Cheat Sheet
The Best In Brief
THANK YOU
Your feedback has been sent!
Obama to Commemorate Stonewall
The White House will commemorate the Stonewall riots for the first time on Monday, but is it too little too late? Some gay-rights groups are boycotting the ceremony because, as GLAAD President Jarrett Barrios (who is attending) puts it in Monday’s Washington Post, “as President Obama, he has presided over an administration that has stumbled—sometimes symbolically, sometimes substantially—in its commitment to include us on the agenda.” In The New Yorker, Hendrik Hertzberg looks at Obama’s betrayal of gay-rights groups, and suggests that “A fair test of that commitment [to promote gay rights] would be a quick end to the dithering over D.A.D.T. [Don’t Ask Don’t Tell]”
COPYRIGHT © 2008-10 RTST, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
rapierwits
He goes at his own pace. I think he's going in the right direction, perhaps too slow for some, too quick for others but this will help him avoid the mistakes of Johnson and Carter.
I don't believe Clinton recognized the 25th anniversary. This is progress. He and sec. Clinton already recognized Pride month.
idicula1979
Exactly he does go at his own pace, (I believe we should already be there but, there are others who simply think that they could impose their religous beliefs on others) the democrats in their way to be bipartisan always screw up and end up having a crisis of confidence (MESSAGE TO DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS ARE NOT GOING TO NEGOTIATE)
mattbenzor
That's one way to kiss the gay community's ass.Who he has put there agenda a side for now.But will that get him support in 2012 I say "YES" cause who they going to vote for the republicans who want see them burn in hell.They should be patient with the president because "NO" republican will do for them what president Obama will do
sonofloud
Dear DNC,
I truly "support" Democrats being elected in 2010 and 2012. I am a "fierce advocate" of the Democratic Party after all. I know that I have promised you my support over the past few decades and have done my best to follow through.
Even now I am "working towards" a financial donation to the Party. I do have to ask for your "patience" though, because as a gay man, my family and I are still second class citizens and are having to funnel our resources towards causes that protect and honor our basic civil rights. "We have a lot on our plate."
We are "proceeding" towards lifting the denial of funds to the DNC and are "developing a strategy" that will get us there by the end of Obama's time at the White House. As a matter of fact, my family has planned several "meetings" to discuss these very important donations and will be sending out a press release shortly to announce our "cocktail party" celebrating Democracy.
Thanks for understanding. And hang in there!
Sincerely,
Liam
PS The Obama apologists just don't get it. It's not what Obama hasn't done, it's what he has done.
Namely, comparing gay relationships to incest in his court filings.
ConstitutionalRights
As a straight man who has gay business partners, had gay ushers at my wedding, and recognized gays as "people" when it was not popular, I can tell you that it is getting a bit tiring hearing the constant drumbeat for special rights I keep hearing.
Everyone has a right to pursue their own happiness, but the hard facts are that "behavior" does not deserve special privilages. You have a right to pursue your adult sexual preference as you choose, but do not have the rights to distort or overshadow mine. Your personal behavior does not have greater rights than my religous beliefs, and the constant flamethrower verbage used to discredit and intimidate those with beliefs that counter your life choices is as bad as you claim to have been wronged for your lifestyle.
At some point we both have to recognize that tolerance, acceptance and endorsement are not the same, and that expecting the law to be changed to slant things to favor the minority is as wrong as penalizing the minority for those practices.
The self righteous political movement of gay activists has run amuk. It may not be popular to state that, but this is not a civil rights issue, it is a pursuit of happiness issue. Gays should and do have a right to pursue their own happiness, but not to destroy the balance of nature and manipulate the legal process for their own selfish ends. It is time to begin respecting the rights of others, including the practice of the right of privacy.
If you want respect and support, try sharing that respect and support for those who disagree with you as well.
johncopeland
I'm not exactly sure what you are saying here. This IS a civil rights issue. Gays want equal rights and justice under the law. It's that simple to me. We want to be allowed to "marry" if we so desire and no "religious" belief or non-belief has anything to do with this issue. Gay people are born gay! I respect your right to privacy and take it that you respect mine. I'm unsure as to what "special" privilege you speak of as I see NO special privilege being asked for. I respect your right to have "faith" as you see fit son long as that "faith" does not enjoin me from having equal rights.
