No one is saying gay people shouldn’t want to serve, some are just arguing that they shouldn’t serve if the price is their soul. I’ve had this argument with my brothers several times, and like I said to them, there are many civilian jobs that will allow them to serve this nation and be exactly who they are simultaneously. I speak from experience, being a firefighter with a gay man (my best friend) on my squad. The two should never be mutually exclusive and when they become such, the choice should be simple.

Lets be honest, this tour is going to do nothing more than preach to the choir. The people that disagree with the issue aren’t going to suddenly show up at the rally other than if they choose to protest it. Those that already agree are not suddenly going to become gay rights activists. The truth is, the popular vote can support whatever it wants, but as long as we don’t value the popular vote in any election in this country it doesn’t matter. There are certain areas in this country where the district that voted Democratic did so with the expectation that if the person they voted for voted for gay rights issues they either do it quietly or not get their vote the next term.

I live in a district where if the HRC started spewing out a hornets nest of equality it would draw attention to the vote when it was actually made by my Representative. That much attention would cause him to be much more likely to go with a vote that caused him to get re-elected to another term. That vote would most likely be conservative because the area is conservative. However, when no one is looking at him directly for his vote it can be glossed over and people see the positive stuff he does in other areas and don’t really check his stance on gay issues and end up voting him back in a conservative district although he supports gay rights.

Right. Because in order for one to point out a discriminatory problem one must engage in the problematic activity? So you’re telling me that if the 65,000 ish gay soldiers were instead activist fighting toward the repeal of DADT so that once it was abolished they could serve proud and pridefully, we wouldn’t be having this argument? You can’t really be this naive.

If this were true, gay marriage would never have been an issue because we’ve never been able to get married. While I’m sure this type of circular logic helps you sleep at night — you know for all your selfless sacrifice to a country that views you as a fraction of a self — but that’s probably where its buck stops.

@Joe, they’re not serving openly. They’re at most open to a handful of close friends in their unit. They’re still willingly shamed into the closet, unable to be exactly who they are with dignity. For people who place self respect over everything else, you’re either pridefully out or you’re not, there’s no half stepping. And this is pretty much the source of the hypocrisy I keep seeing; it’s alright for those of you who place “selfless service” above all, but for those who place dignity and self respect on the same pedestal, suddenly we become blasphemous anti gay enemies. That high horse must be nice, huh?

I know quite a few people that have worked and do work full time for good causes for free. However, there is a flip side where they say they work for free because they aren’t given an actual salary, but they are given a stiffen and their room and board is paid for by the organization.

Furthermore, those who deride gay Americans for wanting to serve their country seem to be forgetting that along with the gay community’s demands for equality in our country comes the requirement to contribute to the country as well. Straight Americans surely cannot take our cries for equal rights seriously if some of us, at least, aren’t willing to stand up and serve in the defense of our nation as well.

Yes while many civil right struggles were helped along by way of infiltration the vast majority were changed from outside pressure, experience, lobbying and respectfully showing that the suspect group in question was just as valuable as everyone else. This mainly had to happen because the inside was so hostile, the allies that you have to gain are the movable middle, not the people that are going to find you less than no matter what.

You want to justify your decisions that some view as questionable and shine that arrogance and false sense of entitlement all over this blog, that’s fine. But let’s keep logic and reasoning as our friends, ‘kay?

Rather than engage you in several of these such comments, I’d rather spend what energy I have debating this topic, on advocating the repeal of DADT.

I’ve met far too many people with such strong opinions on various issues and if I spent so much time on each of you, I’d never get anything else accomplished.

So forgive me if this is my last response to you.

I’ll be working to change the culture of the military I love, from the inside out. You can’t force change, without too much resistance. Anyone who’s ever served, understands that. And if every single gay didn’t join the military, nothing would have ever changed because we wouldn’t be having this argument. There would be no need for DADT and certainly no need to repeal it. In fact, everyone would be happy except those gays who might have wanted to serve.

In your perfect world, gays wouldn’t want to join the military and wouldn’t and straight people who were homophobic would have no issues.

