CHICAGO HONORS LGBT VETERANS

In a ceremony held yesterday in downtown's Daley Plaza, Chicago honored all of the gay men and women who served their country proudly throughout America's march through history.

The Windy City Times, Chicago's oldest gay newspaper, reported that for the seventh year running, Chicago has held the only municipally sponsored ceremony in the country that recognizes and honors the service of GLBT veterans. It's called With Liberty And Justice For All and included the laying of a pink triangle wreath and a mayoral proclamation read by Dana Starks of the Chicago Commission on Human Relations.

The keynote speaker was Luke Visconti, a veteran, CEO of Diversity Inc, and a member of the U.S. Navy Diversity Senior Advisory Group. In his moving speech, he outlined what he believes defending the constitution means now. He said:

"Keeping liberty is disruptive. Ending slavery was disruptive, as was winning the vote for women, desegragating the military, integrating women into the military. Liberty is fragile and needs care.

I think it is time for veterans to come to the forefront to defend liberty. I don't mean just LGBT veterans but, I hate to tell you, it always is the oppressed ones who have to carry the water for the trest of us. Oppressed people have to bring society forward, it is the way it has always been. Emancipation of slaves didn't happen without a fight, women's sufferage didn't happen without a fight. People didn't get the civil rights act and voting rights without a fight and this isn't happening without a fight.

Below is a television report on the event by WSL-TV (Chicago's ABC affiliate).

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
SORRY ABOUT THE VIDEO THAT SHOULD BE HERE...
It was working until sometime over night. I've tried reembedding the coding but it's not working so I think it's corrupted at WSL-TV.
As soon as I can get it working, I'll remount it.
If you want to see it before then, go to:
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/video?id=6950460
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

I was born in Chicago but because I grew up in the country just north of the city, I never really saw that side of it. It was always obscured by the many political scandals that plagued that whole area. Since then, I've come to appreciate just how forward thinking most people there were - and obviously still are. Today, I couldn't be prouder of my birth city than I am right now. Congratulations Chicago - we've both come a long way.

18 YEAR DECORATED COMBAT PILOT MAY LOSE ALL RETIREMENT BENEFITS

Air Force Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach is a decorated pilot who has flown combat missions over Afghanistan, Iraq and Bosnia. Now serving as the assistant director of operations for an Air Force squadron in Idaho, he has an exemplary 18 year record of serving his country with unquestioned honor and a level of bravery that most of us could never know.

Now, after 18 years and nine Air Medals, including one for heroism under fire during an enemy ambush near Baghdad in 2003, Fehrenbach faces discharge because last year a civilian reported to military authorities that Fehrenbach is gay.

According to an in-depth piece published yesterday by Washington Post writer Steve Vogel, the Air Force launched its own all-out investigation based on nothing more than the hearsay quality and probably revenge instigated civilian report. The result was that last September the Air Force charged Fehrenbach with "damaging its good order and discipline." How despicably ironic is that? After 18 years of exemplary service they tell him that he damaged their "good order"! That's about as cruel and callous a statement as they could have come up with.

But wait - it gets even cruder...

In April, a review board ruled against Fehrenbach, and unless Air Force Secretary Michael Donley rejects the recommendation, he will be dismissed. If he is unable to retire with 20 years of service, Fehrenbach will lose nearly $50,000 a year in retirement pay as well as medical benefits.

If he is discharged and does lose all of the benefits he EARNED over the last 18 years, it's highly unlikely that, in today's marketplace, he would ever be able to recoup any of that - provided that he's even able to find work right now! And, given the damaging label the military has pinned on him, most employers who offer more than minimum wage positions would be very reluctant to hire someone who "damaged the good order and discipline" of the military.

This whole DADT thing is getting more despicable and uglier with every passing day. It's also fermenting deep seeded resentments and almost insurmountable distrust of the military and the political leaders who allow this to happen when a simple stop-loss order from the President or fast-tracked legislation by congress would put a humane end to this cruel and unsustainable policy.

As an Air Force veteran myself, I couldn't be more ashamed of and embarrassed by our military and political leaders than I am right now. This is a great and extraordinarily vibrant country but these power brokers are making it seem little better than our most ardent adversaries.

STOP THIS STUPID POLICY NOW before anymore dedicated and patriotic service members are slandered and discharged by the very same government they risked their lives to defend!!

MOVING CLOSER TO DADT REPEAL

According to a July 25th Associated Press article by Kristen Wyatt, Speaker Of The House Nancy Pelosi appointed openly gay Representative Jared Polis (D Colorado) to the U.S. Air Force Academy's Board of Visitors.

Polis, who took office in January as the first openly gay non-incumbent ever elected to congress, is now also the first openly gay member to serve on an oversight board at any of the military service academies. This, of course, immediately set off waves of speculation about the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy itself.

People on both sides of the DADT policy are openly wondering if Polis' appointment is a signal that change is coming.

"We're all reading the tea leaves here," said Tricia Heller, a Class of '87 Air Force Academy graduate who flew C-9 jets for the Air Force before the leaving the service four years ago and coming out.

"I'm not saying 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is going away. We can't say that. But this is a good sign."

For the supporters of DADT, this appointment signals the policy''s undoing.

"This is more than a signal," said Elaine Donnelly, president of the Washington-based Center For Military Readiness, a group of mostly civilians that favors banning gays from service. "I think when you're talking about the service academies, you're talking about the future of the military leadership. So this appointment, it appears to be advocacy."

Polis said that he doesn't plan to push for a change through the Board. But when asked about the future of DADT, he said that he expects that Congress could start debating its repeal as early as this fall. He added:

"We expect that [DADT] to end shortly, and I look forward to being a value to the Academy in making the transition."

I truly hope that he's right. This is one of the most destructive, cruel and idiotic military policies politicians have ever passed and it's end can't come soon enough.


In A Related Story...
The Advocate reported yesterday that newly appointed Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York announced Monday that the Senate Armed Services Committee will hold hearings this fall on DADT.

