Gay activists applaud Kagan – tepidly
Gay legal activists are applauding President Obama’s second nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court [1]: Solicitor General Elena Kagan. But it could hardly be described as a standing ovation.
Former Clinton White House aide Richard Socarides called Kagan a “brilliant, pragmatic progressive interested in listening to all sides and building coalitions.”
Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund Executive Director Kevin Cathcart called Kagan “a strong position” in opposing the military’s ban on gays but noted that Obama administration has also “taken legal positions on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and the so-called ‘Defense of Marriage Act’ with which we strongly disagree.”
Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese applauded her selection as fulfilling Obama’s promise to promote “diversity” on the court.
If confirmed, Kagan would become only the fourth woman ever named to the court –out of 104 justices in the history of the court.
Kagan is of particular interest to the LGBT community. While serving as dean of Harvard Law School, she took sides with gays against military recruiters because the military would not abide by the school’s non-discrimination policy. That policy prohibited recruiters who discriminated based on sexual orientation.
Kagan clerked for one of the Supreme Court’s staunchest liberals, Thurgood Marshall, and was a research assistant for one of the greatest legal defenders of gay civil rights, Laurence Tribe.
Single and 50, she was also the subject of a CBS News website blog report last month which claimed that, if named to the court, Kagan would be the “first openly gay justice.” But Kagan has not publicly identified with any sexual orientation, and the White House moved quickly to say the report was “inaccurate.”
The president announced his selection at a 10 o’clock press conference this morning.
Socarides called Kagan “one of the smartest people I know” and “someone the country will come to like and respect.”
“Her thinking is well within the mainstream,” said Socarides, and “very much in keeping with Obama’s overall philosophy…. Pretty much a home-run appointment.”
Shannon Minter of the National Center for Lesbian Rights called Kagan “well-qualified” and said members of his organization “strongly support increasing the number of women on the court.”
Lambda’s Cathcart said he did not expect Kagan “to answer questions about how she would rule on specific issues such as these that will come before her.” But he said Lambda does “expect that she will respond to questions about her judicial philosophy and her understanding of core constitutional principals of equal protection and privacy that are so crucial to the civil rights of people who face discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity and/or HIV status.”
Long-time gay legal activist Paula Ettelbrick, an adjunct professor of law at New York University Law School, said Kagan’s nomination is “most historic” and that “it moves women’s representation on the Court to a more meaningful plurality.”
Mainstream news organizations immediately set about assessing her odds for confirmation. MSNBC speculates both conservatives and liberals could criticize her. Commentator-reporter Chuck Todd said conservatives would fault Kagan over her opposition to military recruiters at Harvard. He said liberals could fault her for defending some policies put in place by the administration of President George W. Bush.
In introducing Kagan to the press conference Monday morning, Obama praised Kagan for having sought conservative views to balance liberal views at Harvard. During her confirmation process for Solicitor General last year, the Senate Judiciary Committee received letters in support of Kagan from such well-known conservatives as former Solicitor Generals Charles Fried and Kenneth Starr, and such well-known liberals as Eleanor D. Acheson.
Her confirmation as Solicitor General was opposed, as expected, by some ultra-conservative groups, including Concerned Women for America, who faulted her for opposing military recruiters, as well as Focus on Family and more than a dozen other groups who said she could not be counted on to defend “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.”
Kagan, an attorney, has never served as a judge but is widely respected as a legal scholar.
NCLR’s Minter said, “Because she has not served previously as a judge, it will be important to hear more about her judicial philosophy and whether she has a strong commitment to enforcing constitutionally protected rights and liberties. “
Given that she filled out the Senate Judiciary Committee’s lengthy questionnaire just last year, the vetting of her by various senators should go fairly rapidly.
In response to questions from the Judiciary Committee last year, Kagan said she views as “unjust the exclusion of individuals from basic economic, civic, and political opportunities of our society on the basis of race, nationality, sex, religion, and sexual orientation.” But she also said she was “fully convinced” she could defend U.S. laws even when they do not reflect her personal views, including the federal law which penalizes universities which ban military recruiters.
