There’s so much going on — Afghanistan, health care, unemployment, Iraq, global warming — hey, it’s getting hard for cable news to find more than 20 or 25 minutes an hour to devote to reality TV party crashers and non-stories about golfers. It’s easy to lose track of where things stand for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender American citizens, who are legally relegated to second-class status. Their marriages aren’t recognized under federal law or in most states, and they can get thrown out of the military if someone has a grudge against them. They can’t adopt in some states, and if they lose their job because of anti-LGBT bias, they have no legal recourse under federal law or most state laws. They often can’t get health insurance benefits at work for their loved ones, and if they do, they pay taxes that don’t affect their straight co-workers.
But it’s easy to say "now isn’t the time" when someone brings up the question of making tax-paying, law abiding LGBT Americans full citizens of this country. The moral indignity of this legalized system of discrimination often gets placed on the infamous back burner. I think we’re presented with a false choice, though. Just because we are dealing with an economic crisis, wars, and urgently needed health care reform doesn’t mean we can’t also take basic measures to ensure equality for all. (In fact, it’s a win-win: letting same-sex couples marry has benefits for the economy and allowing gay and lesbian service-members to serve openly would obviously help our overextended military).
A couple of things I read in the last few days reminded me why equality is as urgently needed as anything else. One was coverage of a surreal piece of legislation in Uganda that would subject any person convicted of "gay sex" to life imprisonment. Anyone failing to report an LGBT person they know to the authorities could be imprisoned for three years.
Thankfully, we don’t have legislation like this pending here–though it wasn’t that long ago that we had criminal penalties for consensual same-sex sexual activity on the books here in the U.S.–the Supreme Court just struck down such laws in 2003, and, actually some still remain on the books, though they are now unenforceable). However, the Ugandan "anti-homosexuality bill" was introduced by David Bahati, a member of the shadowy "Family", a fundamentalist power center exposed in Jeff Sharlet’s book. The Family includes both Republican and Democratic members of Congress. It would be nice if someone asked these members to condemn the action taken by their Ugandan Family member. It’s way past time for American politicians to move past anti-LGBT rhetoric and to make clear they stand for equality–too often, our elected officials fall terribly short in this area.
I was also struck by a short piece in yesterday’s Washington Post — Samuel Johnson explained what it was like for him to grow up gay in the United States: "I was raised Roman Catholic, and as a youth I always dreamed of being married one day. But like so many closeted gay youths, that dream stayed silent within me because I truly wanted to be with a person of my sex. Meanwhile, at Catholic school, I was beaten, pushed, spat upon and harassed — not because I was gay but merely because I was perceived as being gay. And as a Catholic, I accepted this abuse because the church taught that homosexuality was an abominable sin. This self-hatred took years to undo as an adult. This is not a unique story among gays, believe me."
Johnson praised the D.C. Council and Mayor Fenty for taking steps to bring marriage equality to Washington, D.C. His powerful words remind that the effects of inequality are not abstract. Lives are wrecked, children are harassed, people are murdered because they are seen as different–and marked by the law and society as different. Updating the laws would be a good step toward changing this. We can do this even as we grapple with other problems. Hey, cable news could even shine a real light on this reality if it could spare a few of the minutes it’s currently devoting to would-be reality TV stars and golf heroes.



11 Comments







Speak it, Brother! I don’t know how many times it has to be said for it to sink in, but until we all have the same rights none of us is truly free or safe in their rights!
Thanks for the great piece Chris!
thanks Bill…agreed in full.
What part of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” do these jerks not understand?
indeed–as well as equal protection of the laws
It is not all about marriage. Marriage is in fact peripheral to LGBT liberation, as is gays in the military.
The call was made in the 1980s to go for a piecemeal, incremental approach instead of including LGBT as suspect class per civil rights laws. There is a history to that decision, sunk investments, as well as a high cost for changing course.
I’m not sure if the author is queer, but we queers have had enough of heteros calling our agenda, be they Clinton with the military or Newsom with marriage. Prop 8′s political consultants were hetero and that worked out well.
We get to call the shots on our liberation.
Hang on for a second. Are you really saying you don’t want allies from the straight community advocating for full civil rights for all? Really?