“This policy is wrong for our national security and wrong for the moral foundation upon which our country was founded,” Senator Gillibrand said in a statement. “I thank Chairman Levin for agreeing to hold this important hearing. Numerous military leaders are telling us that the times have changed. ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is an unfair, outdated measure that violates the civil rights of some of our bravest, most heroic men and women. By repealing this policy, we will increase America’s strength -- both militarily and morally.”

Although no repeal bill has been submitted yet, it is expected that Senator Edward Kennedy, who has been a long-time champion of repealing DADT, will introduce his bill as soon as he can find a Republican co-sponsor.

Gillibrand said that her effort to build support for a temporary moratorium on DADT discharges had helped push the ball forward.

Finally! Now, if we can just get the repeal of DOMA moving forward...

GAY BRITISH SOLDIER ON COVER OF MILITARY MAGAZINE

Trooper James Wharton of the British Army is now the new face of gays in the military.

Nine years ago the European Court of Human Rights issued a ruling that pressured Britain and other member countries to allow openly gay men and women to serve in their militaries. This month, the July issue of the British Military's own official magazine, Soldier, featured a cover photo of openly gay Army Trooper James Wharton with the word "PRIDE" highlighted from the subdued background of the military's credo.

In the accompanying article, Wharton said that instead of being oppressed and driven to hiding as gays had been forced to do in the past (which is, sadly, still our present), gay and lesbian Army personnel are now given full support.

“I came out to the Army before I told my parents, so that says a lot for the Armed Forces,” said the 22-year-old.

“I told the Army in March 2003, after all my initial training was over – I was 18. I have always known I was gay but it wasn’t until then that I told anyone.”

In 1999, in ruling on two landmark cases, the European Court of Human Rights found that the policy of banning openly gay people from serving in the military was "not sustainable." Following that ruling, in 2000 the British military (along with other European member nations) dropped its ban and opened it doors to all gay and lesbian applicants.

2000 was also the year that George W. Bush was "installed" as President by our Supreme Court. So, of course, the ban on gays in our military was kept staunchly in place thanks in large part to the ensuing rise of religious fanaticism here.

Wharton said of our own baffling and persistant policy:

“I still can’t get my head round the US’ ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy.”

“Luckily I don’t have to deal with it, but clearly there will be gay soldiers in the US Army who are not being themselves – they aren’t allowed to be.”

Granted, there have been some problems with the implementation of and adherence to the British policy but, as Wharton put it:

“Obviously there are people who are set in their ways and aren’t in favour of the changed policy, but the whole attitude is different.”

...

“I think there is room for improvement as far as the Army is concerned because there are still people who can’t accept the changes – but it’s 1,000 times better than ten years ago.”

In fact, British military attitudes have changed so much that at last year's London Gay Pride March, gay men and women in the military were allowed to march in the parade in full military uniforms for the first time.

I wholeheartedly agree with Pennsylvania Representative Patrick Murphy, who is spearheading a bill to repeal DADT. The idea that the American armed forces would suffer morale and recruiting problems if they followed suit is incredibly partronizing. As Murphy put it, "To say that other countries' soldiers are professional enough to handle this and American soldiers aren't is really a slap in the face."

For a country that is supposed to be the shining beacon of hope for justice and equality, it's embarrassing just how far behind we are when compared to our european allies.

IS "DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL" MAKING FOOLS OF THE U.S. MILITARY?

In an excellent article published yesterday in Monterey County's (CA) The Herald, a powerful contrast was drawn between the countries that have allowed gay service members to serve openly for years and the United State's persistent and harmful Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) policy.

Since 1994, the most recent accounts have stated that more than 13,500 US service men and women have been discharged just for being gay. That includes dozens of Arabic linguist who were critical to the success of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and who the military admits were vital because of the difficulties of finding qualified replacements.

Contrast that to England where gay and lesbian service members proudly marched in uniform in the annual London Pride Parade this July 4th. Or to Australia where soldiers and sailors had their own float in Sydney's Gay Mardi Gras parade. Or to Israel, which is acknowledged to have one of the fiercest and best trained militaries in the world, where the army's own magazine earlier this year featured two male soldiers on the cover, hugging one another.

One of the arguments for keeping DADT in place has always been that allowing gays to serve openly would severally harm unit morale and cohesion. Another, more recent argument is that it would hurt recruitment efforts and drive scores of active duty personnel out of the military completely. But others see it differently...

U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy, the first Iraq war veteran elected to Congress, has just launched a campaign for a bill to repeal "don't ask, don't tell." He observed British troops in Iraq operating smoothly with a serve-openly policy and bristles at the contention that America's armed forces would suffer morale and recruiting problems if they followed suit.

"I take it as a personal affront to our warriors," said the Pennsylvania Democrat. "To say that other countries' soldiers are professional enough to handle this and American soldiers aren't is really a slap in the face."

In Israel where gays and lesbians have been proudly serving since 1993 (the same year DADT was approved), the open policy is now considered "thoroughly uncontroversial." In fact, their army recognizes the partners of gay officers as their bereaved next-of-kin after their deaths, eligible for the same benefits straight officer's next-of-kin receive. At promotions and other ceremonies, gay officers often have their partners by their sides.

I do understand that in this country, where homosexuality is still a hot button issue primarily because of the intrusive and manipulative tactics of some of the more fanatical religions, transition to an open military would be a little more problematic. BUT, it would be no more difficult than the readjustment the military had to go through when blacks were allowed to serve as integral parts within all units of the military.

It would be now, as it was then, up to the generals, commanders and sergeants to make sure that the transition is handled professionally. I agree with Representative Murphy, to think that this country's service men and women are incapable of doing what many of our allies have already done is a very big slap in the face to them.

It's long past time to get over this and move on.

UPDATE...
According to a list compiled by the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, the following countries allow gays to serve openly in their militaries:

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Britain, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Uruguay.

Also today, Jason Bellini reported in the Daily Beast that New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand intends to introduce an amendment that would put an 18-month moratorium on the discharge of gays serving in the military.

This would give congress time to work out the details of repealing DADT without harming the reputations of any more patriotic gay American soldiers. It would also be the first time since 1993 that senators will be forced to declare their position on the gay ban.