Kagan’s questionnaire also indicated that she delivered a welcoming address to introduce panel members at a Harvard University Gay and Lesbian Alumni event in September 2008. And in April 2006, she moderated a panel of the LAMBDA Student Organization concerning the “Relationship between Law Schools and the Military.” Such participation is fairly typical of law school deans and her list includes an even greater number of appearances before groups promoting civil rights for black law students.
Senators Orrin Hatch and Jon Kyl, two Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee who voted for Kagan as Solicitor General, issued statements
Monday morning saying their vote is not guaranteed for the Supreme Court appointment.
If confirmed, Kagan will become the third woman on the U.S. Supreme Court today and the second unmarried justice. Justice Sonia Sotomayor,
Obama’s first nominee to the Supreme Court, was married briefly but divorced in 1983.
A press release from HRC applauded Kagan’s “commitment to fairness and equality.”
“Specifically, we applaud Elena Kagan’s vocal opposition to the Solomon Amendment and the discriminatory ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law.
HRC said it would continue examining Kagan’s record on issues that affect the LGBT community.
Kagan’s nomination is being made to fill the seat of retiring Justice John Paul Stevens, who announced his retirement last month.
The composition of the Supreme Court is increasing critical to the LGBT civil rights movement. Three important cases seeking equality in marriage rights are winding their ways to the high court and it seems nearly inevitable that the high court will choose to weigh in on at least one, if not all three. The court will also hear a case this fall that will determine whether a virulently anti-gay protest group has a First Amendment right to stage their demonstrations in ways that disrupt private funeral services.
While many nominees introduce close members of their family at the press conference, Kagan noted that her parents had already passed away and said she was “thankful for my brothers and other family and friends” for being there with her.
© 2010 Keen News Service
[1] http://www.365gay.com/news/ap-source-elena-kagan-picked-for-supreme-court/
Culhane: Obama’s LGBT report card
At a recent fund-raiser for Senator Barbara Boxer, Obama was heckled [1] on the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and some think this isn’t such a bad thing. Even though Boxer is one of our biggest supporters, the protesters’ sentiment captures a frustration many in the LGBT community feel over Obama’s record on our issues.
But is the frustration justified? How, more than a full year into his Administration, should our community grade the President on his performance so far? Speaking from my legal perspective, I’d give him a passing grade (B-, maybe).
This may seem startling to some that I would pass him at all, because very little of the legislation he promised has been enacted. From a candidate who courted the LGBT community on issues ranging from DADT, to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, to the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, we’ve gotten nothing on those issues to date. ENDA may not have the votes in the Senate to pass DADT repeal seems like a moving target, and DOMA’s not even on the radar screen.
We have only hate crimes law, hardly a major victory. Worse, Obama has spent little of his political capital pushing for any of these goals.
So why the B-? It sounds like a “D” would be more appropriate.
But this overlooks the limits of Presidential power to enact legislation. It’s obvious but easy to forget that the President has no power to actually pass any laws. True, Presidents do suggest legislation that they want to see enacted, but they have only the “bully pulpit” of office to make anything happen. And one thing we’ve learned about Obama is that he’s reluctant to use that pulpit to talk directly to the people in support of his agenda. His passionate advocacy for the health care reform bill is the exception that proves the rule.
Of course, Obama could and should use the fact that his party substantially controls both houses of Congress to urge action on these bills, but given the way the filibuster has metastasized into an every-vote thing, he needs all of the Democrats and now at least one Republican for anything to clear the paralyzed Senate. So what can or should he do?
Let me quickly dispel any suggestion that I’m giving the President a pass on any of this. He could and should be trying to do more, especially on DADT where the Administration’s public pronouncements have been harder to chart than the course of a mosquito.
