Del. Bob Marshall - The Face of Anti-Gay Animus in Virginia

Some politicians focus their legislative efforts on improving public education, improving infrastructure, attracting new job creating businesses, and so forth.  Not Del. Bob Marshall.  His reason for being is to persecute LGBT Virginians and put his personal religious based animus towards gays in action.  Other than Victoria Cobb of the Family Foundation, Matt Staver at Liberty University and the increasingly insane Pat Robertson, there is no one more viciously anti-gay than Bob Marshall.  Yet, ironically, it may be statements made by Marshall and former attorney general Ken Cuccinelli who help make the case that anti-gay animus was the main motivation behind Virginia's same sex marriage ban.  In the plaintiff's pleadings in Bostic v. Rainey examples of their anti-gay animus are laid out (Marshall was a backer of House Bill No. 751).  Here's a sampling:

11. House Bill Number 751 included in its “legislative findings” the fact that “in 1996, the United States Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (Pub. L. No. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419 (1996)), which recognized the traditional definition of marriage as between one man and one woman for all aspects of federal law.” Id.

12. House Bill Number 751 also included in its “legislative findings” that there are “life shortening and health compromising consequences of homosexual behavior” that inure “to the detriment of all citizens regardless of their sexual orientation or inclination.” Id.

14. In 2004, Robert Marshall, one of the co-sponsors of House Bill Number 751, authored an article in The Washington Post in which he referred to marriage between gay and lesbian individuals as “counterfeit marriage” and stated that the Affirmation of Marriage Act was “needed to resist the agenda of activist homosexuals” because the “danger” they posed was “real.” Lustig Decl. Ex. B (The Washington Post, No “New Jim Crow” in Virginia, July 3, 2004).

21. Then-Virginia Senator (now-Attorney General) Kenneth Cuccinelli urged his colleagues to adopt the Marshall/Newman Amendment by claiming “[t]he homosexual left has been on the attack against marriage and family for 40 years,” and that the amendment was necessary for “regaining lost ground.” Lustig Decl. Ex. E (The Washington Post, Va. Senate Backs Ban on Gay Marriage, Feb. 8, 2005).

22. More recently, Attorney General Cuccinelli publicly stated that homosexuality “brings nothing but self-destruction, not only physically but of their soul.” Lustig Decl. Ex. F (The Washington Post, Cuccinelli Basks in Richmond’s Warmer Climate, Feb. 5, 2008).

23. Similarly, Attorney General Cuccinelli has stated that homosexual acts are “intrinsically wrong” and “don’t comport with natural law”; and that homosexual behavior “is not healthy to an individual and in aggregate is not healthy to society.” Lustig Decl. Ex. G (The Virginia Pilot, Steve Shannon for Attorney General, Oct. 26, 2009); Ex. H (Huffington Post, Ken Cuccinelli Loses Petition to Uphold Anti-Sodomy Law, Apr. 10, 2013).

Remember, the supposed purpose of the Marshall-Newman Amended as represented in pleadings in Bostic was to protect traditional marriage and two parent parenting.  Yet we see statements that gays are unhealthy, a danger, that being gay is  life shortening, and other batshitery.  But Marshall's anti-gay animus extends far beyond alleged desires to protect "traditional marriage."  Joe Jervis has a partial list of Marshall's always sething animus towards gays:

Last week Marshall filed an amendment that would grant Virginia state legislators the right to claiming standing in marriage lawsuits. In September 2013, Marshall petitioned the US Supreme Court to overturn Virginia's legalization of sodomy. In May 2012, Marshall attempted to block the appointment of an openly gay state judge because the nominee has "an illegal husband." In 2011 Del. Bob Marshall claimed it is a felony for a state office to fly the rainbow flag. Marshall has also called on Virginia to issue its own currency, and has claimed that God punishes women who have abortions by giving them deformed children. After the DADT repeal bill passed, Marshall tried to have gays banned from the Virginia National Guard.

Equality Loudoun has a further compilation of Marshall's anti-gay animus here.  If a court wants evidence that anti-gay animus prompted the passage of the Marshall-Newman Amendment, it need look no further than Bob Marshall.

P.S. I hope Judge Wright Allen is familiar with Marshall's support for disenfranchising black voters. 

Why Ken Cuccinelli and the Virginia GOP Are Bad for Virginia

As Ken Cuccinelli continues to bring negative publicity to Virginia through his quest to reinstate the sodomy statute which has been twice ruled unconstitutional, Bob Witeck, the president of Witeck Communications who provides consulting services to Fortune 500 corporations and nonprofits on LGBT issues, has an op-ed in the Virginian Pilot that lays out why Cuccinelli and the Virginia GOP's anti-gay agenda is bad for Virginia and its economy.  Here are some excerpts:

Virginia has been among America's economic leaders and why so many successful multinational and high-tech firms find their welcome here.

Last month, however, that welcoming reputation darkened when Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli overreacted to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act. Declaring that for 400 years Virginians have defined marriage as between one man and one woman, Cuccinelli then insisted that the repeal of DOMA had no relevance for Virginians.

Such a mindset creates a chill for the state's leading companies and multinational businesses because they walk the walk on nondiscrimination and fairness. Many have earned high scores from the Human Rights Campaign for their equal treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender workers.

Volkswagen, Hilton Corporation, Rolls Royce and 32 out of 50 of Virginia's top employers have workplace nondiscrimination policies that include LGBT Virginians. Those companies also include SAIC, Dominion Virginia Power, Lockheed Martin and Capital One - all competing for the same pool of highly educated talent.

This appetite for talent explains why 278 U.S. corporations and employers, including many with workers in Virginia like Marriott, Xerox, Cisco Systems and Starbucks, also urged overturning the Defense of Marriage Act. They know that treating all employees equally is good business - and now that the federal government recognizes same-sex marriages performed in 13 states and Washington, D.C., they can also save money and streamline their own complex payroll and administrative systems.