BTW - the latest discharges under DADT are West Point graduate and Iraq war veteran, Army National Guard Lt. Dan Choi, and a veteran of combat missions over Iraq and Afghanistan, Air Force Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach.

NO PLACE LEFT FOR OBAMA TO HIDE

President Obama has run out of excuses for not taking action on DADT himself by simply exercising his own authority.

As most of my regular readers know, I've written numerous articles about Obama's inaction on DADT. Well since then, the steam over this issue has steadily increased the pressure for him to do something.

In addition to the USA Today/Gallup poll taken in May showing that over two-thirds of the country supports repealing DADT and the University of California's Palm Center Think Tank's report on what actions Obama can legally take on his own authority, this past Monday, 77 Democratic lawmakers sent a letter to the Present urging him to stop the unwarranted discharges of gay service members.

In the letter they called on him to use his executive powers to order a halt to military discharges under DADT and to work aggressively with Congress to pass new legislation to overturn what they describe as a discriminatory policy that harms national security. The letter said, in part:

"We urge you to exercise the maximum discretion legally possible in administering Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell until Congress repeals the law. To this end, we ask that you direct the Armed Services not to initiate any investigation of service personnel to determine their sexual orientation, and that you instruct them to disregard third party accusations that do not allege violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

To metaphorically swing the congressional closet door that Obama has been hiding behind wide open - David Corn, writing for the publication Mother Jones, reported today that when questioned about DADT and DOMA, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs usually gives a version of the same reply - we're waiting for the Pentagon and/or Congress. He essentially has been suggesting that Obama cannot do much on his own. Corn went on to write:

Well, the Center for American Progress--the policy shop run by John Podesta, who oversaw Obama's presidential transition, says that's not so. This week, CAP released a report proposing a rather simple 5-step program for dumping DADT.

1. Signing an Executive Order banning further military separations based on DADT and sending a legislative proposal on DADT repeal to Congress.
2. Forming a presidential panel on how to implement the repeal
3. Repealing DADT in Congress and changing the Uniformed Code of Military Justice, or UCMS
4. Changing other necessary military guidelines to conform to the new policy
5. Following-up to ensure that the armed forces implement the policy changes

Obama cannot do all of this on his say-so. But he sure could get the ball rolling by inking an executive order and creating a presidential panel.

If Obama were to at least issue that Executive Order stopping the discharges immediately, it would go a long way in restoring the GLBT community's faith in the promises he made to us before being elected.

One thing for sure - he's run out of time and excuses. And he can be sure that the GLBT community and the press in general is not going to stop hammering away until he does something.

Mr. President, I still really do want to believe that you honestly do want to live up to the ideals of equality you so passionately preached about before you became President.

Please don't let us down. The country needs and deserves to have at least one politician, one president actually be what he and/or she wants us to believe they are.

DEMONSTRATION PLANNED TO PROTEST OBAMA'S CHICAGO VISIT MONDAY

Many in the GLBT community are very upset with Obama's silence and inaction on DOMA and DADT.

To some, the Dept. of Justice's (DOJ) baffling, specious and almost unintelligible brief filed IN FAVOR OF UPHOLDING DOMA in a recent court challenge is the last straw.

The media, from countless blogs and websites to prestigious newspapers and national broadcasts, have espoused scathing commentaries about this latest slap-in-the-face action taken against the rights of GLBT people throughout the country. I too am incensed that the DOJ (i.e., the Obama administration) would even consider taking such a stand when Obama is already under a great deal of fire for his unwillingness to use the stop-loss power he already has to at least suspend the continuing DADT discharges so that no more American Patriots are unceremoniously kicked-out for nothing more than being gay.

What makes this even more confusing is the way in which the DOJ handled the filing of their brief. Their actions just simply make no sense. Even if you buy into the argument that this particular case isn't the right one to challenge DOMA on the grounds of a constitutional right for gays and lesbians to marry because it only addresses the right to have the already performed legal gay marriages recognized by other states and the federal government. There are, in fact, several cases in the pipeline that directly challenge the constitutionality of prohibiting only gay marriages and would be much stronger challenges to DOMA.

In a June 12th posting renowned journalist Andrew Sullivan said:

There's a completely decent reason to keep DOMA in place for the time being, especially in the federal courts right now - where bad precedents could wound us in the future. But to file an actual brief re-stating some of the worst and most denigrating arguments against gay civil equality is just bizarre. They could have argued for a narrow ruling or kept the "reasonable" arguments to a minimum. What they did - without any heads up to any of their gay supporters and allies - is unconscionable. Citing incest precedents? Calling gay couples free-loaders? Arguing that our civil rights are not impinged because we can marry someone of the opposite sex? Who on earth decided that that was a great idea? Marc is right that this will be simply incomprehensible to most gay people. To have unloaded it after refusing to do anything on DADT, after failing to lift the HIV travel ban, after punting on even pure symbolism like hate crimes - well, it's no way to treat those who worked their butts off to elect you...

I'm baffled by this, I really am. The content of this brief is a massive political error from an administration that is making it impossible for its gay supporters to stay supportive. What's next? A Clintonian political ad boasting of these arguments?

It's now even more important to visibly remind Obama that we are NOT AT ALL HAPPY with the way he and his administration are handling the issues of vital importance to our community. One way to do this is to show up and protest whenever Obama makes any kind of visit to cities and towns outside of Washington.

Queers United has reported that one such visit will be in Chicago TOMORROW MORNING. If you live in Chicago or the surrounding area, you owe it to yourself and your gay brothers and sisters to attend the demonstration that's already planned. Here's the specifics:

WHEN -
Monday, June 15th from 10:30 AM – 12 noon

WHERE -
Hyatt Regency Hotel
151 E. Wacker Drive
(one block east of Michigan Avenue)

LASTEST POLL SHOWS OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FOR ENDING DADT

The publication Mother Jones (one of my personal favorites) reported Sunday that according to the latest USA Today/Gallup poll conducted May 7-10, 2009 and released last Friday, support for allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly has increased from 63% to 69%.

That's now over 2/3 of the general public that believe gays should be able to serve in the military without any of the preconditions of the now obsolete and embarrassing Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) policy.