Change has to come from within, from people who can better influence, in order for it to be initiated, sustainable and lasting…

THAT is the POINT Phil – All your “lobbying” has been a waste of time and money. Two-thirds of the US population believe gay is wrong, evil and deviant. 80% of elected officials believe the same thing. HRC has done nothing to change those beliefs.

The whole idea that GAY is WRONG came from religion 2,000 years ago. Not from science or art or anywhere else – just religion. Religion has made us wrong for 2,000 years. What has HRC done to change that? Lobby?

The whole idea that GAY is still anti-gay and 80% of the elected officials are anti-gay. The whole idea that GAY is WRONG came from religion 2,000 years ago. Not from science or art or anywhere else – just religion. Religion has made us wrong for 2,000 years.

People with strong religious beliefs inherited them before they could think – they are etched into their minds. These are the BELIEFS that make gay WRONG. What has HRC done to fight these beliefs? You cannot get a politician to change his mind and then “burn in Hell.” Or at least you can’t get very many. It seems like only 7 politicians have changed their votes in the last 5 years. Their votes, not their minds.

How much did those 7 votes cost Phil? $2-3 million each? That’s my math. HRC has a lot of gay money, but doesn’t use it wisely. They have become part of the Washington DC “cause-pimps,” claiming success, but with nothing to show.

So, do not say that HRC has a successful record. We are no closer to obtaining equal rights. I’ve been to several Black-tie Dinners – they’re fun and they do help the community. But, like everything else that the HRC does – they don’t change any of the beliefs about homosexuals. Doing that would require a strategy and maybe even some balls.

Religion made homosexuals wrong – that’s the enemy. When will the HRC get started?

Entertain yourself all you want, Brian. Meanwhile Clintons cowardly bigoted DADT will continue to set up LGBT service members for harassment, mistreatment, loss of benefits and life in a closet enforced by law and for occasional violence. It’s revolting that Clintonistas are entertained by that and just as revolting that Obots were entertained by ‘gawd’s in the mix or that McCain was endorsed by the Logheads.”

@Phil: Lobbying by LGBT groups, environmentalists, unions etc. is the one effort virtually guaranteed not to produce results. Sit-ins like the one at the Capitol that resulted in the arrest of 26 activists in the fight against HIV/AIDS that forced Congress to agree to needle exchanges are far more productive, although mass actions without arrests are even better. Because of the sit-in Congress overruled Obama who promised a needle exchange and then, as he always does, reneged on his promise. Show us the results of your lobbying in terms of real federal laws passed that have has a major impact on ending homohating bigotry.

Politicians in the White House and Congress are far more likely to keep their promises to business lobbyists with briefcases full of unmarked $50 and $100 dollar bills. That’s what real lobbying is all about. That’s why Congress lined up to give AIG a few hundred million in welfare for the looter class, why Obama stifled criticism when they used that money to give enormous bonuses to execs and why AIG has the guts to say they want another round of gigantic bonuses.

Your tea and crumpets get togethers with barely disguised homohaters in Congress go like this. You present. They hem and haw. You leave. As soon as the door is closed they mutter faggot, smirk and wander down to vote for DOMA or DADT or to gut ENDA. It’s an exercise in futility on you part and in lying and practicing their smiles for them. And an enormous waste of donated funds.

People who engage in lobbying are all misguided and misled. And not a few, particularly in and around HRC are careerists, hoping to grease the wheels of their careers in the law, politics or as movement hustlers. You know the type; Democratic Party loyalists, movement hustlers and lobbyists who led No on 8 to an unnecessary and unexpected defeat.
[img]http://politicalgraffiti.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/lobbyist_change.jpg[/img]

Was I event planning when I spent a week lobbying capitol hill with HRC in 2005, 2006 and 2007? I had no clue. I wish you had been there to tell me that’s all I was doing. Thank goodness you popped up now! What would I have done without you?!?

Was that what Candice Gingrich was doing when she was setting up a network of volunteers and workers in HBCU? I had no clue! Well ya’ll suburban white boys probably don’t know what that stands for, do you. I’ll let y’all guess. Oh yeah, you were probably too busy reading Dan Savage’s racist fucking slog. Welcome to the comfort zone! I’m sure you never left!