ConstitutionalRights
Sir, I respect your rights to pursue your lifestyle, but your statement that gay people are born gay has no medical or scientific backup. Special interest groups have been trying to legitimize that for decades, but nothing has been verified, nor has there been any evidence of mammals anywhere on the planet setting up house together. This is a issue of choice plain and simple, and that is okay with me, but don't try to reinforce your decision or your calling by falsifying science, it isn't there.
Marriage is an issue that was designed to allow couples to procreate in an organized manner, to celebrate biological lineage, to help financial support for couples that were impacted by one leaving the workplace due to the physical act of giving birth and staying out of the workplace to help raise and guide children and to respect and celebrate the union of two families. It is a long standing religious ceremony that has been respected for thousands of years. Asking non gays to abandon that to allow gay couples to openly practice behavioural issues by endorsing their decision through marriage is not acceptable to me. While I do encourage monogamous behavior and am willing to help you achieve some of the marital benefits, asking me to set aside my beliefs to "modernize" marriage is not acceptable.
Gays have equal rights under the law. Gays can be with whomever they want, have whatever job they can qualify for, can not be denied housing, and the list goes on.
While it may seem that marriage is the next logical step, it really isn't. You are asking me to change the way I look at marriage, I can't. You want to have a legal process to build a "family", fine, lets work together to find a fair solution. However if you want me to ignore my beliefs and reverse history, sorry, that is when you lose me.
sonofloud
You are such a fount of mis information I don't know where to begin but lets start here:
Federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws
I. What Are the Federal Laws Prohibiting Job Discrimination?
* Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;
* the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), which protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination;
* the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older;
* Title I and Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which prohibit employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in the private sector, and in state and local governments;
* Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibit discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities who work in the federal government; and
* the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which, among other things, provides monetary damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination.
Do you see the words sexual orientation anywhere? That means gay people can be fired for simply being gay at the federal level and if your state doesn't happen to include it in their civil rights, your out of luck.
Try the AMA and APA websites for the proof you seek regarding sexual orientation and genetics.
Andynhoboken
Constitutionalrights wants his gay friends to never be on an equal footing as him. He must feel gays are only on this earth to cut his hair and help his wife with decorating his house. To say that homosexuality is a choice is degrading to me and my fellow men and women. Lastly, to think that our desire to be on equal status with white males in society somehow will overshaddow you as a person leads me to think that you have severe self confidence issues. Why not bow out of an argument you know nothing about. We have enough people pontificating in America these days.
Dylan111
As a junior high teacher for many years, one who has very often kept in contact with her students, I could not be more positive that homosexuality is not a choice. More than a few of my students, those whom I thought might be gay when I had them in my class, and those about whom I had no clue, have told me in the intervening years that they realized at a very young age that they were "different" in some way that they could not yet fathom. There was no choice of lifestyle involved. After all, why would anyone choose to be discriminated against or to actually be reviled by what is, thankfully, a shrinking percentage of the public? And again, I have to wonder why gay marriage is seen as an attack on the institution of marriage instead of support for it. I can never seem to get a straight (no pun intended) answer to that one.
Wednes
As an Obama supporter, I feel very deceived by the fact that he plainly stated that he would work to repeal both DOMA and DADT. Instead Obama has spoken in defense of both of these absurd laws. Unless you can also be thrown out of the military for saying you're straight, the very idea of DADT is prejudiced at its core.
I have never heard a secular argument against gay marriage. As our laws do not require everyone to be the same religion, it cannot possibly be constitutional to use religious fervor as an excuse to deny people rights.
As for the ignorant statement that there is no evidence of homosexuality among other mammals? Please ask that question to a zookeeper. Any zookeeper should be able to show you an example of why you are incorrect.
But if that's not enough for you, perhaps consider the sad and shocking statistics on gay teen suicides. Why would you kill yourself over something you've chosen to do and could therefore simply change your mind about? If you're so sure people can will themselves to change who they're attracted to--why don't you try changing your own and see how it goes?
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.