Consider the greatest irony. Virginia has the nation's largest concentrations of women and men serving on our combined military and federal payrolls. With Don't Ask, Don't Tell lifted, thousands today may also serve openly and proudly regardless of their sexual orientation. And with DOMA consigned to the dustbin, married same-sex couples - even those living in Virginia serving in uniform - will be recognized as married by their employer, Uncle Sam. They will be treated equally under federal tax laws and with health benefits. But not yet by our backward-looking commonwealth.

The competition for superior talent goes hand in hand with appealing communities and welcoming cultures. Very few openly LGBT executives and managers eagerly await job transfer, with spouses and children too, to states like Virginia that insist on denying equal legal protections and stability, or whose leaders neglect the changes that our dynamic economy will bring.

Increasingly, in post-DOMA America, same-sex married couples will align their ambitions with their best interests in choosing to live and work in states that offer them the full respect and equal treatment under the law they need and want for their families. They will find refuge in states where well qualified, openly lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people today hold civic offices, among them senators, representatives, judges, mayors and council members. They will see that most Americans judge us on the content of our character and not by whom we love.

[D]iscrimination extracts a price too high for any global competitor. Leading companies expect nothing less from their public leaders.

As noted in the past, I regularly receive calls from LGBT individuals considering a job transfer or promotion that would bring them to Virginia.  Many turn down the jog prospect so that they can remain in more gay friendly states.  I encourage them to tell their employers or prospective employers, as applicable, why they will not be taking the offer.  If these companies hear this story line often enough, they can and will put pressure on politicians prostituting themselves to the Christofascists and hate groups like The Family Foundation.

It’s Time to "Out" Lindsey Graham

John Aravosis has a timely post at America Blog that calls for and investigation of Senator Lindsey Graham and "outing: him.  I agree wholeheartedly with John.   There is no reason why closeted gay politicians who daily harm normal gays who are simply trying to go about live their lives should be given any deference.  Their hypocrisy is disgusting and, in my view, they need to pay a price for the evil they are doing to other.  That's why I contacted Mike Rogers and help set things in motion to out former Virginia Congressman Ed Schrock.  

For background, Schrock had the second most anti-gay voting record in the House and pandered to the Christofascists by making numerous statements about his concerns about gays looking at other service members in the shower.  Meanwhile, he himself was trolling for gay sex and stupidly met a guy I knew who immediately called me.  When I  confronted Schrock's office, Schrock called me himself on his cell phone and then I received threats from his staff.  I don't doubt that Graham is engaging in similar conduct.  Therefore, he needs to be outed - the sooner, the better, although waiting until the GOP is locked into him as the party nominee has a sense of deliciousness to it as well.  Here are highlights from John's post:

It’s time to finally out Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC).  Graham has had it coming for a while now. Not because he’s a Republican. But because he’s an anti-gay Republican. And while it’s one thing to be gay and a closet case, it’s quite another to be a hypocrite, an anti-gay gay, someone who uses his power to harm others in the name of morality, all the while knowing secretly that he is one of the others.

In this case, Graham’s hypocrisy that broke the camel’s back is immigration reform. I have it on good authority from someone intimately involved in the immigration reform process that Lindsey Graham is the central reason that the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA), which would help stop the forced deportation of foreign-born gay spouses, is being blocked from being added to the immigration bill. While other Senators might be bluffing about their opposition to addressing the immigration needs of gay binational couples in immigration reform, I’m told Graham isn’t bluffing.

The obvious question arises as to why Graham is holding gays hostage in the immigration bill. 
One theory is that UAFA is Graham’s legislative beard. A beard is a woman a gay man socializes with in order to throw off suspicions that he’s actually gay. In this case, the theory goes, Lindsey Graham is using UAFA in order to throw off the suspicions of the Tea Party voters back home who are challenging him in a high-profile primary. Their suspicions are that: A) Graham is a liberal; and B) he’s gay.

Graham’s support for immigration reform is hardly helping him dispel the closet liberal image.  But his opposition to UAFA, the theory goes, is a two-fer: It let’s Graham oppose something, anything, related to immigration reform (his support for the measure has been a thorn in his side with the far-right back home), and it has the added benefit of bashing gays.

Lindsey Graham voted against the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, because he believed that gays should not be serving in the US military.   .   .   .   .   The question facing us is not whether you or I think Lindsey Graham’s sexual orientation is relevant to a public policy debate.  The question confronting us is whether Lindsey Graham thinks one’s sexual orientation is relevant, and he does.  So by the Graham Standard, America deserves to know if Air Force Reserve Colonel Lindsey Graham is gay.

I don’t know if Lindsey Graham is gay.  But I’m having a difficult time believing that he’s straight (and I’m clearly not the only one). And what’s more, he seems to be having a difficult time proving it, or even explaining it.

Lindsey Graham decided long ago that one’s sexual orientation was fair game for politics, then so be it.  It’s time someone did an in-depth investigation of whether Lindsey Graham is gay, straight, or asexual, because under the Graham Standard, America has a right to know.

I agree with John 100%.  Graham needs to be outed if he's gay.

Head of Air Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Arrested for Sexual Assault

Prior to the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the hate merchants of Family Research Council and the always lunatic Elaine Donnelly shrieked that open service by gays and lesbians would usher in all kinds of sexual assaults and destroy morale.  Of course, none of these dire predictions have come to pass.  But they were right about one thing - there is a huge problem of sexual assaults in the military.  And its principally the heterosexual males who are doing the assaulting.  And nothing underscores the problem more than the arrest of Lt. Col. Jeffrey Krusinski (pictured at right and still bearing marks from his would be victims defense of herself) who was charged with groping a woman in a northern Virginia parking lot on Sunday.  Krusinski is the - or more accurately, was - head of the Air Force's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response unit.  The Virginian Pilot looks at the debacle.  Here are highlights:

The sexual battery arrest of the Air Force officer who led the service's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response unit underscores how far the Defense Department has to go in addressing the plague of sexual crimes in the military, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee said Tuesday.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., told a committee hearing that a Pentagon report to be released later Tuesday reportedly estimates that, on average, there are more than 70 sexual assaults involving military personnel every day.