HRC represents a group of tired, lame event planning queens who care more about planning the next event and declaring “Nobama” Fabulous than getting off their flabby butts and doing something to promote full equality for the LGBT Community.

However, take it as you will. I’ve read enough of your posts to know you will anyway.

“Most people” being defined as who, by whom?

Politicians, by default, pander. Perhaps you are just catching on, but I’ve understood this for some time now.

What “outrageous approach” would that be and towards what, since you’ve deigned to actually suggest any in your post?

Don’t bother to reply, I’m not really interested. I’m just entertaining myself at this point.

People who sign bigoted laws are bigots. Period. He could have vetoed DADT but he chose to be a coward and capitulated to military bigotry. He deserves no credit for signing a bigoted law or for being a coward. And his later boasting about signing DOMA confirm that without a doubt.

Most people have no more respect for him than they have for Obama, Bush or McCain. And for the same reasons. They’re bigots who pander to other bigots for votes.

So respect Clinton all you want. Some people respected LBJ and some even respected Nixon. Your apologia for Clinton is totally in line with that outrageous approach.

I’m also African-American and your argument is similar to saying black people pre-civil rights who called other blacks self-hating sell outs because they passed for white knowing good and well who and what they are were wrong for feeling that way.

They were not. Gay people today with similar beliefs, also are not. Whether you and I agree with it or not is fine, but we can’t jump on our high horse just because we don’t agree with a perfectly valid opinion.

Some people hold pride of self higher than anything else, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

P.S. your military desegregation analogy is also flawed because 1. the military never asked blacks to hide being black and 2. blacks had their own units where they were surrounded by people who were obviously black just like them. The gays don’t have this and therefore in the eyes of many prideful gay and even straight people, they relinquished an insurmountable amount of dignity/pride by joining the military.

Eff them!

I have no love for the gross politics played with our lives, and there is more than enough reason to have disgust for politicians. But resorting to the partial-truth tactics used by them makes one no better than.

If anyone here is a “coward” or suffering from “gay battered wife syndrome” it is those folks who do nothing more than sit on their asses bitching online at gay vets actually trying to make a difference rather than do any of the hard work themselves. Can YOU do any better? Great! Get off your sorry ass and DO IT!!! Show the world how much better YOU are at this so we can all bask in your so-called “greatness”!

Constructive criticism of HRC or SU in how they are pursuing repeal is fine, but hatchet-job articles like this or pathetic whining in blog comments do the work of the those anti-gay bigots who would like nothing more than slam the closet door shut on all us forever.

We should not be in the armed forces that have been used to kill Cubans, Vietnamese, Koreans, Panamanians, Pakistanis, Lebanese, Laotians, Libyans, Afghans, Cambodians, Guatemalans, Hondurans, Grenadians, Haitians and probably close to a million Iraqis. With apologies to countries attacked by the US that I didn’t recall – in my defense there are so many.

That said, our movement should fight the military brasses harassment of LGBT folks and their creation of a climate that leads to anti-gay violence. The catch is that DADT prevents that. As many have noted, it’s enforced by bigots, isolates GLBT service members, forces them into a dangerous closet and helps fuels an atmosphere that empowers christian thugs, including officer class thugs.

Clinton, like his clone Obama was a constitutional lawyer. He knew that it was a bigoted law and what it would produce but he signed it anyway. That makes him a bigot. A gutless cowardly bigot if you insist, but a bigot nonetheless. There is no defense for that or DADT, which is not a compromise, but military bigotry codified.

So, while I agree with some of your points, I find that your selective use of only the information that supports your personal opinion of Bill Clinton to be a rather juvenile tactic in a post you seem to pride in being based in fact.

DADT was just one example of Bill Clintons bigotry. Signing the bill makes him a bigot. Article 1, Section 7 of the US Constitution gives him veto power.

DOMA is an even clearer example of Bill Clinton’s disgusting bigotry. He championed DOMA from the beginning to get reelected because he lost so much labor support championing NAFTA.(1) All during the 96 campaign Clinton moved further to the right, pandering to christer bigots. Like Obama, opposition to same sex marriage was a centerpiece of Clinton’s 1996 campaign. He needed bigot votes so he championed DOMA.

