and the world will go on.
Cat G
@soonergrunt: You’re right, I stand corrected, Boykin is retired Army.
AdamK
Damn, Cole, you’re ignorant. Why don’t you educate yourself about gay issues, since you’re so determined to put your two cents in all the time?
Chuck Butcher
@AdamK:
WTF?
Is he supposed to start dating guys? He asked a damn question that bunch of gay commenters didn’t have any concensus on. You got a kick me sign on your back?
Dayv
Personally, I love DADT, just because it’s always good to know that I could suck a dick to get out of military service.
I think it’s darkly ironic that gay people might get the right to kill for their country before the right to marry the one they love.
Mnemosyne
@toujoursdan:
Honestly, I think this is what it is, combined with the kicked-puppy syndrome that was discussed before. Since the press is busy re-living 1996 all over again (ACORN is Obama’s Whitewater!), what makes us think that activists are any more immune to it?
Cassidy
@Chad N Freude: Rock on.
@soonergrunt: Just to add this, troops typically reject fundamentalism on any issue. Think of it in this terms: Orders come down that we’re doing a raid, specifically going into a 2 story building that could be nothing or happen to be the weekly AA meeting of Armed for Allah. That’s a general all around scary scenario. Now if our leaders start telling us that we’re doing it for God, all of a sudden you start to think things like “meat shield” and whatnot.
pantherq
Why dadt over doma? Have you never filled out a job application?
Do you think it takes such a big section of an application to find out if someone has military service? Legal right to work check could dispense that info.
This is about the law being used to economically discriminate against us. And being denied jobs seems to be important right now.
scandi
My humble opinion is that most LGBT people don’t realize that ENDA hasn’t been enacted or why it needs to be. They think their jobs are safe because they have been up to this point. People just don’t realize that you can be fired for being gay in a lot of places in this country.
On the other hand everyone knows that gays can’t openly serve in the military, so that becomes the big issue.
soonergrunt
@Cassidy: Interestingly, I’ve met more Chaplain’s Assistants who were fundies than Chaplains. When your job has you listening to young men and women from every conceivable walk of life under stress, tired, angry, freaked out, smelly, hungry, cold, and every other thing, you tend to be rather relaxed about the formal stuff or you can’t do your job. For those who’ve never served, a Chaplain is as much a social worker and psychological counsellor as anything else, and they must be able to perform religious ceremonies for a variety of Christian and non-Christian faiths. Specialist Chaplains like Muslims, Catholic priests, and Jewish Rabbis frequently ride a circuit to provide services, and advise and counsel the other Chaplains on serving their believers.
One of the most relaxed laid back chaplains I ever knew was (is) a Pentacostal. He’s the one who happened upon me as a young naive private pulling radio watch. He asked me where everybody was, and not knowing the meaning of ‘bible’ in this particular case, I directed him to the machine gun position, where “they said they’re studying the bible.”
Off he went, excited at the thought of young soldiers engaging in self-directed bible study…
He came back shortly and said “well, that was interesting.”
I found out later what the deal was. We laughed about it, but not until several months later.
Deschanel
DADT was such an embarassing, childish compromise when it was enacted. It was the equivalent of covering ones eyes and ears, na-na-na I can’t hear you. All to save Clinton’s hide and change the subject.
DOMA was worse- heterosexual marriage needing “defending” against gays wanting their relationships recognized. Thanks again, Bill.
In some ways Clinton was more Republican than Democrat. Don’t think any President did more to accelerate the hollowing out of the middle class, and exporting jobs overseas. Hello Nafta! (Remember how that meant the price of Molson’s or Corona beer would go down, for example? Funny how they never did. What did NAFTA ever do for us again?)
Back to gay issues- yeah, DADT is pretty much low-hanging symbolic fruit. 99.9% of us gays aren’t in the military. But the disastrous cost and strategic stupidity of getting rid of 10,000 gay personnel, even those with key skills like Arabic translation, is pretty indefensible. It’s not 1993 anymore where useless half-ass compromises like DADT can’t be seen as anything other than idiocy, or invitations to abuse and blackmail for gay personnel.
A childish country this is, loving fanciful denial of reality and cool ass names for the latest foreign war. Presidents landing on aircraft carriers, “Mission Accomplished”. I might be just gay, but god, this nation just loves fairy tales.
tootiredoftheright
One thing a lot of people who want DADT to be repealed not wanting it by way of executive order is that when DADT is repealed the armed forces will go back to the old rules namely in which gays are hunted down and expelled.