Authorities in Arlington County, Virginia, said Lt. Col. Jeffrey Krusinski was charged with groping a woman in a northern Virginia parking lot on Sunday. Krusinski was removed from his post in the sexual assault unit after the Air Force learned of his arrest. He started in the post in February.  "While under our legal system everyone is innocent until proven guilty, this arrest speaks volumes about the status and effectiveness of (the Defense) department's efforts to address the plague of sexual assaults in the military," Levin said.

The Pentagon report says that the number of sexual assaults reported by members of the military rose from 3,192 to 3,374 in 2012, while the department estimates that as many as 26,000 service members were assaulted, based on anonymous surveys, according to officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the report.

A police report said that the 41-year-old Krusinski was drunk and grabbed a woman's breast and buttocks. The woman fought him off and called police, the report said.

Two cases involving decisions by three-star generals to overturn guilty verdicts in sexual assault cases have outraged members of Congress and propelled a bipartisan push to change the military justice system to essentially strip commanding officers of their ability to reverse criminal convictions.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., is holding up the nomination of Air Force Lt. Gen. Susan Helms, tapped to serve as vice commander of the U.S. Space Command, until the Missouri Democrat gets more information about Helms' decision to overturn a jury conviction in a sexual assault case.

So far, not a word from Mr. Perkins or Ms. Donnelly.  I can only wonder who long before they somehow say these crimes and outrages are all the fault of gays.

Family Research Council Video Says Gays Are "Unclean"

The Family Research Council is constantly whining over its designation as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a designation that puts FRC in the same category as the KKK and other vile groups.  Yet time and time again FRC resorts to deliberate lies and anti-gay propaganda reminiscent of what Hitler's Nazi regime used against the Jewish members of European society, namely depicting Jews as diseased and "unclean."  With the Boy Scouts of America possibly on the verge of allowing gay scouts (but not gay scout leaders), the folks at FRC - which garners much of its income from promoting the threat of the "gay agenda" - are simply hysterical over the normalization of gays that this would represent.  Hence a new  “Stand With The Scouts” webcast  that FRC is peddling which is down right heinous.  Truth Wins Out looks at this nasty, untruthful attack on gays.  Here are some highlights:

Wingnuts have always been obsessed with purity and contamination, but this weekend’s little “Stand With The Scouts” webcast from the Family Research Council hate group is a doozy.

The first half of this supercut [below] (put together by Right Wing Watch) features a spooky pastor-like figure explaining that we are living at the “end of days.” It is worth noting that apocalyptic Christians have always believed that they are living in the End Times. It’s as silly now as it was in 45 AD. The next section features a Boy Scout who explains that gay sex is “unclean,” according to Boy Scout law.

Then Tony Perkins comes on to assert, based on no evidence besides the putrid thoughts in his brain, that DADT repeal has caused lots of problems in the military, and therefore the Boy Scouts shouldn’t change their policies.

Finally, another Scout does the “I’m so creeped out” thing, where he says “but iiiiii dunnnooooo what i would doooo if another Scout came on me!” Why they always think we’re interested in them, I do not know. It’s really kind of sad, as wingnuts don’t tend to be attractive people in heart, mind or body.

 

GOP Again Tries to Ban Gay Weddings on Military Bases

As noted frequently on this blog, the Christofascists believe that the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion only applies to them.  Worse yet, by extension, that means that they believe that they are entitled to force their religious views on all of society and that they can ride rough shod over the religious beliefs of others.   And like the good political whore that they are, GOP members of Congress are only too eager to show the depths to which they will prostitute themselves to the Christofascists and work to undermine both the U.S. Constitution and religious denominations that hold pro-gay views of gay marriage.   As MetroWeekly is reporting, the House GOP has again sought to ban same sex marriage ceremonies from military bases regardless of the beliefs of the denominations seeking to perform such ceremonies.  As is always the case with the GOP, it is ALL about appeasing the Christofascists and hate merchants.  Here are some article highlights:

A handful of Republicans on Capitol Hill are again attempting to write discrimination into U.S. military code with a bill introduced in the House of Representatives last week.

The "Military Religious Freedom Protection Act" introduced by Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) would amend military code in order to protect the "rights of conscience of members of the Armed Forces and chaplains." In the bill's attempt to protect those religious freedoms, same-sex weddings would be banned from taking place on any military installation.

[F]or advocates who fought the ban on out gay servicemembers, Huelskamp's bill is a desperate attempt to open the door to discrimination in the military.

"This is just more of the same from a dwindling number of folks on Capitol Hill who wish to cling to the discrimination of the past, rather than embrace the journey toward full equality and fairness that we have embarked upon as a nation," OutServe-SLDN spokesman Zeke Stokes told Metro Weekly. "This bill seeks to address a problem that doesn't exist."

In many ways, the bill resembles what was a final attempt by former Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) last year to include a similar "conscience clause" in the $633 billion Pentagon budget. Advocates believed the provision was an attempt to permit harassment as well as ban same-sex weddings from occurring on military bases, despite a Defense Department policy that already ensures no chaplain can be forced to perform a same-sex marriage.

"This proposal needs to be seen for what it is – a naked attempt to undermine DADT repeal and open service by green lighting discrimination against lesbian, gay and bisexual service members," ACLU Legislative Representative Ian Thompson said of Huelskamp's bill. "Given the acknowledged success of the transition to open service, including from the uniformed military leadership, this legislation could not be more ill-timed or ill-advised."

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who has tried to ban same-sex weddings on military bases before, is a co-sponsor of the bill, as are Republican Reps. Tim Walberg (Mich.), Vicky Hartzler (Mo.), Doug LaMalfa (Calif.), Jim Jordan (Ohio) and Louie Gohmert (Texas).

