Human Rights Campaign endorsed Barack Obama today. Said the group’s president, Joe Solmonse: “Senator Obama has consistently shown that he understands, as we do, that, GLBT rights are civil rights, and human rights. Senator Obama has said that embracing ‘our gay brothers and sisters’ is true to Martin Luther King’s vision; I know that Senator Obama’s vision is one of equality, fairness, and justice for all of us.” [HRC]
Backing.
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
Cancel anytime · Proudly LGBTQ+ owned and operated
CitizenGeek
It’s so annoying the way the HRC uses ‘GLBT’ instead of the UNIVERSAL, LESS CONFUSING, ‘LGBT’. It just annoys me every time I see it; like, what is the point of it?
Any who, nice to HRC endorsing Obama – it might convince some of the many, many Hillary gays to stick with him. Still, I think Obama will be staying as far away as possible from gay issues.
Bob
What a shocker, HRC comes out to support a candidate who doesn’t support full equality for our community. I wish just once they’d have some balls and say “We cannot endorse any presidential candidate who believes we should accept second-class citizenship in any regard, and due to all of the candidates’ refusal to support marriage equality for our community we will not be endorsing any presidential candidate in 2008.” Sure, Obama will be better on gay rights issues than McCain, but he still believes we should just shut up and take inferior domestic partnerships and not rock the boat. And his incredibly uninspiring statement after the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality was pathetic. HRC, grow some balls.
flightoftheseabird
CG that is absurd quabble. I have used and seen used GLBT and LGBT interchangably for nearly 15 years. And it is not universal or less confusing. I am not sure your point. Personally, I like GLBT better. But whatever…
I am glad that HRC did not wait too long to endorse him. This is good news.
flightoftheseabird
Uh Bob, I support Civil Unions. Because I know the political reality of this country would not allow gay marriage yet. It will happen eventually, but it will come from the courts, not a president, not congress.
Bob
Sorry, I don’t buy the “political reality” of the country argument. If our own leading LGBT organization refuses to push for full equality for us, including marriage equality, who will? The only way to change the political landscape is to challenge injustice consistently and loudly, whether the public is ready to hear it or not. By sitting by quietly and saying “We’re OK with a candidate that thinks separate-but-equal (and in reality civil unions/domestic partnerships are not at all equal) is acceptable when it comes to our community” then we truly are screwing ourselves. This has nothing to do specifically with Obama. HRC shouldn’t back any of the presidential candidates until they fully back us. Period.
James
Bob,
“Sure, Obama will be better on gay rights issues than McCain, but he still believes we should just shut up and take inferior domestic partnerships and not rock the boat. ”
While it’s more than fiar to give Obama grief for not being for same-sex marriage (like a number of ther big time Dems), at least be fair in your critique. Here he is in the Advocate:
http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid53285.asp
“Anybody who’s been at an LGBT event with me can testify that my message is very explicit — I don’t think that the gay and lesbian community, the LGBT community, should take its cues from me or some political leader in terms of what they think is right for them. It’s not my place to tell the LGBT community, “Wait your turn.” I’m very mindful of Dr. King’s “Letter From Birmingham Jail,†where he says to the white clergy, “Don’t tell me to wait for my freedom.”
So I strongly respect the right of same-sex couples to insist that even if we got complete equality in benefits, it still wouldn’t be equal because there’s a stigma associated with not having the same word, marriage, assigned to it. I understand that, but my perspective is also shaped by the broader political and historical context in which I’m operating. And I’ve said this before — I’m the product of a mixed marriage that would have been illegal in 12 states when I was born. That doesn’t mean that had I been an adviser to Dr. King back then, I would have told him to lead with repealing an antimiscegenation law, because it just might not have been the best strategy in terms of moving broader equality forward.
That’s a decision that the LGBT community has to make. That’s not a decision for me to make.”
Gregoire
At least he directly equates the gay marriage issue with the civil rights cause. That’s a bit of a hot button analogy to make for some.
Bob
Gregoire: Yeah, he equates it, then refuses to endorse it. How brave to acknowledge a fundamental injustice then sit on the fence when it comes to fighting it. (And before I’m attacked, I don’t think Hillary’s any better.)
And James, my post isn’t about Obama. It’s about HRC.
You write that Obama says: “That’s a decision that the LGBT community has to make. That’s not a decision for me to make.†Exactly. HRC is arguably the leading advocate for the LGBT community, and it shouldn’t endorse candidates who don’t fully support us.
You are trying to turn the argument into one of “Barack loves us, but is grounded in political reality.” I’m not talking about Obama’s positions (or lack thereof). I’m saying HRC should not suppor ANY candidate who doesn’t support full LGBT equality. HRC’s sole responsibility to advocate for us, not Obama’s. While Obama should show some political backbone and fully support LGBT equality (as should all our alleged allies in government), whether he does or not is his choice. It shouldn’t be a choice for HRC.
And please notice I said HRC should not back ANY major party candidate — that includes McCain and Clinton.
James
Bob,
I made an error. Most of that post is Obama talking. From “Anybody who’s been at an LGBT event” to “That’s not a decision for me to make†is all Obama.
No I’m not trying to turn it into an Obama loves us line. I was simply pointing out that your previous idea about Obama thinking “we should just shut up and take inferior domestic partnerships and not rock the boat” is not really true as the long quote from Obama shows.
Now as to if the HRC should support Obama, well that’s a great point. They would argue if they don’t suppport him, if he wins they can’t get a place at the table. You would say, supporting him shows he shouldn’t take gay issues seriously. Difficult problem. Most days I would say I would agree with you. Other days not.
Sorry for being so long winded.
Bob
It just seems to me that unless our own organizations make full equality a requirement in order to gain those organizations’ support, no one else is ever going to come around to our side of the issue. When HRC says it’s OK to oppose some of our rights, I don’t see the political reality ever changing much.
Obama loves to pander & u eat it right up
“Seeing Mayor Gavin Newsom on the national stage with former president Bill Clinton on Monday night is a reminder of how political winds can change. On the eve of the biggest night of the presidential primaries, Newsom shared the spotlight during a town hall meeting staged and broadcast on cable TV and satellite radio by the Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign.
But just four years ago, current Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is said to have declined to have his picture taken in San Francisco with Newsom, who was then at the center of a national uproar over his decision to allow same-sex marriage in San Francisco.
“I gave a fundraiser, at his (Obama’s) request at the Waterfront restaurant,” said former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown. “And he said to me, he would really appreciate it if he didn’t get his photo taken with my mayor. He said he would really not like to have his picture taken with Gavin.” …
GranDiva
The problem with HRC is that their endorsement isn’t made in the interest of our community, it’s made in the interest of retaining favorable access as lobbyists. If they bet on the wrong horse, they may stop getting invited to events with the intelligensia and stuff.
Mark
HRC, isn’t that the Homo Republican Committee?
Sorry, couldn’t help it; they strike me as seriously useless. Although, I understand that their executives make good bank.
chadnnocal
Yet another reason to not give a dime to HRC. Joe Solmonese is such a tool.