Oct 18
2007
Punted| Category: Action Alert!, Cross-Posted, DADT, Don't Ask, Don't Ask Don't Tell, Don't Tell |
According to USA Today, the Army, Navy, and Air Force have been advertising on the networking site for LGBT professionals, GLEE.com. A sign perhaps? Perhaps good news at a time when military recruiters are having trouble filling the ranks with warm bodies in an ever growing unpopular conflict? Perhaps not. (more…)
Aug 10
2007
Punted| Category: 2008 Elections, Barack Obama, DADT, Debate, Don't Ask, Don't Ask Don't Tell, Don't Tell, ENDA, HRC, Hate Crime Laws, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Pam's House Blend |
The Forum last night wasn’t exactly a huge success. While it was the first of its kind addressing solely the issues that affect the LGBT community the candidates were mostly able to wriggle out of answering a lot of questions that pertained to our equality.
The candidates went in the order that they responded to the invite which shows Hillary responded last while Obama responded first. it looked a lot like the set of Oprah the way seats were laid out and the audience, clearly hand-picked for their notability/recognizability in the queer community looked decidedly uncomfortable.
The order in which I write about the candidates is basically the order at whcih I pull them out of memory.
Edwards did not move positions. Once he realized that it sounded like his position had changed he backtracked immediately with the comment “My positions haven’t changed.” Edwards seems to be as he stated “evolving” but purposely saying, “Oh yeah, I wanna support you, but can’t ‘cuz I won’t get the votes. But my wife supports you, can’t you just take that?”
Kucinich and Gravel, we knew would be in our court. Gravel sounded less crazy than Kucinich, and at the same time actually discussed a lot more than the front runners.
Hillary, even when pressed by the question of “state’s rights” (my submitted question I might add) couldn’t bring herself to answer the question directly. Of the candidates so far I’m still for Kucinich and Gravel for their unaplogetic stances on anything, but that’s a different story. She even at one point said and I’m paraphrasing ‘Even if I went through the things that you all went through for the last 15 years my positions would not be any different.’ If that’s not a kick in the teeth I don’t know what is. When pressed about why she hasn’t introduced legislation in the Senate as a companion bill to the House’s Military Readiness Enchancement Act (MREA), she merely went on about
Bill Richardson lost A LOT of points when he melted down on Melissa’s and Joe’s questions. When asked whether or not he thought homosexuality was a choice his first response was “Yes, it’s a choice.” After three attempts at giving him the chance to answer the question in a different manner he maintained. He only changed his response to that after the forum when pressed about it by blogger Pam Spaulding. The question he was posed by Joe Solmonese which remains unanswered was “If presented with a bill for equal marriage, would you sign it?” His response: “I’ve done everything I can to push for ‘Domestic Partnerships.’” Three times he was asked this as well, twice in the forum and again, by Pam. Simply, he wants us to go on his record. My response to that is that while one’s record is clearly important what you say and what you do know is very important to the survival of your comapaign.
Obama did fairly well however still when pressed about the hard issues couldn’t break from his personal stance. At one point he even, and unfortunatley not many caught it, prioritized us and homophobia as last among all other things that need to be addressed in the black community.
None (other than Edwards briefly) actually seemed to be able to identify with our community and our struggles. Most candidates touched on AIDS and Healthcare and what they’ve done. But clear to me was the bottom line, we’re just not important enough for any of the top tier candidates.
We have a right and a responsibility to demand what’s right form our candidates. We still have a long road ahead of us to get to the 2008 elections and we need to keep pressing these issues to get the answers that we deserve. Human equality is not something that should be “left to the states.” Human dignity is not a votable issue. No more 85% citizenship simply because of who we love or who we’re attracted to. No more getting fired from jobs because our boss just happens to be bigoted against gay people. Whether or not your Creator is God, Jehova, Allah, Zeus, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or none of the above, we all are guaranteed equal legal status by our constitution and our government and it’s time that we stand up and unite to demand it.