DADT means the military cannot ask and if the military officers do ask they are supposed to be reported so they could be disciplined. Gays who tell when asked and don’t report such efforts to be found even if they aren’t gay are encourging an anti-gay atmosphere in the miltiary and embolden fundmentlist miltiary officers who are growing in number in the military. It’s not second hand numerous agencies have reported on it not only at the Air Force Academy but the Marines as well. Full blown anti-atheism, full blown hatred of Muslims etc have been well documented.
Everytime a gay military person outs themselves they just give credance to the arguments that gays are bad for the military since they cannot follow simple orders and also make it look like they want to get out of the military rather then serve it faithfully like they claim to do it.
Repealing DADT through Congress allows the potential to have an act that replaces making expellation for sexual orientation not possible by the military and if done for that reason having serious penalities being brought against the military officers that were found to use it against their fellows.
Deschanel
@tootiredoftheright:
Oh, so it’s the gay soldiers’ fault then?
“Gays who tell when asked and don’t report such efforts to be found even if they aren’t gay are encourging an anti-gay atmosphere in the miltiary and embolden fundmentlist miltiary officers who are growing in number in the military.”
“Everytime a gay military person outs themselves they just give credance to the arguments that gays are bad for the military since they cannot follow simple orders and also make it look like they want to get out of the military rather then serve it faithfully like they claim to do it.”
I’m sorry, but please go stuff yourself. You’re blaming the victim for witch-hunts and blackmail. “Simple orders”- yes, gays can’t follow “simple orders” to absolutely lie about who they are. Who are you to say that’s a “simple order”?
Please prove to me that the 10,000 career military personnel tossed since DADT “wanted to get out of the military”. What an astonishing claim. Yes, they wanted to have years of service revoked, their hope of pensions cancelled. We don’t have a draft anymore- haven’t in decades. Why on Earth do you think they want secretly to get out of the military? OH! you annoy me and your logic is boggling.
Am I the only one here who’s read “Coming Out Under Fire” by Alan Berube? About the valiant gay people who served in the military from WWI through Vietnam? And the thousands of good valiant gay servicemembers whose lives and careers were destroyed by the periodic antigay witch-hunts that have swept the military, particularly in the McCarthy era? I swear I must be, and i’d swear half the people opining here have no idea what a gay person- a fellow citizen- even is.
KaffeeMeister
My partner and I have been together for 32 years. We hate the inevitable lawyers fees whenever we move to another state… More Lawyers fees for Wills, Power of Attorneys etc.. The Republican Tax on Gays should be repealed! Don’t you think?
tootiredoftheright
“yourself. You’re blaming the victim for witch-hunts and blackmail.”
When the victime doesn’t report the violation of DADT and allows the violations to continue they aren’t serving the country nor following the law.
The important first part of DADT is do not ask. If a military officer asks they are supposed to be reported since they are violating the policy.
Here is the thing if those guys never told they would still be in the miltiary and if they reported their officers violating DADT they would still be in the miltiary.
Many straight military officers will tell you those gays who got tossed violated DADT hence they were removed. They are not supposed to tell even if ordered to do so.
People are blackmailed have legal recourse as long as they do not give into the blackmail same for witch hunts.
Cassidy
@soonergrunt: My experience has always been the exact opposite. My Chaplians have always been rather fundie, but I seem to draw the Mormons wherever I go. One time, I really pissed my Chaplain off as he was behind me. I was explaining to one of my Soldiers that Mormons aren’t considered Christians by actual christians, but instead a cult. I forgot why the conversation came up. Anyway, there was a noticeable drop in air temperature.
Jack
@Brick Oven Bill:
This is not a ‘gay’ issue, this is a ‘sexual harassment’ issue.
A gay soldier should be disciplined for ogling his male comrades, not for being gay, the same way a straight soldier should be disciplined for ogling his female comrades. It’s not about being gay, it’s about sexualizing your comrades and coworkers.
Sam Hutcheson
I’m late to the party here, but there’s a couple of points (that may have been made earlier, but I just skimmed posts 75-170.)
First, “the gay community” – if by that phrase you mean the major lobbyists and activists inside of DC and the Village – are more interested in ENDA than DOMA or DADT. The Human Rights Campaign – the major lobby arm for gay issues in establismentarian circles – is front and center on ENDA (and collecting contributions.)
The “gay blog community” – if such a phrase makes sense – led by Andrew Sullivan is focused on DADT. From what I can gather, this is because
1) Obama explicitly campaigned, with very strong language, to end DADT. He hedged more on DOMA and didn’t touch ENDA much at all. So there’s a “hold him to his word” element going on here. Also…
2) DADT is one of Sullivan’s pet issues. As others have said, he opposes ENDA on libertarian/conservative principle, in much the same way he has always opposed hate crime legislation and such. DADT and DOMA are different for Sullivan – and I think he makes a good point here – because unlike ENDA they are *active* discrimination perpetrated by the state.