As soon as DOMA passed he rushed to sign it and put an ad on southern christer radio stations, like those run by Pat Robertson, which said

“Protecting religious freedom. It’s the foundation of our nation.

When the Justice Department went after a church to gather the parishioners’ tithing money, the government was stopped cold because President Clinton overturned the government’s policy and protected us… It’s not the only time he’s defended our values.

President Clinton wants a complete ban on late term abortions … The President signed the Defense of Marriage Act… President Clinton has fought for our values and America is better for it.

Paid for by Clinton/Gore 96″

Clinton became so anti-LGBT that Time Magazine commented

“By the time Clinton arrived in Chicago for his party’s convention in August, nothing that hinted at liberalism was left hanging on him. When the President, who had begun his term advocating the rights of gays in the military, came around to supporting the Defense of Marriage Act, which barred federal recognition for gay and lesbian unions, Dole was wide-eyed. “Is there anything we’re for that he won’t jump on?” Dole asked. The answer, essentially, was nothing…”

Ben, do have a citation for your remark that “his White House employed hundreds of out and proud LGBT staff members during his tenure…”? I can only remember a dozen or so and they’re the same tired retreads Obama is hawking now to prove that he’s our “fierce advocate.”

(1) NAFTA, coincidently, was a bill that favored Wal-Mart, the most anti-union anti-worker corporation in the US. Hillary Clinton sat on the Board of Directors of Wal-Mart malevolently working with them to bust unions and pauperize workers for 5-6 years.

DODT came into existence because the LGBT community clamored for the Clinton White House to take UNILATERAL action on the issue. Unfortunately for us, no one (including HRC, NGLTF, etc.) did any research to see how congress would respond to this initiative. Unfortunately, we learned a tough lesson. No President, no matter how well intentioned, can pursue a profound policy change, without counting votes on Capitol Hill.

As just one example amonng many of President Clinton’s commitment to the LGBT community, his White House employed hundreds of out and proud LGBT staff members during his tenure.

A) Gay people sacrificing their dignity to serve a country which views them as lepers is just another example of the gay battered wife syndrome. This is truly sad and both of my brothers personify this.

B) With the military being as tyrannical and shady as it is, gay people serving won’t do much for gay people in general, however lifting the ban would.

Repealing DADT will help civilian gays. Serving in the military does not help civilian gays. It is a political game. Let’s just be honest.

Bill is right, our military does some shady stuff. Gay people can serve trying to make themselves feel like they deserve everything those straights do but in the end you are serving corporate interest that doesn’t give a crap about you- gay or straight. DADT serves as a method to oppress gays. Lifting it will help the overall cause of gay people in the US. There is still racism and sexism in the military and civilian world even though people of color and women are allowed to serve. Gay people serving won’t do much for gay people. Living in a world where we don’t pretend we are helping people via dropping bombs on their heads might actually be something that helps. Maybe Nicholson would be ok with some other country dropping bombs on his house as long as there was a gay translator who could tell him in English why everything he knew was just destroyed. Maybe Chase would be ok with some other country “helping” the US by decimating it with 500 pound bombs as long as those who dropped them “carry in {thier} heart a hope and dream for other people suffering from oppression in the world”.

Human rights, not just gay rights.

Before you run your mouth, I am active duty right now.

Find something else to contribute to. HRC does not have a strategy for anything, they’re just working the system and making a living. If they actually accomplish something, like equal rights, they’d all be out of work. No incentive, no results.

Surprisingly HRC sent a delegation to Jena Louisiana a year or two ago to defend the Jena Six, ignoring the rampant racism of a few in the GLBT communities who sided with David Duke, describing the Jena Six as hip hop thugs because they retaliated against racists.

As the radicalization heats up, particularly among LGBT folks right centrist groups like HRC, Stonewall Democrats and the Log Cabin Republicans will occasionally make a stab at activism so they don’t become totally discredited and so they can try to control the pace of things.