According to the poll, the biggest increase in support has been among conservatives. Their support has increased an encouraging 12 percentage points from 46% in November 2004 to 58% in May 2009.



As Mother Jones pointed out,

There's a rule of thumb that says social policies are resistant to change until they garner two-thirds support from the public. Allowing gays to serve openly in the military has now officially passed that point. That means it's safe to keep your campaign promise and act, Mr. President.

Mr. President, it's more than obvious now that not only is there widespread, overwhelming support throughout the country for ending DADT but that you also clearly have the authority to put an IMMEDIATE end to these harmful and disruptive discharges that have so negatively and cruelly impacted so many honorable veterans. So, once again, I ask:

WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?

AFTER ACCUSATIONS OF BACKROOM DEALS HRC FINALLY JOINS ACTIVISTS AGAINST DADT

On May 10th I posted a blog article chastising President Obama for not taking any visible action to end the DADT policy despite overwhelming public support to repeal it and his numerous and clearly stated intentions to do just that when he was elected.

Two days later, on May 12th, I posted another story about the new study published by the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, that said the President does, indeed, have the authority to end DADT on his own authority.

The study said that the Commander-In-Chief already has the statutory authority to halt military separations under 10 U.S.C. § 12305, a law which Congress titled, “Authority of President to suspend certain laws relating to promotion, retirement, and separation.”

More importantly, the study also said that the provisions of the "stop-loss" law, which are granted by Congress, give the President authority to "suspend laws relating to separation when a national emergency has strained personnel requirements.” This is something that can be done immediately by the President alone.

So, given the fact that it has been almost a full month since this new information was made public, why hasn't Obama issued that order?

Well, according to a video piece (see below) posted at The Daily Beast by award winning gay journalist Jason Bellini, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and other "mainstream" gay rights organizations had reached an agreement with the White House to support delaying action on the DADT repeal until some of the other pressing GLBT rights legislation has been passed. To lend credence to this has been the HRC's somewhat milquetoast efforts to hold the administration's feet to the fire to get this repeal accomplished as promised.

Of course HRC immediately issued a statement denying that any deal was made. But despite that denial, many people in the gay community, especially the newest and youngest activists and activist organizations felt that there might be some truth to the accusation because blogs and websites burned up the internet with condemnations and accusations against HRC for not truly representing the goals of the now more fervent, in-the-street, activist movement.

In response to this growing maelstrom, HRC President Joe Solmonese finally came out and publicly called on President Obama to at least suspend DADT to stop the unwarranted and unwise discharges of sorely needed military personnel.

Gay News Net reported yesterday that when Chris Matthews on MSNBC's Hardball last night asked Solmonese whether he believes Obama has the authority to sign such an order and whether he should do so, Solmonese said, "Yes he can and yes I do." Matthews repeated the question, asking "Do you think he should?" Salmonese confirmed, "Yes I do."

Solmonese also said that Obama should sign the executive order immediately to halt further firings like that of Lt. Dan Choi, a West Point graduate who speaks Arabic. "The president has the opportunity to stop that from happening," Solmonese said. "We've asked him to do that and pressed him to do that and hope that he will."

If, in fact, the HRC did reach some kind of agreement to delay an all-out push for the repeal of DADT, I'm absolutely positive that there were no sinister, underlying motivations. I'm sure that they thought that strategy would be the most effective in securing all of the rights we're seeking. It's possible that they didn't even know about the recently revealed Presidential powers that Obama has to effect this change completely on his own authority.

Whatever reasons were behind HRC's past inaction, I'm glad to see them now using their substantial political capital to pressure Obama to suspend the firings. They're a good organization that has done a whole lot in advancing our causes in towns, cities, states and municipalities throughout the country. So let's not, as the saying goes, "throw the baby out with the bath water."

One thing for sure at this point - it is now almost impossible for the President and his administration to ignore the importance of immediate action on DADT. We're all watching Mr. President.

Below is Jason Bellini's video piece referred to above:

PRESIDENT PROCLAIMS JUNE GAY PRIDE MONTH

I'm a couple of days late with this but I didn't want to let it go by without a comment.

Lately, many in the GLBT community have been expressing growing dissatisfaction with President Obama's seeming non-action on many of the issues we consider to be of paramount importance to our community. I myself have expressed my own frustrations over this in several of my more recent posts.

Although these feelings certainly do seem to be justified considering the high expectations for action that were fueled by Obama's many strong and positive statements about ending DOMA, DADT, anti-gay discrimination in the workplace and housing, passing hate crimes legislation, etc., etc.. Let's not forget that in just six short months, he has appointed more openly gay professionals to high level, high profile management and advisory positions throughout the government and his own administration than any president before him. He is also the first president to endorse and speakout for an end to anti-gay discrimination throughout the world.

Yes, he hasn't moved as fast as we wanted him to but I think it's important to recognize the impact that the words a President speaks to us and to the rest of the world have not just on policies but on the thoughts and beliefs of tens and hundreds of millions of people.

It's easy to dismiss what someone says by loudly protesting that they're "just words." But what makes a difference is what the specific words are and who says them. Entire armies have been moved to against-all-odds victories and whole civilizations have been built on nothing more than words. The reality is that, like it or not, words are what change everything.

On Monday, President Obama issued the following proclamation declaring June 2009 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month:

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION

Obama Forty years ago, patrons and supporters of the Stonewall Inn in New York City resisted police harassment that had become all too common for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. Out of this resistance, the LGBT rights movement in America was born. During LGBT Pride Month, we commemorate the events of June 1969 and commit to achieving equal justice under law for LGBT Americans.

LGBT Americans have made, and continue to make, great and lasting contributions that continue to strengthen the fabric of American society. There are many well-respected LGBT leaders in all professional fields, including the arts and business communities. LGBT Americans also mobilized the Nation to respond to the domestic HIV/AIDS epidemic and have played a vital role in broadening this country's response to the HIV pandemic.

Due in no small part to the determination and dedication of the LGBT rights movement, more LGBT Americans are living their lives openly today than ever before. I am proud to be the first President to appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an Administration. These individuals embody the best qualities we seek in public servants, and across my Administration -- in both the White House and the Federal agencies -- openly LGBT employees are doing their jobs with distinction and professionalism.