Apr 26
2007
Punted| Category: DADT, Don't Ask, Don't Ask Don't Tell, Don't Tell, Pam's House Blend, Threats |
A press Release today from SLDN says that the Pentagon’s ‘TALON’ (Threat and Local Observation Notices) program that tracked student groups including LGBT activists and labled them a credible threat has been discontinued. This program was discovered back in December 2006 by NBC and was reported by Pam Spaulding and John Arivosis. Below is the press release from SLDN
The Department of Defense (DoD) has announced plans to discontinue its controversial Threat and Local Observation Notices (TALON) surveillance program, launched in 2003 track and monitor domestic terror threats. The program came under intense scrutiny after news reports revealed officials were collecting data on demonstrators and protestors, including those within the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. In February 2006, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) filed a federal lawsuit seeking information related to surveillance of LGBT activists and student groups. Documentation released in April 2006 found extensive monitoring of students opposed to the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law at New York University, the University of California at Berkeley, and the University of California at Santa Cruz.
“The Pentagon’s surveillance program undermined the constitution and eroded Americans’ privacy rights,” said Sharra E. Greer, director of law and policy for SLDN. “The freedom to dissent and the right to voice that dissent are fundamental bedrocks of American democracy. Rather than wasting time and money peeping through keyholes, the government should strengthen our country’s defense by lifting the ban on open service and welcoming every qualified American to our armed forces.”
In December 2005, Lisa Myers and NBC News reported that Pentagon investigators had records pertaining to protests at campuses across the country, including those organized to protest “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Among the demonstrations listed was a protest at New York University, coordinated with the law school’s LGBT advocacy group, OUTlaw, which was classified as “possibly violent” by the Pentagon. A UC-Santa Cruz “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” demonstration, which included a kiss-in, was also labeled as a “credible threat” of terrorism.
James R. Clapper, Jr., undersecretary of defense for intelligence, told reporters on Tuesday that he is moving to end the program. The Pentagon, Clapper said, “must lay to rest the distrust and concern about the department’s commitment to civil rights.” Clapper acknowledged problems with the TALON program, noting that, “The history of the intelligence community is replete with instances of abuse of civil liberties – well intended, but abuse nonetheless.” He said it is “important that the proper balance be struck between the counterintelligence mission, on one hang, and the protection of civil liberties, on the other.”
The real winners of this, are LGBT citizens who belong to organizations like the ones described above who a) appreciate the freedoms guaranteed to every citizen to peaceably assemble and express their grievances, b) don’t want their privacy violated and c) may want to join the armed services sometime in the near future to serve their country. However, it’s doubtful that any of those students would join until the ban on LGBT citizens is lifted.
Mar 16
2007
Punted| Category: Don't Ask, Don't Tell |
The following is a letter I wrote to Represtantive Meehan (D-MA). I’ll post his response when I get it.
Rep. Meehan,I applaud your recent re-introduction of the “Military Readiness Enhancement Act.” I was the person in the corner live-blogging the event. As a gay former Airman I recognize the need to lift this hurtful ban on Military Professionals is like lifting a dark stain from Our Flag, however, I have some concerns for the effectiveness of the bill.
As I have noted in a discussion on Pam’s House Blend with Director of Communications for SLDN, Steve Ralls, the bill allows for military members to serve openly with conditions if it is passed, but it doesn’t get rid of the underlying problem of Article 125 of the UCMJ, “Sodomy.” The article is supposed to be applied to ALL members of the military equally regardless of sexual orientation specifying basically that which goes on behind closed doors is regulated to a specific position and only with a married member of the opposite sex. This means that even if the “Military Readiness Enhancement Act” is passed, it would still mean that Gays and Lesbians would not be allowed to serve openly.
Gays and lesbians would still be punished disproportionately to their heterosexual counterparts if they admitted to having a signifigant other, or boyfriend, or girlfriend, because this would imply an admission of sodomy. What this bill actually does is allow gays and lesbians to be openly celebate. It’s a reality that article 125 is not applied consistently throughout the military except in cases of homosexuality, adultry, rape, incest, or child molestation. Anyone can observe this by listening to candid conversations among military members of all branches of service. General Pace was wrong to call gays and lesbians “immoral,” but this shows how article 125 will be applied disproportionately. Simply stated, instead of gays and lesbians having to change pronouns when referring to their partners, they must eliminate pronouns out of their vocabulary all together. Where, sir, is the equality in this?
My reccomendation is to amend the “Military Readiness Enhancement Act” with either an amendment to Article 125 in the UCMJ or an elimination of Article 125 all together and still allowing punishment for Adultry, Rape, Incest, or Child Molestation. As it currently is, Article 125 negates the “MREA.”
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Daimeon Pilcher
TinyQueerFootballs.com
Get-The-Skinny.com