Saying in response to hecklers that he supports the policy’s repeal just won’t cut it any more. And the protesters deserve our gratitude for calling Obama on what Andrew Sullivan has called “the fierce urgency of whenever.” [2]
Yet legislative inaction isn’t the whole story. We should look at what Obama is doing in areas where he can effect change without Congress. Here I’m talking about the vast body of law – including administrative matters and the interpretation and enforcement of legislation – that’s under the control of the Executive Branch. And here, with at least one glaring exception, he’s done much better.
Let’s start with the exception: In defending DOMA against a lawsuit last year, Obama’s Department of Justice wrote a needlessly offensive brief [3] that, as I wrote at the time, “seemed to have been intended to set the course of judicial progress on gay rights back many years.” I was hardly the only blogger to go ballistic over the brief, and then…things got better. A later brief in the case expressly disavowed the argument that children did better in homes headed by opposite-sex parents [4] than in our homes.
Then there was another encouraging performance by the DOJ in a recent bullying case. [5] The Administration took an aggressive and unsettled legal position, arguing that Title IX (the federal law that protects against gender discrimination in education) also covers discrimination based on gender stereotyping.
From the administrative law standpoint, there have been a few other encouraging moves: putting into place long-awaited rules that lifted the HIV immigration restriction; the very recent directive to the Department of Health and Human Services to honor hospital patients’ visitation wishes (in a memorandum that expressly cited the problems of gay and lesbian couples); a memorandum that extended some limited benefits to the same-sex partners of federal employees; and the recent announcement that DADT will now be enforced more “humanely.” None of these actions require acts of Congress, and Obama has at times stepped smartly into this breach.
Should any of us be satisfied if Obama’s (first? only?) term ends with a few more administrative moves, but no additional legislation? No. He has to deliver what he promised, whatever the obstacles. We have to demand results. Above, I gave him a passing (probably inflated) grade on his performance so far.
But the more precise assessment is: ”Incomplete.”
John Culhane is Professor of Law and Director of the Health Law Institute at Widener University School of Law in Wilmington, Delaware. He blogs about the role of law in everyday life, and about a bunch of other things (LGBT rights, public health, biology, sports, pop culture, philosophy and lots of personal stuff) at http://wordinedgewise.org [6]A fuller bio is here [7]. Starting next Tuesday, he will be blogging the week-long Equality Forum [8] from Philadelphia.
[1] http://www.365gay.com/blog/withers-protestors-interrupt-obama-at-fundraiser/
[2] http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/05/the-fierce-urgency-of-whenever.html
[3] http://wordinedgewise.org/?p=128
[4] http://wordinedgewise.org/?p=300
[5] http://www.365gay.com/news/culhane-how-to-stop-gay-bullying/
[6] http://wordinedgewise.org/
[7] http://law.widener.edu/Academics/Faculty/ProfilesDe/CulhaneJohnG.aspx
[8] http://equalityforum.com/
Obama statement on DOMA
From the White House:
Statement by the President on the Smelt v. United States Brief
Today, the Department of Justice has filed a response to a legal challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act, as it traditionally does when acts of Congress are challenged. This brief makes clear, …
Obama administration says marriage law unfair
(Washington) The Obama administration filed court papers Monday claiming a federal marriage law discriminates against gays, even as government lawyers continued to defend it.
Justice Department lawyers are seeking to dismiss a suit brought by a gay California couple challenging the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. The administration’s response to the …
Equality California statement on DOMA
From Equality California:
Today the Obama Administration filed court papers saying the Defense of Marriage Act does discriminate against same-sex couples, but the Justice Department is continuing to defend the law that prevents married same-sex couples from having their unions recognized by the federal government.
In response, Equality California Executive Director …
Human Rights Campaign Calls on the LGBT Community and Allies to Participate in National, Grassroots Push to Lobby Congress Face-to-Face
The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, today launched a national, grassroots campaign called “No Excuses” to demand action from Congress on key issues of equality. Designed to take advantage of the congressional summer recess, when members are in their local offices and meeting with constituents, “No Excuses” will mobilize HRC’s 750,000 members and their allies to meet directly with lawmakers and push for federal legislative change. Members and supporters can get involved by visiting: http://noexcuses.hrc.org.