Given the anti-gay hysteria of the bill's sponsors, one cannot help but wonder how long it will be before one or more of them are caught having a "wide stance" in a restroom or  being caught up in some highway restroom sting soliciting gay sex.  The closet cases always protest the loudest.

Hate Group Leader Blames Military Suicide Increase on DADT Repeal

Hate group leader Tony Perkins rants against the Southern Poverty Law Center's designation of Family Research Council as an anti-gay hate group.  Yet he continues to demonstrate precisely why the SPLC was 100% on target in giving the hate group designation to FRC.  It his latest eruption of anti-gay animus, Perkins is blaming the U. S. military's exploding suicide rate on the gays.  That's right, in Perkins' bizarre alternate universe, it is DADT repeal, not (i) the horrors troops are seeing in the fool's errand wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, (ii) the repeated deployments to those hell holes - my son-in-law was on his third deployment when he was seriously wounded last November - and (iii) the military's failure to take mental health issues seriously that is the reason that members of the military are taking their own lives in unprecedented numbers.  Right Wing Watch reports on Perkins' latest foul anti-gay lies:

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has joined American Family Association’s Buster Wilson in linking the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell to the military’s suicide rate.  .  .  .  . Perkins said that the Obama administration’s work in “driving Christianity out [and] putting homosexuality in” are “adding additional stress” that leads to a higher rate of suicide. Perkins cited no evidence to back up his claim, but as with his ominous and incorrect predictions regarding the consequences of DADT’s repeal, he apparently doesn’t see a need to substantiate his outrageous allegations.

Perkins: The volume of these decisions coming out of this administration is unbelievable, unbelievable. The stress in our military, when you look how they have used the military for their social experimentation: driving Christianity out, putting homosexuality in, suicide rate going through the ceiling. I think it was last year if I recall the numbers there were 349 suicides in 2012 and I believe that’s more than were killed in combat, that’s the highest number since the Pentagon began tracking suicides back in 2001. And what are they doing? Adding additional stress by this social engineering. Unbelievable.

 What's unbelievable is that anyone moral and sane listens to Perkins - a failed state politician with white supremacist ties - and his fellow Christian Taliban hate merchants.  

Marine Corps to Spouse Clubs: Admit Same-Sex Spouses

In somewhat of a surprising move, the U. S. Marine Corps has directed spouses clubs operating on its installations must either admit same-sex spouses or move off Marine Corps bases.  So far, none of the other branches of the U.S. military have taken such a direct and uncompromising position.  The Marine Corps ultimatum comes in the wake of the ongoing controversy within the Army's Fort Bragg Base in North Carolina where the officers' spouses club  denied admission to a same-sex spouse.  As readers may recall, before the repeal of DADT, the Marines were among the most vocal supporters of DADT.  Here are highlights from Federal News Radio:

The Marine Corps has advised its legal staff that spouses clubs operating on its installations must admit same-sex spouses if they wish to remain on the bases.  It's a step that the other service branches have not yet announced as they grapple with how to accommodate same-sex couples following repeal of the don't ask, don't tell policy that barred gays and lesbians from serving openly.

Underscoring the challenges, the Marines' legal advisory - obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press - refers to an ongoing controversy at the Army's Fort Bragg in North Carolina where the officers' spouses club has denied admission to a same-sex spouse.

The Marine Corps commandant's Staff Judge Advocate, in an e-mail to legal offices throughout the corps, said the Fort Bragg events had "caused quite a stir" and cautioned, "We do not want a story like this developing in our backyard."

The memo noted that spouses clubs and various other private institutions are allowed to operate on bases only if they adhere to a non-discrimination policy encompassing race, religion, gender, age, disability and national origin.  "We would interpret a spouses club's decision to exclude a same-sex spouse as sexual discrimination because the exclusion was based upon the spouse's sex," the memo said.

A Marine Corps spokesman, Capt. Eric Flanagan, said the Marines cannot directly control the actions of independent organizations such as spouses' clubs, but added, "We expect that all who are interested in supporting Marine Corps Family Readiness would be welcome to participate and will be treated with dignity and respect."

The Defense Department has not issued similar guidance covering all service branches, and for now is taking the stance that the Fort Bragg spouses club is conforming with the existing rules because the non-discrimination clause does not extend to sexual orientation.

I can just hear the shrieks and imagine the flying spittle among the professional Christian and Christofacscist organizations.  Nothing gives them more joy or buoys their self-congratulatory piety more than bashing gays and the less fortunate.

Anti-Gay Mormon Senator Mike Crapo Arrested For DUI

There's more news in the hypocrisy department: Idaho Senator Mike Crapo - a Mormon known for his anti-gay positions - was arrested for DUI early yesterday morning in Alexandria, Virginia.   As Joe My God notes, Crapo has a perfect track record of voting against LGBT rights: He twice voted for a federal constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, voted against both the Hate Crimes Act and the repeal of DADT, and has a 100% rating from the Christian Coalition and a 0% rating from the Human Rights Campaign.  CNN has more on Crapo's arrest.  Here are highlights:

U.S. Sen. Michael Crapo, R-Idaho, was arrested early Sunday morning in Alexandria, Virginia, and charged with driving under the influence, according to the town's police department.

Jody Donaldson, an Alexandria police spokesman, said Crapo was arrested by an officer at 12:45 a.m. ET after the officer noticed Crapo's vehicle running a red light.

"Sen. Crapo was identified as the driver and arrested after failing several field sobriety tests," Donaldson said in a statement. "He was taken into custody without incident and transported to the Alexandria Adult Detention Center where he was released on a $1,000 unsecured bond."

Crapo released a statement through his office Sunday, saying: "I am deeply sorry for the actions that resulted in this circumstance. I made a mistake for which I apologize to my family, my Idaho constituents and any others who have put their trust in me.