The LGBT rights movement has achieved great progress, but there is more work to be done. LGBT youth should feel safe to learn without the fear of harassment, and LGBT families and seniors should be allowed to live their lives with dignity and respect.

My Administration has partnered with the LGBT community to advance a wide range of initiatives. At the international level, I have joined efforts at the United Nations to decriminalize homosexuality around the world. Here at home, I continue to support measures to bring the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans. These measures include enhancing hate crimes laws, supporting civil unions and Federal rights for LGBT couples, outlawing discrimination in the workplace, ensuring adoption rights, and ending the existing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in a way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security. We must also commit ourselves to fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic by both reducing the number of HIV infections and providing care and support services to people living with HIV/AIDS across the United States.

These issues affect not only the LGBT community, but also our entire Nation. As long as the promise of equality for all remains unfulfilled, all Americans are affected. If we can work together to advance the principles upon which our Nation was founded, every American will benefit. During LGBT Pride Month, I call upon the LGBT community, the Congress, and the American people to work together to promote equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2009 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. I call upon the people of the United States to turn back discrimination and prejudice everywhere it exists.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.

BARACK OBAMA

Obama is the first President to ever even acknowledge our transgender brothers and sisters in a national/international speech. That's important.

Thanks to Towelroad.com for the text of the proclamation.

JON STEWART RAILS AGAINST FIRING OF ARMY LINGUIST EXPERT LT. DAN CHOI

In my March 23rd posting, I did a story (with video) on the very public coming out of Lt. Dan Choi on the Rachel Maddow Show.

Lt. Choi is a graduate of West Point, a NY National Guard platoon leader, an Iraq war veteran and an Arabic linguist expert. He and 38 other West Point graduates risked their careers by coming out publicly and forming an organization called Knights Out, which they intended to be a support group that would offer help to their alma mater in educating future Army leaders on the need to accept and honor the sacrifices of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender troops.

At the time of his Maddow interview, Lt. Choi was still an active duty officer in good standing. Unfortunately, even after very personal, heartfelt and reasoned pleas from Choi not to be discharged under DADT, the Army went ahead and fired him anyway. Totally disregarding, as they had 53 times before, the inestimable value an Arabic linguist has to the war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Below is a video segment of The Daily Show's Jon Stewart skewering Barack Obama and the military for the insane firing of Lt. Choi and others in the middle of two wars in two Arabic/Muslim countries.

According to LezGetReal.com, as a lead-in to the video segment with John Oliver, Stewart cautioned us to always check the fine print as the camera focused in on an Obama banner that was altered to read below the “Yes We Can” slogan the words “But That Doesn’t Necessarily Mean We Are Going To.”

Here's that video:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Dan Choi Is Gay
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

To date, the United States Military has fired over 12,000 service men and women for no other reason than the fact that they are gay. Many of the them were highly decorated war veterans.

If you would like to express your concerns directly to President Obama, you can send an email using the contact form at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

ARE OBAMA & DEMOCRATS THE NEW "POLITICS AS USUAL" PARTY?

In my last two blog postings, I talked about the failure to see any substantive progress by the Obama administration to make good on his often repeated campaign promises to the LGBT community.

Although there are still many issues that have yet to see any kind of movement, I focused on two of the top priorities that I believe should already have been addressed with strong, doable actions.

The repeal of DOMA and the repeal of DADT are both policies that an overwhelming majority of democrats, including Obama, have already said they were against and pledged to repeal. More importantly, these are policies that not only mock and severely limit the thousands of legal, gay marriages already performed but also jeopardize the readiness and ability of our ground troops to perform at their best in two wars being fought in the middle of two Arabic/Muslim cultures that have a language that virtually none of our troops are able to even understand let alone speak.

Yet, everyday that these policies stay in effect, more and more highly qualified American troops who do speak the languages and understand the cultures are being discharged. And legally recognized gay families are being discriminated against and denied rights and privileges that straight families take for granted on the flimsy excuse that it's against DOMA. In both cases, the lives of thousands of law-abiding, patriotic and emotionally committed individuals are having their lives disrupted and their dreams crushed because those who were elected to correct these injustices are dragging their feet - for no defendable reason.

Yesterday, renowned writer Andrew Sullivan of The Atlantic magazine added his voice to the growing number of openly gay Obama supporters who are beginning to question the veracity of the democrats and, in particular, of Obama himself when they loudly proclaimed their support for GLBT issues. In his article, Sullivan said:

Here we are, in the summer of 2009, with gay servicemembers still being fired for the fact of their orientation. Here we are, with marriage rights spreading through the country and world and a president who cannot bring himself even to acknowledge these breakthroughs in civil rights, and having no plan in any distant future to do anything about it at a federal level. Here I am, facing a looming deadline to be forced to leave my American husband for good, and relocate abroad because the HIV travel and immigration ban remains in force and I have slowly run out of options (unlike most non-Americans with HIV who have no options at all).

And what is Obama doing about any of these things? What is he even intending at some point to do about these things? So far as I can read the administration, the answer is: nada. We're firing Arab linguists? So sorry. We won't recognize in any way a tiny minority of legally married couples in several states because they're, ugh, gay? We had no idea. There's a ban on HIV-positive tourists and immigrants? Really? Thanks for letting us know. Would you like to join Joe Solmonese and John Berry for cocktails? The inside of the White House is fabulous these days.

Sullivan wrote an emotional and powerful piece that I highly recommend to everyone. To read his article go to The Atlantic at: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/05/the-fierce-urgency-of-whenever.html

Hopefully, President Obama's Deputy Director of the White House office of Public Liaison, LGBT activist Brian Bond, is keeping track of all of these articles and postings and is keeping the President and, in turn, the democratic leadership aware of the growing dissatisfaction within our community.

If they continue to treat us as the unwanted stepchildren, they're going to have a hell of time getting themselves reelected. Lest they forget, there were millions of us and our supporters who got them elected to begin with.

NEW STUDY SAYS OBAMA CAN LEGALLY STOP DADT WITHOUT CONGRESS

In my posting yesterday, I said that President Obama could end, or at least suspend, the DADT policy himself.