Basically though, HRC is a front group for the Democrats, the party that’s totally responsible for DADT and other bigoted bills like DOMA. DADT was signed by a bigot named Bill Clinton and Democrats as well as Republicans voted for it overwhelmingly. It’s a key part of Clinton’s legacy of bigotry. The main thrust of DADT is to closet LGBT servicemembers, forcing them to lie, isolating them and opening them up to the kind of murderous violence that took the lives of Barry Winchell and August Provost.

I agree with the thrust of those in SU and SLDN who to end military bigotry codified in Clinton’s DADT. But I think, as do many GLBT antiwar activists, that we should actively discourage people from our communities and everyone from enlisting in a war of genocide for oil. It kills GIs by the thousands and Iraqi, Afghan and Pakistani civilians in vast numbers. As of today 4777 US and satellite troops have been killed and over 30,000 wounded. Civilian deaths due to the Clinton-Bush-Obama oil war are measured in the hundreds of thousands in Iraq and rapidly climbing, especially among children, in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Support for enlistment in a genocidal war for oil is treason to the GLBT and antiwar movements and to the GIs and civilians being killed to make Haliburton and Chevron-Texaco richer.

Now, since we’re on the subject of irony, I find it ironic that you think those with less glowing opinions about gay service members haven’t taken the time to exercise empathy and understanding, when in my case that couldn’t be further from the truth. My brother is a DADT discharged Navy man and I couldn’t love, understand, and empathize with him more.

That being said, I still find those of you who know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you’re gay and still enlist, because of “selfless sacrifice” to a country and moreso a military that views you as hated, disguting, vile cretins utterly shameful. You all talk about this “selfless sacriface” but you neglect to mention the other side of that coin; that sacrifice of integrity and respect, not just yours but of all LGBT members. You said you made great sacrifices of your own but what you fail to realize is you also sacrificed all of us, everyday that you continued to live and abide under this legal discrimination.

But at least you did it for Afghanistan…except maybe their gays, who would also in a very positive way benefit from someone like you being out and proud instead of a weapon for the injustice being used against us.

I guess my point is, while there are certainly pros for gay people to join the military in current state, the cons greatly outway them, in my eyes at least. When one of us comes out, it advances the acceptance of all of us. Similarly, when one of us shamefully re closets ourselves, it advances the degradation of all of us. It feeds into everything our haters say and makes it reality, and in my opinion, this is a far greater sacrifice than any other.

I do not agree still, with the things the military does and there are many things I don’t understand in terms of how people reconcile conflicting ideologies, but I would not discredit any of you for your passion or opinions… even if that opinion brings you to the conclusion that you should not serve in uniform out of principle.

I would ask however, that before you criticize and judge what you don’t understand (how gay people could serve in the military), you exercise some empathy, a desire for understanding and an open mind…

It is a bit ironic to me that I ask the same of straight people when discussing discrimination against gays and here I’m compelled to ask a gay person to be more open minded.

My gay and lesbian friends in the military aren’t what you assume they are… they embody selfless service in ways that far surpass my (and obviously your) understanding. Please don’t diminish for the sake of being rude, that which you don’t understand.

I have never understood how a gay man or woman who loves and accepts themselves can enlist in the military, and I doubt I ever will. I don’t know how fair it is for you to say that because they have done more for this cause that somehow makes the opinion of them being shameful less legit.

I agree that the tone of a few post here from both sides are out of line but saying someone cannot view these guys as at least one time sellouts just because they aren’t activist isn’t very fair.

In any case, like someone else here said we all need to work together to repeal this and other anti LGBT laws, despite how we may feel about one another.

Normally, I would hesitate to say this because, per se, one doesn’t have to “earn” the right to have an opinion, but you two have intentionally crossed the line from simply having a different opinion into pointlessly attempting to slime others like two drunken, hysterical bitches.

1. Where did you get your certificate in mind reading as to presume to know what ANYONE else would or would not do, let alone Nicholson, et al. The Psychic Hotline School of Psychokinesis?

2. What have YOU DONE in your lives that equals, let alone surpasses, the things these guys have done? Where do you work? What does it do to make the world better? Do even your mamas know you’re gay, let alone the world as these guys have chosen to allow?