“While we salute and acknowledge the heroic members of Congress who have worked tirelessly on our behalf, far too many have dragged their feet on basic matters of fairness and equality that have lingered too long and hurt too many LGBT people and their families,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “Yes, there are many challenges facing this Congress and this president. But LGBT people often face additional hardship protecting their families, their loved ones and their jobs, and too few in Congress are willing to champion these issues of basic fairness. Now, more than ever, members of the LGBT community need to make their voices heard face-to-face and in the districts where they live.”
Using innovative online tools, one-on-one trainings and staff and volunteer follow-through, HRC members will press lawmakers to end discrimination in the military, treat all legally married couples equally, pass immigration reform that recognizes and honors LGBT families, outlaw workplace discrimination for LGBT employees, and treat all federal employees’ compensation equally.
The interactive “No Excuses” website allows supporters to download a meeting toolkit, schedule a meeting and report back on how it went. To take action, visit: http://noexcuses.hrc.org.
The in-district meetings will focus on the following key legislative priorities in the 111th Congress:
–Repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which denies legally married lesbian and gay couples more than 1,000 federal protections;
–Prohibit workplace discrimination for the LGBT community by passing an inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA);
–Repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to ensure that service members who contribute to our nation’s security are no longer summarily discharged for who they are;
–Pass immigration reform that recognizes permanent same-sex couples and ends the painful separation of families;
–And provide health benefits equally to the nearly 3 million federal government employees, including same-sex domestic partners.
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/human-rights-…
Simplified DOMA Repeal Cuts out Civil Unions
The Bay Area Reporter’s Matthew S. Bajko interviewed New York Congressman Jerry Nadler (D), who is introducing bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.
According to Bajko’s story, Nadler felt the need to focus on Federal recognition of gay marriage first, and so his bill will not apply to civil …
Walter Cronkite: Defender of Gay Marriage
In all of the tributes for Walter Cronkite, who died on July 17, 2009, one aspect of his personality has been omitted: He was an advocate for the separation of church and state. And in this capacity, he came out squarely against the Defense of Marriage Act and tacitly for the right of gay Americans to marry.
In a newspaper column he wrote for King Features Syndicate in 2003, when he was 86, Cronkite wrote, “Conservatives, particularly those of the Christian right, are determined that gay marriage and all abortions must be banned by federal law, even perhaps by amendments to our Constitution.”
Massachusetts had just become the first state to legalize gay marriage. “Conservatives,” he wrote, “particularly those of the Christian right, are determined that gay marriage and all abortions must be banned by federal law, even perhaps by amendments to our Constitution.”
See Walter Cronkite: Defender of Gay Marriage
EDGE Boston
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/walter-cronki…
Obama urges lesbian, gay patience overturning ‘unjust laws’
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. Hello, hello, hello. (Applause.) Hey! Good to see you. (Applause.) I’m waiting for FLOTUS here. FLOTUS always politics more than POTUS.
MRS. OBAMA: No, you move too slow. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: It is great to see everybody here today and they’re just — I’ve got a lot of friends in the room, but there are some people I want to especially acknowledge. First of all, somebody who helped ensure that we are in the White House, Steve Hildebrand. Please give Steve a big round of applause. (Applause.) Where’s Steve? He’s around here somewhere. (Applause.)
The new chair of the Export-Import Bank, Fred Hochberg. (Applause.) Where’s Fred? There’s Fred. Good to see you, Fred. Our Director of the Institute of Education Sciences at DOE, John Easton. Where’s John? (Applause.) A couple of special friends — Bishop Gene Robinson. Where’s Gene? (Applause.) Hey, Gene. Ambassador Michael Guest is here. (Applause.) Ambassador Jim Hormel is here. (Applause.) Oregon Secretary of State Kate Brown is here. (Applause.) All of you are here. (Laughter and applause.) Welcome to your White House. (Applause.) So.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: (Inaudible.) (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Somebody asked from the Lincoln Bedroom here. (Laughter.) You knew I was from Chicago too. (Laughter.)