Well, imagine my delight this morning when I saw a new study published by the Palm Center, a think tank at the University of California, Santa Barbara, that said the President does, indeed, have the authority to end DADT on his own authority.

In fact, according to the study, the President actually has several options available to him. Here is what the study itself said:

There are three legal bases to the president’s authority, the report says. First, Congress has already granted to the Commander in Chief the statutory authority to halt military separations under 10 U.S.C. § 12305, a law which Congress titled, “Authority of President to suspend certain laws relating to promotion, retirement, and separation” Under the law “the President may suspend any provision of law relating to promotion, retirement, or separation applicable to any member of the armed forces who the President determines is essential to the national security of the United States” during a “period of national emergency.” The statute specifically defines a “national emergency” as a time when “members of a reserve component are serving involuntarily on active duty.”

The second and third bases of presidential authority are contained within the “don’t ask, don’t tell” legislation itself. The law grants to the Defense Department authority to determine the process by which discharges will be carried out, saying they will proceed “under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense… in accordance with procedures set forth in such regulation." Finally, the law calls for the discharge of service members “if” a finding of homosexuality is made, but it does not require that such a finding ever be made. According to the study, these provisions mean that the Pentagon, not Congress, has the “authority to devise and implement the procedures under which those findings may be made.”

Diane H. Mazur, Professor of Law at the University of Florida College of Law and another study co-author, said the presidential authority to stop firing gay troops, known as “stop-loss,” is different from the highly unpopular stop-loss policy that the Army recently announced it would phase out. “That use of stop-loss forcibly extends service by those who wish to leave the military,” she said, “whereas suspending discharges for homosexuality would do the opposite: allow ongoing service by those who wish to remain in uniform.” The study says the provisions of the stop-loss law, which are granted by Congress, are “sensible because they give the President authority to suspend laws relating to separation when a national emergency has strained personnel requirements.”

Mr. President, many of us who were, and still are, among your strongest supporters have been saying since the inauguration that we needed to be patient, that you needed time to settle-in. Well, now that we know, without a doubt, that you CAN do this, even our patience is beginning to wear very thin.

I'm sure you're aware that a healthy majority of your constituents, including military personnel themselves, from generals down to privates, have consistently said in numerous polls and public statements that they support the repeal of DADT. With those polls, the release of this study and the current disarray and even impotence of the right wing republican party, we're finding it more and more difficult to understand why this hasn't happened already. The overriding question we all have in our minds just became -- WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?

Mr. President -- NOW IS THE TIME to stand up and BE the "fierce advocate of equality for gay and lesbian Americans" that you unambiguously promised you would be.

THE TIME TO BE A "FIERCE" SUPPORTER IS NOW MR. PRESIDENT

President Barack Obama's exhilarating victory last November seemed to almost instantly inflate a sense of overwhelming pride and indomitable optimism throughout most of this country - and, indeed, the world.

Finally, after eight abysmal years of rampant arrogance, secrecy and stunning disregard for the very constitution that is the heart and soul of this nation, we could see light piercing through the darkness.

For the LGBT community, it was a particularly heady time of real hope for our future. Here we had a man elected President of the United States who had strongly and unabashedly voiced support for our community - for us.

He spoke openly, frequently and eloquently throughout the long, drawn-out campaign about the necessity for fair and equal treatment under the law. And not just for some amorphous group of rights but for GAY rights - specifically! He even went so far as to pledge to be a "fierce advocate of equality for gay and lesbian Americans."

It is true, Mr. President, that you have done more than any other sitting president to appoint qualified, openly gay professionals as heads of many important departments, agencies and pivotal positions within your administration. Although it is still disappointing that there were no cabinet level appointments even though there were several highly qualified, openly gay candidates.

It is also true that you did issue a strong public statement urging Congress to pass the Matthew Shepard Act. And I'm sure that your comments had a lot to do with swaying some of the undecideds to join the majority when they passed this legislation on April 29th.

It is however, very disappointing that two of the most important actions you vowed to vigorously pursue have yet to show any real progress.

Everyday there are more and more legally married and legally "partnered" gay couples and families establishing their relationships in cities and rural communities throughout this country. And even though this is a very positive trend, everyone of those couples continue to face a myriad of challenges and very real hardships caused by the so-called Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA).

This is something you vowed to "vigorously" work toward the repeal of. So far, there seems to have been no visible effort on your part to help bring about this promised action. Granted, this is something that must be done by Congress but now, with your new, formidable position as President of the most powerful nation on earth, you could certainly push, prod and cajole enough members of both houses to bring this issue to a resolution instead of allowing them to sidestep and doublespeak their way around it.

Also, as you well know, there are still highly patriotic, skilled and exhaustively trained members of the armed services being discharged for no other reason than their status as gay Americans. When this happens, not only is the country itself harmed but good people like West Point graduate, Iraq war veteran, and Arab linguist, Lt. Choi or Second Lieutenant Sandy Tsao (who you wrote to personally) and thousands like them have their lives totally disrupted and their dreams of serving their country honorably and with dignity crushed by this illogical and harmful policy.

This is, to me, probably the most disturbing of all of the gay civil rights issues because this is something that you, as Commander and Chief, have the immediate power to stop. Right now. Today.

Granted, it may take some time to workout the implementation of ending the DADT policy altogether. But, in the meantime, a simple order from the President/Commander & Chief to "temporarily" stop these callous discharges until the details and legalities of ending this policy can be worked out would put an immediate end to the indiscriminate "punishment" of the distinguished, dedicated men and women now serving our country.

This can easily be justified under the auspices of protecting and maintaining military readiness in the midst of two wars being fought in Arabic/Muslim nations. How many missions were botched and how many lives were lost for no other reason than the fact that our forces simply didn't understand the languages and/or cultures within the fields of battle.

This IS something you can do right now, Mr President.

Yes. You can.