Currently, approximately 700 gays are discharged a year under DADT. Barely 1% fight it privately, let alone publicly, which is definitely their free choice. But Nicholson, et al., have chosen to fight and fight publicly, sacrificing their privacy and putting their nonactivist careers on hold. Nicholson’s partner, Jarrod, who is again part of the tour, was NOT kicked out, he simply chose not to reenlist, but he’s fighting, too, as are some nongay members of the tour…and they’re all heroes.

I know trying to shame pansy pond scum invertebrates like you won’t change you, but others need to understand what insects you are.

Done.

http://servicemembersunited.org/?p=1293

I just read this blog posting on their site (most likely by one of the 3 full-time free worker bees that they don’t employ) and the arrogance that these guys have is mind bottling.

My mind’s now in a bottle.

I’m proud these guys are trying to repeal this law, but the air of “I’m a savior” is just too much. If Alex (the creator of this group) had never been discharged under DADT he’d still be just another coward hiding who he is to serve a country that views him as second class.

I’m sorry but It’s hard for me to respect people who sold their self respect and dignity out to a military that hates them. If you want to work toward a repeal – especially a repeal you wouldn’t be working toward if you didn’t get discharged for not continuing to be a coward – great, but don’t lecture us on courage and pride. You? Seriously? You guys who signed over your courage and pride to play along with this charade?

Please, stop it.

WHO do you think you are KIDDING? 3 People working full-time for FREE. Jesus Christ. How do these people pay their rent? Or eat?

If you are going to promote your activism, please be honest. There are too many people in the business of taking advantage of the “Gay Story.”

In Dallas, we have these two-bit con-artists called Queer Liberaction. They are raising money to “demand our rights.” They are now under investigation.

heh heh good one , Cam

Regardless of your feelings about HRC in the past, its counterproductive to nitpick when they’re doing the right thing. HRC has always been the easiest target within the gay community to fling scorn on because they are the most active organization–lots of activity, so lots of chance to screw it up, and they’ve done so plenty of times in the past. However, its time to call a spade a spade. Hate on HRC all you want for the things they botch–withhold your funds whatever it takes–but don’t steer people in the wrong direction on good things. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act is our bill to lose now that Rep. Patrick Murphy is Lead sponsor. All we need is to get the usual suspects in a tizzy about HRC to get our community to start tripping over our feet all over again.

You know what I think about Michelangelo Signorile’s claim that HRC is some sort of sleeper cell agent selling us out for… whatever? I think The cynicism is getting the best of us! Michelangelo has done great work in the past, but we all know he can also be a bully, and bullies always get more aggressive when they have an audience! The work that he did with Queer Nation and ACT UP in the 80s and 90s was crucial, and maybe some of them folks in DC deserved to be outed, but when he turns his gun in at the rest of us–the community itself–its time to say “hey dude, chill a bit!”

If you drive HRC into the ground, then what? What’s your solution once you’ve toppled the great Satan? Why are you now dragging Servicemembers United in as well? Should ANY organization that even gets remotely close to HRC be worried about getting blacklisted? (why even ask, of course so!)

I don’t think either you nor Michelangelo have anything but good intentions–and trust me, I’ll still read Queerty every day–but you’re so used to the old narrative, you can’t tell a new story.

You say you smell a rat here? I do too, and its called ‘someone’s gotten a little too jaded.’ HRC is NEVER going to do anything right as far as Queerty is concerned, so why should we even bother reading anything on here with HRC in the headline? Its already biased, and we all know it.

What the hell DO you support, anyway?

I do, however, strongly agree with the comment that DoD is the critical element in this game, particularly the opinions of the Joint Chiefs. If these guys don’t at least say that allowing gays to serve openly is not going to be an insurmountable problem, and that they have the leadership capabilities to manage it (as they are already doing, since there so many gays serving openly now), then no effort at repeal of the law is going to work. The military has to agree with this or we’ll never get the conservative Dems (not to mention the Republicans) to go along with it.

So on that score, SU’s efforts are helpful. It is not at all clear that the Joint Chiefs even know any gay troops — one would hope they’d at least be aware of SSGT Eric Alva, USMC, as he was the first American injured in the Iraq War. So getting the faces, voices and stories of gay veterans out there is useful – and doubly so for straight veterans speaking out.