Also, painting the GLTBQI community as monolithic on any issue ignores the reality of the situation. That everyone in the community wants full civil rights is about as far as it goes. There are those who think this fight is not worth the time since we when by demographics eventually anyway. There are those (like myself) who think we should fight it all the time everywhere. There is a huge portion who fall somewhere in the middle.
I would ask you not to oversimplify nor piss on allies whose help we need to achieve our goals.
I am straight, but I’m sorry if I gave the wrong impression — I certainly don’t mean to suggest that equality is simply about marriage or service in the military. I gave the example about marriage because I found Johnson’s story moving, but I fully agree that it’s not all about marriage. When I say that LGBT people are second class citizens, I mean that in a number of ways, as I referred to in some specific examples (adoption, anti-discrimination laws, tax treatment, military service). That’s not an exhaustive list either–LGBT people are also treated differently in social interactions, in the workplace, and in other ways I’m not thinking of. I think you’re right that marriage is eating up a lot of the attention, but I didn’t mean to suggest that I think this is the only thing that matters. The only “agenda” I was trying to set (though I wasn’t thinking of it in those terms) was to say that LGBT people are full citizens and should be recognized as such in every way (that’s what I tried to convey in my title and in examples I gave).
What I’m saying is that queers need to lead and hets need to look to queers for cues on how they can help us.
We’ve seen that one side, the one with the money to file lawsuits to pursue same sex marriage has made a mess of things.
When heteros lend their support to that failing agenda, they are helping do damage to LGBT equality.
Our agenda has been hijacked by heteros who are promoting campaigns that don’t benefit most LGBT, namely, military and marriage.
The leather community is an important part of the LGBT coalition, but not all of us are masochists, picking fights we know we’re going to lose over and again.
The problem is that political power is only as strong as the perception political strength that backs it up. When we lose ballot measure after ballot measure, that takes the wind out of our sails and diminishes LGBT political power in general.
This happened to women with the Stupak amendment, where the pro-choice crowd got lazy and complacent, had not done much organizing under the misapprehension that we’d already won. Absent a mobilized competent pro-choice base of power, we got steamrolled.
Losing does make things worse, and it is irrational to focus on losing campaigns while LGBT in many states do not have protections on the essentials, jobs and housing.
I think we’re talking past each other here. all I was saying is that LGBT people deserve full citizenship rights. I’m not trying to insert myself into a leadership position in any way, I’m simply observing that it’s wrong to put some of us into a 2nd class citizenship status. I live in DC and the people leading the fight for marriage here are LGBT–the head of DC for Marriage is Michael Crawford, a gay man. Many other LGBT people are in leadership roles. The councilmember who has taken the lead in planning for passage of the bill that did pass today, David Catania, is gay. I don’t think straight people are setting the agenda when it comes to marriage in DC. Let’s not argue about this though. As I said, I think we’re talking past each other. Bottom line is I’m not trying to tell anyone how to gain equality and I’m not looking to take over anyone’s agenda. I was simply observing that there is inequality in a number of areas under the law and that is wrong.
I think we all know that second class citizenship is wrong. But racking up a string of highly publicized losses does nothing but set up a flashing green light that says “LGBT are second class citizens, its okay!
I’m usually of the let a zillion flowers bloom variety myself, but in this case, that clearly is not working, indeed it is working at cross purposes to our advancement. What does it mean that LGBT have been privileged to move from the political wilderness to being accepted by 2/3 of Americans for what we are in a mere 3-4 decades, and that in light of that growing acceptance, we’re being kicked in the groin at the ballot box?
First, LGBT need to be given support to hold the professional homosexuals accountable for their poor decisions. Then, after there has been some kind of reckoning and accountability will we be able to move forward in a coherent, well thought out path. Until then, our hetero friends need to realize that there is much more to LGBT “equality” than marriage.
And I challenge the notion of mere equality. The HRC vastly undershot when it chose its logo as a yellow equals sign on a blue background. My read is that we are at least “greater than or equal to” heteros.
I’m not arguing with you about the strategy re: marriage–that wasn’t the point of my piece or of any of my comments. I guess we still may be talking past each other…you keep saying that straight people need to realize there is more to equality than marriage. I fully agree, as I have explained, as was expressed in my post. Perhaps you are talking to other straight people, I’m not sure. Where you lose me, though, is in the last paragraph–”greater than (?) or equal to”. Maybe you mean this jokingly…(I hope)