WHY DID BARNEY FRANK CALL JUSTICE SCALIA A HOMOPHOBE

During a video taped interview with 365gay.com (see full interview below), openly gay Representative Barney Frank referred to Justice Antonin Scalia as "that homophobe" in response to a question about the Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Frank was discussing gay marriage and his expectation that the high court would some day be called upon to decide whether the Constitution allows the federal government to deny recognition to same-sex marriages. He commented, "I wouldn't want it to go to the United States Supreme Court now because that homophobe Antonin Scalia has too many votes on this current court.

In his posting at The Hill's Congress Blog, Frank said:

"While responding to questions from journalists about my characterization of Justice Antonin Scalia as a homophobe, I realized that the fact that I made that comment in conjunction with a potential lawsuit about the Defense of Marriage Act created some confusion as to my basis for that characterization.

My view that Justice Scalia is prejudiced against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people is based, not on his position on marriage, but entirely on the angry minority opinions he wrote in two Supreme Court cases in which the majority held that gay and lesbian people had certain rights against discrimination regarding private consensual sex and political activity. In those two virulent dissents, Justice Scalia denounced the court majorities not simply for finding that it was unconstitutional to discriminate based on sexual orientation in cases involving political rights and the right to private consensual sex, but he also made it clear that in his view sex discrimination is not only permitted by the Constitution but is very much in society’s interest because homosexuality deserves to be treated with not only disapproval, but legal disability.

This comes out most clearly in his very vigorous abjection to the court’s decision to block a criminal prosecution against two men who had consensual sex in the privacy of their bedroom. And it is made very vivid in the passage in which he affirms society’s right to treat homosexuals unequally by citing other categories which deserves such treatment — beginning with murder."

The actual written, astoundingly homophobic, comments made by Scalia in those cases is, to say the least, very disturbing. You can read the full text of Scalia's opinions at the Congress Blog. They're at the end of Barney's comments.

If this man (and I use that term very loosely) doesn't recuse himself from future cases involving any GLBT issue, there is something fundamentally wrong with our Supreme Court Structure.

Below is Barney Frank's full interview with 365gay.com.

TWO VIDEOS OF NOTE...

Lt. Dan Choi is an active duty member of the United States Army, a graduate of West Point, a NY National Guard platoon leader, an Iraq veteran, and an Arab linguist. He and 38 other West Point graduates risked their careers by coming out publicly and forming an organization they call Knights Out.

According to The Advocate, Knights Out is intended to be a support group offering help to their alma mater to educate future Army leaders on the need to accept and honor the sacrifices of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender troops. Their goal is to form a connection between gay troops and Army administrators to provide an “open forum” for communication between gay West Point graduates and their fellow alumni. They would also like to serve in an advisory role to West Point leaders when the disastrous "don't ask, don't tell" policy is repealed.

Knights Out joins two other similar groups formed by graduates of the U.S. Naval and Air Force academies - the U.S. Naval Academy’s USNA Out and the U.S. Air Force Academy’s Blue Alliance.

Below is an interview Lt. Choi gave to Dr. Rachel Maddow on MSNBC last week.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

It will be interesting to see whether or not the military pursues discharges for these courageous service men. Considering how badly the more than 12,500 discharges under DADT have already hurt the military's readiness and the fact that President Obama is actively working with the pentagon to end DADT, I would hope that NO ONE ELSE will be added to that discharge list.

Thanks also to Lez Get Real for their article and the video.


Portia De Rossi Apologizes For Marrying Ellen DeGeneres...
The following video is currently running on YouTube and has cumulatively received more than 50,000 hits so far. It's hilarious! Thanks Portia. Enjoy...

IT'S TIME FOR OBAMA TO STAND UP AND BE COUNTED

Gays rights legal issues are beginning to bubble-up to the top of public agendas much faster than I'm sure the Obama administration would have liked.

In at least two cases fermenting within the Justice Department, the President is being pushed into a position that he either stands behind his many promises to the GLBT community of equal rights, protections and treatment or he doesn't.

One case involves health benefits for same-sex partners in the California court system. The other involves the discharge of a 18 year Air Force veteran who is being forcibly discharged just two years before her retirement under the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy because she was "discovered" to be a lesbian. In both cases, the Obama administration (via the Justice Department) will be forced to take a stand.

A New York Times article said of the California case:

In separate, strongly worded orders, two judges of the federal appeals court in California said that employees of their court were entitled to health benefits for their same-sex partners under the program that insures millions of federal workers.

But the federal Office of Personnel Management has instructed insurers not to provide the benefits ordered by the judges, citing a 1996 law, the Defense of Marriage Act.

Now, Mr. Obama is in a tough spot. If he supports the personnel office on denying benefits to the San Francisco court employees, he risks agitating liberal groups that helped him win election. If he supports the judges and challenges the marriage act, he risks alienating Republicans with whom he is seeking to work on economic, health care and numerous other matters.

In the DADT case, Major Margaret Witt took the podium in front of the nation's capitol at a rally to repeal DADT and said:

“For 18 years I served in the military, before the Air Force discharged me because they found out I was a lesbian. But I don’t want to leave, and I’m challenging the government’s attempt to discharge me.”

This case is a little more complicated because the ninth circuit appelate court's decision narrowly focused on Maj. Witt's case specifically and doesn't necessarily challenge DADT directly.

As The Advocate reported:

When her [Maj. Witt] attempt to fight the dismissal was denied a hearing by a federal judge, her lawyers appealed the decision and the ninth circuit ultimately ruled that Witt had a right to her day in court. The decision concluded that, although the government had previously been able to discharge any LGB person under the policy, new protections provided by the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas ruling now required the government to actually prove that an individual’s presence was indeed harming unit cohesion. The ruling was also carefully constructed to only apply to Major Witt’s case.

The court did not rule on the constitutionality of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ but it said because of a new precedent, ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ has a higher burden to meet in order for an individual to be kicked out.”

C. Dixon Osburn, CEO of Osburn Management Consulting Company and former executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, a group that advocates for repeal of the policy, said:

"...the movement has always argued that the government had no evidence demonstrating that letting LGBs serve openly in the military would hurt unit morale or military preparedness.

We have tried for the last 15 years to get the government to defend themselves and the courts have just looked the other way. This case is saying, ‘No, we won’t turn a blind eye to this, you need to give us evidence that the law is sensible on a case-by-case basis.’”