A court date was set for January 4, according to Donaldson, who added that Crapo's blood alcohol level was .110 at the time of his arrest. The legal blood alcohol level for drivers in Virginia is .08. Donaldson also said Crapo was alone in the car at the time.

Crapo has represented Idaho in the Senate since 1999. Before that he served in the U.S. House of Representatives for six years. He was re-elected in 2010 with 71% of the vote. He's a member of the Senate's "Gang of 8."

According to his official biography on congress.gov, Crapo is also a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which prohibits the use of alcohol among its members.

GOP Still Pushing to Reinstate DADT if Romney Wins

As if there isn't more than enough reason for LGBT voters to oppose the Romney/Ryan ticket and Congressional Republicans, now GOP Congressman Jim Jordan (pictured above and a certifiable nutcase in my view) has announced that if Romney wins the White House, Jordan and his cohorts in the ultra-conservative Republican Study Committee - a group of more than 160 Republican House members - are going push to reinstate DADT.  And what of LGBT members of the U. S. military who have "come out" since DADT repeal?  They'd be forced out.  Think Progress looks at the situation.  Here are highlights:  

WASHINGTON, DC — A leading House Republican wants to re-instate the military’s former ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy if his party takes control in November.

In an interview with ThinkProgress at the Values Voters Summit on Friday, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) said he “certainly” supports “going back to the previous policy” of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. He left open the possibility that those service-members who have already come out of the closet, like Brig. General Tammy Smith, would be discharged from the military if Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is reinstated.

Though first elected in 2006, Jordan is no back-bencher. He chairs the conservative Republican Study Committee, a group of more than 160 Republican congressmen dedicated to pushing conservative causes that wields major influence within the GOP caucus.

If Jordan were to ask the military about reinstating DADT as he suggests, he would learn that the Pentagon believes that last year’s repeal was actually beneficial for unit morale, and that none of the concerns expressed by opponents of the decision have come to fruition. In addition, there was considerable support for lifting the ban on openly gay and lesbian people serving in the military from the heads of three of the four branches of the military even before DADT was repealed.

Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA) has previously indicated that he would not like to see Republicans bring up Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, but his opposition may not be enough to stop Jordan and the Republican Study Committee from reinstating the policy if the GOP prevails in November.

Given Jordan's obsession with LGBT issues, one has to wonder how soon before he's caught in a wide stance situation like Larry Craig or caught seeking gay hook ups like former 2nd Congressman Ed Schrock.

Why George Allen is a LGBT Virginian's Worse Nightmare

I've know George Allen, the GOP candidate for U.S. Senate, for just shy of 38 years.  That's when er became classmates in law school at the University of Virginia.  George was always the party boy and ran with a crowd that liked to see itself as macho - something George still does today wearing his cowboy boots.  Now, I have no problem with cowboy boots and own a couple pair myself, but I DO have a problem with those who hold a mindset akin to that of the many rednecks who wear them.  And George is one such individual when it comes to LGBT rights and the treatment of gays in general.  Just as his infamous "macaca" quip revealed his contempt for Indian-Americans (many of whom I have as clients), he has documented his contempt for LGBT Americans.  Think Progress has compiled George's record on LGBT  issues and it should send every LGBT Virginian running to pull the lever for Tim Kaine come election day in November.  Indeed, they should tell all their friends and family to vote the same way.  Here are highlights:

Over his time as Governor of Virginia, in the U.S Senate, and as a candidate:

1. Allen said homosexuality was not “acceptable” and should be “illegal.” In a 1994 radio broadcast, then-Gov. Allen told listeners that he didn’t want his children “even seeing the news of some of these things here, thinking that, this is acceptable behavior.” He added: “I don’t think this is acceptable behavior… and as a matter of government policy I don’t think we should condone that sort of behavior.” In the same broadcast, he praised Virginia’s unconstitutional Crimes Against Nature law –which made private consensual sex between same-sex adults a felony — saying “It’s against the criminal law in Virginia, that homosexual acts are illegal, and I think should stay illegal.”

2. Allen has vigorously fought to stop any recognition for same-sex unions. As Governor, he signed Virginia’s state defense of marriage law in 1997. Allen campaigned for the 2006 state constitutional amendment that banned all state recognition of same-sex unions. He co-sponsored the “Federal Marriage Amendment.” He continues to reaffirm his support for both the unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act and a federal constitutional amendment, noting “My stand on marriage is clear: I believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman.”

3. Allen opposed Hate Crimes protections for LGBT Americans — and still does. Though he promised in his 2000 Senate campaign that he would support adding sexual orientation to the federal hate crimes law, in 2005 he changed his mind. “I wouldn’t define it as a flip-flop,” his Virginia state director told reporters. Allen’s reasoning? He feared “some courts that would use that as a building block toward civil rights status, which he is opposed to.” In other words, he worries that treating terrorism against LGBT Americans in the same way as the law treats terrorism against other minority groups would be okay if it weren’t for the risk of a slippery slope that might mean LGBT Americans would have other civil rights. Perhaps unaware that President Obama signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act into law in 2009, on Allen’s current campaign website he bizarrely promises to “vote against adding sexual orientation to federal hate crimes statutes, as he did in 2005.”

4. Allen opposed adding employment protections for LGBT people. Fearing anything that would raise sexual orientation to civil rights “status,” he has never supported the Employment Non-Discrimination Act or other efforts to end anti-LGBT discrimination. In 2004, the Human Rights Campaign listed him as refusing to adopt a voluntary office policy not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Allen’s civil rights record is not much better for other minority groups–he opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991 and even voted against making Martin Luther King Day a holiday in Virginia.

5. Allen opposed allowing same-sex couples to raise kids. In his 1994 anti-gay radio tirade, he said he opposes same-sex couples raising kids because it is “not in the best interests of a child to be raised in that environment.” His view has not evolved — last year, an Allen spokesman told Politico that the former Senator has never been a supporter of same-sex couples adopting and that he “agrees with Governor [Bob] McDonnell’s [R] recent decision to keep current adoption regulations in place.” Allen also backed efforts to allow adoption agencies to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. His campaign website notes that he “does not support same-sex couples adopting children.”