It’s good to see so many friends and familiar faces, and I deeply appreciate the support I’ve received from so many of you. Michelle appreciates it and I want you to know that you have our support as well. (Applause.) And you have my thanks for the work you do every day in pursuit of …
… equality on behalf of the millions of people in this country who work hard and care about their communities — and who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender. (Applause.)
Now this struggle, I don’t need to tell you, is incredibly difficult, although I think it’s important to consider the extraordinary progress that we have made. There are unjust laws to overturn and unfair practices to stop. And though we’ve made progress, there are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors or even family members and loved ones, who still hold fast to worn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families like their families; and who would deny you the rights that most Americans take for granted. And I know this is painful and I know it can be heartbreaking.
And yet all of you continue, leading by the force of the arguments you make but also by the power of the example that you set in your own lives — as parents and friends, as PTA members and leaders in the community. And that’s important, and I’m glad that so many LGBT families could join us today. (Applause.) For we know that progress depends not only on changing laws but also changing hearts. And that real, transformative change never begins in Washington (cellphone “quacks”). Whose duck is back there? (Laughter.)
MRS. OBAMA: It’s a duck.
THE PRESIDENT: There’s a duck quacking in there somewhere. (Laughter.) Where do you guys get these ring tones, by the way? (Laughter.) I’m just curious. (Laughter.)
Indeed, that’s the story of the movement for fairness and equality — not just for those who are gay, but for all those in our history who’ve been denied the rights and responsibilities of citizenship; who’ve been told that the full blessings and opportunities of this country were closed to them. It’s the story of progress sought by those who started off with little influence or power; by men and women who brought about change through quiet, personal acts of compassion and courage and sometimes defiance wherever and whenever they could.
That’s the story of a civil rights pioneer who’s here today, Frank Kameny, who was fired — (applause.) Frank was fired from his job as an astronomer for the federal government simply because he was gay. And in 1965, he led a protest outside the White House, which was at the time both an act of conscience but also an act of extraordinary courage. And so we are proud of you, Frank, and we are grateful to you for your leadership. (Applause.)
It’s the story of the Stonewall protests, which took place 40 years ago this week, when a group of citizens — with few options and fewer supporters — decided they’d had enough and refused to accept a policy of wanton discrimination. And two men who were at those protests are here today. Imagine the journey that they’ve traveled.
It’s the story of an epidemic that decimated a community — and the gay men and women who came to support one another and save one another; and who continue to fight this scourge; and who demonstrated before the world that different kinds of families can show the same compassion and support in a time of need — that we all share the capacity to love.
So this story, this struggle, continues today — for even as we face extraordinary challenges as a nation, we cannot — and will not — put aside issues of basic equality. (Applause.) We seek an America in which no one feels the pain of discrimination based on who you are or who you love.
And I know that many in this room don’t believe that progress has come fast enough, and I understand that. It’s not for me to tell you to be patient, any more than it was for others to counsel patience to African Americans who were petitioning for equal rights a half-century ago.
But I say this: We have made progress and we will make more. And I want you to know that I expect and hope to be judged not by words, not by promises I’ve made, but by the promises that my administration keeps. And by the time you receive — (applause.) We’ve been in office six months now. I suspect that by the time this administration is over, I think you guys will have pretty good feelings about the Obama administration. (Applause.)
Now while there is much more work to do, we can point to important changes we’ve already put in place since coming into office. I’ve signed a memorandum requiring all agencies to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LGBT families as current law allows.
And these are benefits that will make a real difference for federal employees and Foreign Service Officers, who are so often treated as if their families don’t exist. And I’d like to note that one of the key voices in helping us develop this policy is John Berry, our director of the Office of Personnel Management, who is here today. And I want to thank John Berry. (Applause.)