The narrowness of this case's decision may allow the DOJ to let the ruling stand, without any action by them, which would send the case back to the lower court to be argued. This would give the Obama administration a little more time to finish what they already started doing - working with the Pentagon to figure out the best way to end DADT.

Although I currently support Obama's approach, I, of course, also support Maj Witt's right not to be discharged for nothing more than simply being gay.

On a personal note, the Times' logic about Obama's risk of "...alienating Republicans with whom he is seeking to work on economic, health care and numerous other matters" should he side with the California federal appeals court seems extraordinarily childish and naive for such a prestigious publication.

In case the article's author, Robert Pear, hadn't noticed, the Republicans have made it their party's policy to disagree with and belligerently fight every proposal the President has introduced to turn the country's immediate financial crisis and long-term solvency around. Even going as far as standing silently by when their self-proclaimed, de facto "leader," Rush Limbaugh, publicly and proudly proclaimed that he "hoped Obama would fail" which, in effect, is saying that he hopes the country fails. I don't think you can get much more alienated than that!

Apparently, in the minds of Republicans, having the country continue to experience poverty, mayhem and misery for a few more years would give them a better chance to regain power in 2010. How sick is that?

NATIONAL EQUALITY RALLY SET FOR MAY 3RD IN PHILADELPHIA

The pioneering GLBT magazine The Advocate reported today that the organizers of the upcoming National Equality Rally lauched a video on YouTube yesterday to promote the event.

The video is absolutely awesome. It's set to the music of Five for Fighting’s "What Kind of World Do You Want?" and begins with the image of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech then segues into images of gay rights rallies and marches from the first Philadelphia demonstrations in 1965 all the way through to today's fight for marriage equality. It really is an awesome video presentation and the music is just plain dynamite. Check it out...

The Rally is scheduled for May 3rd at Independence Hall in Philadelphia. I just wish may partner and I could afford to go because it looks like its going to be one of those incredibly memorable moments that you'll take with you for the rest of your life. What better setting could there be? The site our movement's first public demonstration and the birthplace of a country that dedicated itself to equality for all of its citizens.

According to National Equality Rally's website, the rally would serve as a call on Congress and our new president for:

• Passage of trans-inclusive hate crimes legislation

• Passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)

• Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)

• Support for GLBT health issues

• Equal benefits for same-sex families

• Same-sex marriage Equality

If you do plan to attend, I would strongly suggest that you call one of the downtown hotels as soon as you finish reading this. I have a feeling that they're going to get booked up pretty quick.

Right-Winger Stuns Congressional Hearing On Don't Ask, Don't Tell

In arguments meant to persuade congressional leaders, Elaine Donnelly, founder and president of the Center for Military Readiness, stunned everyone at the House Armed Services subcommittee hearings on the now infamously famous "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

According to a Washington Post story, Ms. Donnelly was called to testify before the committee but instead of making her case to retain the DADT policy, she launched into amazingly bizarre and far-fetched arguments that had just about everyone staring at her with their mouths hanging open.

The Washington Post story said:

Donnelly treated the panel to an extraordinary exhibition of rage. She warned of "transgenders in the military." She warned that lesbians would take pictures of people in the shower. She spoke ominously of gays spreading "HIV positivity" through the ranks.

"We're talking about real consequences for real people," Donnelly proclaimed. Her written statement added warnings about "inappropriate passive/aggressive actions common in the homosexual community," the prospects of "forcible sodomy" and "exotic forms of sexual expression," and the case of "a group of black lesbians who decided to gang-assault" a fellow soldier.

At the witness table with Donnelly, retired Navy Capt. Joan Darrah, a lesbian, rolled her eyes in disbelief. Retired Marine Staff Sgt. Eric Alva, a gay man who was wounded in Iraq, looked as if he would explode."

Ms. Donnelly not only didn't make her case she was an embarrassment to herself and her organization. In fact, she did more to generate sympathy for the repeal than just about anyone else who testified.

Rep. Vic Snyder (D-Ark.) called her comments "just bonkers" and "dumb" and her comments about an HIV menace "inappropriate." Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.), a veteran of the war in Iraq, called her words "an insult to me and many of the soldiers" by saying they "aren't professional enough to serve openly with gay troops while successfully completing their military mission."

To read the full story (it's worth taking a few minutes to read) go to: Washington Post

Poll Shows 63% Say Gay Marriage Is "A Strickly Private Decision"

From a post on Advocate.com
June 05, 2008

"A USA Today/Gallup Poll found that 63% of adults say same-sex marriage is "strictly a private decision" between two people; 33% believe the government has the right "to prohibit or allow" such marriages, while 4% had no opinion.

The greatest support for no government intervention regarding same-sex marriages was in the East (71%), followed by the West (64%), Midwest (63%), and South (56%).

The percentage of participants who believe that same-sex marriage is “strictly a private” matter decreased as the age of the respondents increased: 79% of 18- to 29-year-olds, 65% of 30- to 49-year-olds, 62% of 50- to 64-year-olds, and 44% of those 65 and older.

The strongest support for government regulation of same-sex marriage came from people who say they attend religious services weekly (56%), are Republicans (56%), or are politically conservative (54%)."

Clearly, acceptance of same-sex marriage is now mostly a matter of attrition. And, since many of the most virulent anti-gay religious leaders have either died or been discredited by their own, personal sex scandals, and since there is a whole new, younger, more tolerant generation set to grab the reins from their cold, dead or severely emasculated hands, I'm sure that things will begin to change at a much more accelerated rate. BUT --- because the faster things change in our favor, the more frustrated and violent our remaining opponents actions will become. So, of course, still be visible, but also be vigilant and be careful!! Always know where you are, who's around you and what you'll do should a situation become threatening. You don't need to be paranoid because the odds are strongly against anything happening to you. You just need to be aware.

As a supportive addendum to this change is a recent statement by aging, former senator Sam Nunn. He now believes that the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that he so cold-heartedly helped create and ram through the congress and senate should now be reexamined. Maybe even the older demagogs are beginning to see the writing on the wall. They were wrong. Period.

Both Stories At: Advocate.com.