6. Allen fought against same-sex couples being eligible for low-interest home loans. As Governor, he backed a restriction preventing the Virginia Housing Development Authority from making low-interest home loans to LGBT families. “Governor Allen doesn’t agree with these relationships and is not going to be advocating these relationships in his administration. This could establish a precedent that could lead to a redefinition of what family is,” an Allen spokesman noted at the time, adding that homosexuality was “basically viewed by the governor as an unnatural relationship.”

7. Allen opposed allowing LGBT servicemembers to serve openly and opposes chaplains conducting same-sex ceremonies. In 2000, he criticized his Senate race opponent’s support for allowing gay and lesbian Americans to serve in the military as “Vermont values.” Allen told the Veterans of Foreign Wars in the same campaign that he opposed using the military for “social experimentations.”

In short, while George may be amusing and entertaining at a cocktail or dinner party, we truly don't need him back in the U.S. Senate.  Sadly, he is all too typical of today's GOP and would strive to take the country backwards in time.  Gays, minorities and women need to understand that George is no friend of equality for all and that he will readily do the bidding of the worse elements of the Christofascist elements of the GOP. 

America Now Has Its First Openly Gay General

Elaine Donnelly must be writhing and convulsing on the floor with a trail of spittle pooling next to her.  Why?  Because the U.S. Army now has an out lesbian general.  It's got to be more than the delusional Donnelly can cope with based on her past batshitery and obsession with her fantasies about threat of gay sex in the military.  The out general in question is Brigadier General Tammy Smith who is pictured above with her wife Tracey Hepner.  Here are highlights from Think Progress on the development:

Tammy Smith has been promoted to the rank of brigadier general in a private ceremony today, making her the first openly gay flag officer to come out while serving in the U.S. military. Less than a year after the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Smith — who served in Afghanistan last year — is now the most senior openly gay public military figure.

Smith discussed her promotion with Stars and Stripes, focusing on the honor of the opportunity rather than her sexual orientation:

“All of those facts are irrelevant,” she said. “I don’t think I need to be focused on that. What is relevant is upholding Army values and the responsibility this carries.” [...]
Stars and Stripes interviewed Smith last summer before the “don’t ask, don’t tell” repeal was finalized. Speaking under a pseudonym, she said she had no plans to come out to her colleagues, but was looking forward to the relief of knowing that her career wouldn’t be threatened if she was found out.

“Finally my partner and I will be able to go out and have drinks together without worrying,” she said then.

Smith’s promotion marks an important milestone, and while the fight for equality continues, the future is bright for the LGBT military community: The Air Force Academy graduated its first openly gay cadets this past May. For her part, Smith has been extremely humble: “For me, the story is about the promotion and the opportunities it brings.”

Military Chaplains Cite Few Problems After DADT Repeal

Remember all of the shrieking and predictions of a mass exodus of members of the armed forces and the chaplain ranks if DADT was repealed?  Shrill hater like Elaine Donnelly and Tony Perkins and others went on and on ad nausea about how DADT repeal would cripple the military and deter meeting recruitment targets. So what has happened during the nine months since DADT repeal?  Absolutely nothing to support the claims of the gay haters.  That's right, nothing.  Yes, there have been a few chaplain retirements, but few have been linked to DADT repeal.  It would seem that the chaplains themselves, not to mention the ranks of the military, are not the religious zealots and bigots that the professional Christian set painted them to be.  The Virginian Pilot reports on the fact that DADT repeal continues to be a non-event outside the ranks of hate groups like Family Research Council and the worse Kool-Aid drinking elements of the GOP's Christofascist base.  Here are highlights:

WRIGHTSTOWN, N.J. - Col. Timothy Wagoner has been an Air Force chaplain for 20 years, serving a denomination — the Southern Baptists — that rejects same-sex relationships.  Yet here he was at the chapel he oversees, watching supportively as an airman and his male partner celebrated a civil union ceremony.  "I wouldn't miss it," Wagoner said at the McGuire Air Force Base chapel, days later. "I don't feel I'm compromising my beliefs ... I'm supporting the community."

Wagoner didn't officiate at the ceremony — he couldn't go quite that far. But his very presence at the gathering was a marker of how things have changed for active-duty clergy in the nine months since the "don't ask, don't tell" policy was repealed and gays could serve openly.

Prior to repeal, various conservative groups and individuals — including many conservative retired chaplains — warned that repeal would trigger an exodus of chaplains whose faiths consider homosexual activity to be sinful. In fact, there's been no significant exodus — perhaps two or three departures of active-duty chaplains linked to the repeal.
Moreover, chaplains or their civilian coordinators from a range of conservative faiths told The Associated Press they knew of virtually no serious problems thus far involving infringement of chaplains' religious freedom or rights of conscience.  "To say the dust has settled would be premature," said Air Force Col. Gary Linsky, a Roman Catholic priest who oversees 50 fellow chaplains in the Air Mobility Command. "But I've received no complaints from chaplains raising concerns that their ministries were in any way conflicted or constrained."

Wagoner would not have been willing to officiate at the June 23 civil union ceremony at the McGuire chapel, nor would his Catholic or Mormon colleagues. But he had no problem with another member of his team, Navy Chaplain Kay Reeb of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, doing so.

Reeb, who will be will leaving the Navy in a few weeks after 20 years as a chaplain, held a couple of pre-ceremony consultations with the couple — Tech. Sgt. Erwynn Umali and civilian Will Behrens — and was impressed by their commitment to one another.

On hand at the chapel were the couple's family and friends, several gay-rights activists, and Sgt. Elizabeth Garcia, the chaplain's assistant who handled logistical arrangements. And then there was Wagoner, whose denomination preaches that homosexuality is sinful and is "not a valid alternative lifestyle."  "As a Southern Baptist, why was I here? I was here to lend support," Wagoner said. "I was here supporting Airman Umali. I've worked with him. He's a comrade in arms."