ENDA is more of an “affirmative action” sort of bill, where the feds tell employers how to cater their hiring/firing practices so as not to discriminate against gays and lesbians. ENDA is “protection” against potential future actions by citizens, not the sort of law a libertarian/conservative would back naturally.
Repealing DADT and DOMA isn’t of that type of action. DADT actively discriminates against GLTB in the military, putting their identity in competition with their patriotism and desire to serve, as well as their potential career. The federal government will fire a soldier who is gay, regardless of skill, performance or national security. That’s about as “Jim Crow” as you can get. DOMA is the same sort of deal as DADT, actively limiting the civil rights of gay citizens. As such, those two laws are rightly targeted more fiercely by civil libertarian activists like Sullivan.
Jack
@Jack:
Argh – two Jacks?
Cerberus
Very late to the party, but I can attest that on a personal level, ENDA has always been WAY more important than DOMA has.
On why it doesn’t SEEM that way, I’d say part of it is Andrew Sullivan. Andrew hates anyone who is not white, male, and catholic so protection that will generally be needed by poorer queers in more rural areas as well as protection for trans people offends his libertarian sensitivities. He’s publicly against all hate crimes legislation because he is ignorant about what hate crime legislation is about, see libertarianism.
The blogosphere in general is also leading congress. There was a lot of noise about ENDA back a few months ago, but it’s really hard to determine where exactly the bill is. Last I heard it had passed the House, then something good happened in the Senate and it passed in the Senate form in the House again, which I assume means it must be pretty close to full passage, but it’s been oddly difficult to get direct information.
So that’s part of it since it’s difficult to figure out who we should be lobbying to move it, since it’s difficult to figure out exactly where it is right now. The other part is I think the blogosphere assumes that the battle has been all but won and all that’s left is some minor process stuff, so they’ve downgraded it to light pressure on key conservadems and basically keeping a wary eye to make sure no one adds a sneak amendment cutting out gender identity again and moved on in essence to the next battles (DADT, Maine, Washington, some state pressure stuff still in New York and Rhode Island, and a bunch of local battles and ordinances for mini-versions of ENDA and marriage rights).
So noise is cut down on ENDA and thus it seems like DADT matters more.
And echoing earlier people that it’s also about DADT being symbolically important because it looked so slam-dunk and congress and the administration have been so cautious about it.
But frankly in terms of legislation, I think inclusive ENDA is a much bigger fish and once that bad boy is signed, I’ll be dancing a little jig. DADT is important, but I really don’t think it’s some big Waterloo and shouldn’t be the be all, end all of the community since pretty much everything we’re striving for in legislation is more important, more difficult.
Oh, and also, people are probably confused by the name of ENDA since it was for months called the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act so people may not now what it is or assumed it had already passed.
Cerberus
@Commonwealth:
I know I’m late, but I think it’s important to note that while there are parallels to the struggles faced by african-americans as well as to any minority group’s struggles against a hostile conservative movement, there isn’t some magic power in that trajectory.
Just because something happened in a certain order before, doesn’t mean that that’s the magic order and things can happen out of order and still be good. If ENDA passes thus changing the game in real ways in the private sphere, it isn’t somehow bad because gays are still fucked in the military. If anything it jumpstarts the “earlier” steps because what military man ever wants to look MORE backwards than society at large. If that happens, well then, the uniform doesn’t somehow make them special and that will not do.
That and ENDA will allow people to feel comfortable coming out at work thus opening up a whole new swath of “hello, you actually do know an evil faggot and they’re actually pretty cool” personal interactions which will hasten the continued precipitous collapse of homophobia in our society. And that lack of “it can’t get back to my business” or “will this hotel take us in” will add to piece of mind for gay people thus allowing them to feel better, less haunted, and thus to assert themselves more.
Basically, don’t complain about the order since the main thing is just the victories. Skipping ahead is just that and it’s a good thing for rapid institutional change.
henqiguai
@Joe Mondo(#137):
Um, no. I would suggest you review the African-American experience in these United States, even though blacks have been openly serving in the military from our nation’s inception. It’s a nice hope, but personally I wouldn’t put an ounce of faith in said hope.
Houston
“tootiredoftheright”
If you’re military and someone accuses you of being Gay, and you get called in my your c.o. and a member of the army’s legal investigators and someone asks you point-blank if you’re Gay, you can be court-martialed either for saying no and thus lying, or refusing the answer, thus affirming the question. The idea that you might report the offending officer for asking a prohibited question shows your ignorance of both the law and military culture.
The military has never done its part in DADT.