I’ve called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act to help end discrimination — (applause) — to help end discrimination against same-sex couples in this country. Now I want to add we have a duty to uphold existing law, but I believe we must do so in a way that does not exacerbate old divides. And fulfilling this duty in upholding the law in no way lessens my commitment to reversing this law. I’ve made that clear.
I’m also urging Congress to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act, which will guarantee the full range of benefits, including healthcare, to LGBT couples and their children. (Applause.) My administration is also working hard to pass an employee nondiscrimination bill and hate-crimes bill, and we’re making progress on both fronts. (Applause.) Judy and Dennis Shepard, as well as their son Logan, are here today. I met with Judy in the Oval Office in May — (applause) — and I assured her and I assured all of you that we are going to pass an inclusive hate-crimes bill into law, a bill named for their son Matthew. (Applause.)
In addition, my administration is committed to rescinding the discriminatory ban on entry to the United States based on HIV status. (Applause.) The Office of Management and Budget just concluded a review of a proposal to repeal this entry ban, which is a first and very big step toward ending this policy.
And we all know that HIV/AIDS continues to be a public health threat in many communities, including right here in the District of Columbia. And that’s why this past Saturday, on National HIV Testing Day, I was proud once again to encourage all Americans to know their status and get tested the way Michelle and I know our status and got tested. (Applause.)
And finally, I want to say a word about “don’t ask, don’t tell.” As I said before — I’ll say it again — I believe “don’t ask, don’t tell” doesn’t contribute to our national security. (Applause.) In fact, I believe preventing patriotic Americans from serving their country weakens our national security. (Applause.)
Now, my administration is already working with the Pentagon and members of the House and the Senate on how we’ll go about ending this policy, which will require an act of Congress.
Someday, I’m confident, we’ll look back at this transition and ask why it generated such angst, but as commander in chief, in a time of war, I do have a responsibility to see that this change is administered in a practical way and a way that takes over the long term. That’s why I’ve asked the secretary of Defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to develop a plan for how to thoroughly implement a repeal.
I know that every day that passes without a resolution is a deep disappointment to those men and women who continue to be discharged under this policy — patriots who often possess critical language skills and years of training and who’ve served this country well. But what I hope is that these cases underscore the urgency of reversing this policy not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because it is essential for our national security.
Now even as we take these steps, we must recognize that real progress depends not only on the laws we change but, as I said before, on the hearts we open. For if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll acknowledge that there are good and decent people in this country who don’t yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters — not yet.
That’s why I’ve spoken about these issues not just in front of you, but in front of unlikely audiences — in front of African American church members, in front of other audiences that have traditionally resisted these changes. And that’s what I’ll continue to do so. That’s how we’ll shift attitudes. That’s how we’ll honor the legacy of leaders like Frank and many others who have refused to accept anything less than full and equal citizenship.
Now 40 years ago, in the heart of New York City at a place called the Stonewall Inn, a group of citizens, including a few who are here today, as I said, defied an unjust policy and awakened a nascent movement.
It was the middle of the night. The police stormed the bar, which was known for being one of the few spots where it was safe to be gay in New York. Now raids like this were entirely ordinary. Because it was considered obscene and illegal to be gay, no establishments for gays and lesbians could get licenses to operate. The nature of these businesses, combined with the vulnerability of the gay community itself, meant places like Stonewall, and the patrons inside, were often the victims of corruption and blackmail.
Now ordinarily, the raid would come and the customers would disperse. But on this night, something was different. There are many accounts of what happened, and much has been lost to history, but what we do know is this: People didn’t leave. They stood their ground. And over the course of several nights they declared that they had seen enough injustice in their time.
This was an outpouring against not just what they experienced that night, but what they had experienced their whole lives. And as with so many movements, it was also something more: It was at this defining moment that these folks who had been marginalized rose up to challenge not just how the world saw them, but also how they saw themselves.