He [Archbishop Timothy Broglio of the Archdiocese for the Military Services] concurred with the estimates that only a handful of chaplains have left the military because of the repeal. He said "two or three" Catholic chaplains had resigned their commissions in recent months, and guessed that repeal may have been a factor though they didn't cite that specifically.

Another conservative denomination with a large contingent of chaplains — 114 on active duty — is the Assemblies of God.  Scott McChrystal, a retired Army chaplain who oversees them, said the concerns that preceded repeal had not been borne out.

Bishop James Magness, the coordinator for about 75 active-duty and reserve Episcopal chaplains, said he'd heard a common, positive verdict about repeal from his more conservative Catholic, Mormon and Southern Baptist colleagues.

"The whole argument about religious liberty is so incredibly uninformed, and inflamed by some of the very conservative legal groups," Magness said. "In reality, there's been very little if any of the services forcing any ministerial activity on a chaplain against his or her will."

What likely frightens the gay haters the most is the real likelihood that as chaplains from conservative denominations become more familiar with gays and same sex couples,  they will change their perceptions on gay relationships and ultimately gay marriage.  Familiarity breeds not just tolerance but acceptance.  Nothing would hurt the bank accounts of hate groups more than having military chaplains counter their anti-gay message.

Adm. Mike Mullen to Headline SLDN Anniversary of DADT's End

Elaine Donnelly's and Tony Perkins' heads must be exploding at the news that retired Admiral Mike Mullen - former head of the Joints Chiefs - will be headlining the SLDN event celebrating the end of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.  To listen to Donnelly and Perkins one would think America is on the verge of collapse now that gays are allowed to serve openly in our military.  Never mind that much of the original founding and training of the nation's army traces back to a gay many who helped the United States win independence from Great Britain (a topic I will write more about soon on this blog and in a VEER Magazine column).  The reality is that none of the horrors that the Christofascists predicted have come to pass with the demise of DADT.  Indeed, the only thing that did happen was that the hate merchants like Perkins and Donnelly can no longer point to DADT as evidence that their anti-gay bigotry is justified.  Metro Weekly looks at the coming celebration and Admiral Mullen's role in it.  Here are some excerpts:

On Sept. 18, retired Admiral Mike Mullen, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will join Servicemembers Legal Defense Network aboard the USS Intrepid in New York City to mark the one-year anniversary of the end of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the group is telling supporters today.

In an email being sent to supporters today, SLDN executive director Aubrey Sarvis wrote of the fundraising event, "This historic and emotional event presents a unique -- indeed, a once in a lifetime -- opportunity to reinforce the meaningful part that Admiral Mullen played in the DADT repeal process."

Mullen took the lead on making the case to Congress to repeal DADT, telling the Senate Armed Services Committee on Feb. 2, 2010, that he supported repeal -- and made a moral case for doing so.

"Speaking for myself and myself only, it is my personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do," he told the committee. "No matter how I look at this issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy that forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens. For me, personally, it comes down to integrity: Theirs as individuals and ours as an institution."

Of the troops, Mullen added: "I also believe that the great young men and women of our military can and would accommodate such a change. I never underestimate their ability to adapt."

The event, which SLDN spokesman Zeke Stokes says will be a fundraiser for SLDN, will be the lead event of a week of events by the group to mark the anniversary.

How Marriage Inequality Fans Bullying and Homophobia

I have long argued that the far right and the Christofascists in particular eagerly support laws that discriminate against LGBT citizens because such laws allow them to point to the laws as proof that their religious based hate and bigotry is mainstream and correct.  Hence the Christianist struggle against the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and opposition by "godly Christians" to every law that would ban anti-gay discrimination in the work place, in housing and accommodations, etc.   The more the laws discriminate against gays, the happier the Christofascists will be.  This same phenomenon carries over into the struggle for same sex marriage.  While the National Organization for Marriage ("NOM") disingenuously claims it is trying to "protect marriage" the fact that NOM and its allies are increasingly pushing the "ex-gay" myth and the fraudulent work of Paul Cameron, the more clear it becomes that the agenda is something else far beyond "protecting marriage."  It's about fanning homophobia and setting an atmosphere where anti-gay bullying is seen as perfectly proper.  After all, if the law deems gays as inferior, then bullies can feel justified in their abuse of LGBT individuals.  A piece in Huffington Post looks at how this legalized discrimination creates support for rampant homophobia and the deadly bullying that goes hand in hand with it.  Here are some highlights which seem equally applicable in America:

On May 17 we marked the International Day Against Homophobia (IDAHO). It reminded me of the president of Ireland's recent address, speaking at a youth conference in March. President Higgins spoke of the "appalling, destructive reality of homophobia."

President Higgins went on to state, "The idea that any young person could be driven, not just to lower self-esteem, exclusion, isolation, loneliness, but self-destruction itself, is an appalling blight on a society." His words are chilling. His words are true. The president was deservedly commended for his condemnation of the harsh actuality we face as a society. But we're missing something.

Bullying comes about through a lack of empathy inside, displayed outwardly as intolerance. Anti-gay bullying and the denial of marriage equality are not mutually exclusive in that sense. People are bullied because they're perceived as different. We blame the bully, possibly the parents. We want to hold someone accountable. But we need to look at the wider picture. We need to consider the fact that the law treats citizens differently. The law perceives some of us differently. The bullies aren't blind. Whose lead are they following?

The Constitution of Ireland sets out our bill of rights. Article 40.1 makes a guarantee that "[a]ll citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law." And therein lies the problem. The problem is the fact that where the issue of marriage equality is concerned, the emphasis is placed on our gender, on our sexual orientation, whereas marriage laws should be about us as human beings, as "human persons," in line with Article 40.1.