As we’ve seen so many times in history, once that spirit takes hold there is little that can stand in its way. (Applause.) And the riots at Stonewall gave way to protests, and protests gave way to a movement, and the movement gave way to a transformation that continues to this day. It continues when a partner fights for her right to sit at the hospital bedside of a woman she loves. It continues when a teenager is called a name for being different and says, “So what if I am?” It continues in your work and in your activism, in your fight to freely live your lives to the fullest.
In one year after the protests, a few hundred gays and lesbians and their supporters gathered at the Stonewall Inn to lead a historic march for equality. But when they reached Central Park, the few hundred that began the march had swelled to 5,000. Something had changed, and it would never change back.
The truth is when these folks protested at Stonewall 40 years ago no one could have imagined that you — or, for that matter, I (laughter) — would be standing here today. (Applause.) So we are all witnesses to monumental changes in this country.
That should give us hope, but we cannot rest. We must continue to do our part to make progress — step by step, law by law, mind by changing mind. And I want you to know that in this task I will not only be your friend, I will continue to be an ally and a champion and a president who fights with you and for you.
Thanks very much, everybody. God bless you. (Applause.) Thank you. It’s a little stuffed in here. We’re going to open — we opened up that door. We’re going to walk this way, and then we’re going to come around and we’ll see some of you over there, all right? (Laughter.) But out there. (Laughter.)
But thank you very much, all, for being here. Enjoy the White House. Thank you. (Applause.) ###
See Obama urges lesbian, gay patience overturning ‘unjust laws’ (text) Los Angeles Times
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/obama-urges-l…
On same-sex marriage/civil unions, the air is leaking out of the tire
ast month Texas Lyceum, a non-partisan, business-oriented group, released one of its periodic polls on current issues, and the results for the most part were what one would expect in a conservative state. By margins of about 2-to-1, Texas opposed any further bailouts for automakers or banks. An even bigger margin – including a majority of whites, blacks and Hispanics – supported the concept of a voter ID requirement.
But on one issue, the poll did raise some eyebrows. According to the survey, a majority of Texans would permit some form of same-sex union to be recognized: 25 percent favor same-sex marriage and 32 percent would allow civil unions, while 36 percent oppose either arrangement. Although Democrats and independents were more liberal on this issue than Republicans, a thin Republican majority – 14 percent for same-sex marriage, 37 percent for civil unions – now favor one arrangement or the other.
That indicates that Texans are more conservative than the rest of the country on this issue, but not dramatically so. A CBS News/New York Times poll conducted at about the same time showed that 33 percent of Americans favor same-sex marriage, 30 percent would permit civil unions and 32 percent oppose any legal recognition of same-sex or lesbian couples.
This national poll also showed opinions on the issue are shifting back and forth: In a CBS News/New York Times poll conducted in April, support for same-sex marriage was at 42 percent. That decrease in support could be a result of the rising visibility of the issue: In June, New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch signed a bill which made his state the sixth in the country to allow same-sex marriage.
The fact that attitudes in Texas aren’t greatly out of line with the rest of the country doesn’t portend any big changes in the law in this region of the country, any time soon. If same-sex marriage/civil unions had been polled last month in Tennessee or Alabama, opposition to either one would probably have been significantly higher. But it may be an indication that as a political issue which can easily get traction, the air is slowly leaking out of the tire.
Most of the states, and all the Southern states, have passed some form of Defense of Marriage Act, and all the Southern states except North Carolina have passed constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. This makes it less, not more likely that conservative candidates in these states will get much mileage out of the issue than they have in recent years. It’s much more likely that opposition to same-sex unions will galvanize votes in states like New Jersey or Pennsylvania, where changes in current laws are a greater possibility.
None of this is to say conservative candidates won’t be able to raise money and garner endorsements on the issue well into the next decade. But it’s noteworthy that the strongest opposition to gay marriage in nearly every poll comes from African-Americans, who aren’t likely to swing behind candidates who are conservative on other issues.
See On same-sex marriage/civil unions, the air is leaking out of the tire
Southern Political Report -
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/07/on-same-sex-m…