The law doesn't embrace who they are, not fully. Article 40.1 becomes conditionally operational and is precluded from being relied upon in certain circumstances. The family provision, Article 41, goes one step further and even operates to deny a right: the right of marriage. What message is this sending down the line? It's a very strong message. It comes from on high. It comes from the top. It comes from the very document our heroes of history fought to establish, for Ireland, for the people, for all of us.

We're a progressive country. We pride ourselves on embracing all types of people. Why, then, do we stop short of embracing all types of families? How can we teach these youngsters to accept themselves when we know they're going to grow up without full acceptance from society, from the law? The mainstream, and indeed the law, is not reflecting equality. It's not reflecting reality. It's excluding certain people, and it is having a damaging effect.

As I said, the enemies of the LGBT community understand the importance of the law treating us differently.  It sends a strong message in support of bigotry and discrimination.  All based ultimately on religion.  Something all of us are supposed to be able to practice as we wish.  Until anti-gay laws are eliminated and marriage equality is allowed nationwide, the promise of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution remains a farce and America is a fraud when it claims to champion freedom of religion.  It doesn't.  It champions a fear and hated based version of Christianity.

Will Obama "Evolve" Further on Gay Marriage?

Personally, I suspect Barack Obama doesn't do anything that isn't motivated by political calculation.   And when it comes to the issue of same sex marriage, it's all political calculation rather than equality under the law and the U. S. Constitution.  However, Obama may find that the train has left the station on the issue - especially in the minds of younger voters - and that he may have no choice but to get fully on board and cease the double speak of leaving marriage rights to the states.  That mealy mouthed position is akin to saying that states can decide to reimpose segregation (something that would likely be embraced by "godly Christians" in Bible Belt states).  One is either a full citizen of the United States or one is not.  Currently in a significant majority of states, LGBT Americans are second class citizens unless they are living in states like Virginia, in which case they are fourth class citizens.  Thus, some such as Ted Olson believe that Obama will be pressed to make marriage equality a national rather than state decision.  This, of course, terrifies the Christofascists who seek to impose their Christianist version of Sharia law on all citizens.  Here are highlights from an article in the Washington Post that looks at Obama's likely predicament:

Supporters and critics of President Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage agree on one thing: He may not be finished evolving on the subject.   Despite his comments that he thinks the matter should be left to the states, many gay rights advocates strongly believe that it must be dealt with nationally — and that Obama is quietly on their side. Conservative critics of the president suspect the same, citing this as one way the president might tack left if reelected.

And some Obama supporters who are uncomfortable with same-sex marriage fear that in a second term, he would come under enormous pressure to back efforts to impose the legalization of such unions at the federal level.

“I can tell you without a doubt there’s a lot of fear right now from religious communities . . . about where it’s all going to go.”  [said the Rev. Joel Hunter, a spiritual adviser to the president who opposes same-sex marriage]

In particular, they are worried that the president’s preference for state-by-state recognition will give way to the view that same-sex marriage is a guaranteed right under the Constitution. That issue is at the heart of a case that could come before the Supreme Court in its term beginning in October: It involves Proposition 8, a voter-approved California constitutional amendment that bans gay marriage.

Obama opposed Proposition 8. But if the court accepts the case, it could ask the administration for its view on whether marriage is a fundamental right that cannot be withheld from gay couples. Such a finding could sweep away state decisions on same-sex marriage, as well as the bans in 30 state constitutions.

“He’ll have to decide whether he believes the Constitution recognizes gays’ or lesbians’ equality as far as marriage is concerned,” said Theodore B. Olson, a Republican former solicitor general who is a lead lawyer challenging Proposition 8. “That’s not reconcilable with leaving it up to the states.”

Before he announced his support for same-sex marriage, Obama ended restrictions against gays serving openly in the military, and his Justice Department said it would no longer defend in court the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which bans federal recognition of same-sex unions. The administration said the law violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution, an argument that some say conflicts with the view that states should decide.

 The Obama campaign is making same-sex marriage an election issue. It announced plans Wednesday to reach out to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender voters and to use the issue to paint a stark contrast with the president’s presumptive Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, who supports passing a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

 “It’s to me very clear and unqualified, and not up for debate, that the route that this is ultimately going . . . is going to be to recognize justice and equality,” said Chad Griffin, a Democratic fundraiser and incoming president of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group. “I expect that our federal judiciary will side with the side of equality and justice, and I hope the Justice Department will continue to file in the way that they’ve filed in the DOMA case.”

Marine Kiss: Time for the GOP to Kiss "the Gold Old Days" Goodbye

I've looked at the furor amongst the Kool-Aid drinker set that the kiss between Marine Sgt. Brandon Morgan and his boyfriend Dalan Wells after a Facebook photo of their reuniting went viral. It's the type of scene that will play out increasingly now that the religious based discrimination policy known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is on the trash heap of history where it belongs. And the majority of Americans seem fine with the death of DADT. Except for the Christofascists and their puppets in the Republican Party (both of which are far too numerous in Virginia). Leonard Pitts has a great column that looks at the changing world that the GOP needs to embrace. Here are some excerpts:

A few days ago, a U.S. Marine returned to the States after six months in Afghanistan. Spotting his new honey among the people waiting, he rushed forward and planted an enthusiastic kiss -- their first kiss, as it turns out. A friend snapped a picture and posted it on Facebook. And all heck broke loose.

Under other circumstances, it would have been an event noteworthy only for being ordinary, a scene we've seen played out a million times. But we've never seen it like this. That's because Sgt. Brandon Morgan's "honey" is a guy named Dalan Wells and that photo of them playing same-sex tonsil hockey thus manages to simultaneously affirm and subvert a cherished bit of patriotic iconography: the returning serviceman being greeted by the one he loves.

The image forces us to see an old thing in a new way. It is a sign of the times -- jarringly so for some.

That's why it went viral, why it has made international headlines and sparked thousands of comments on message boards. You can probably predict the contents without bothering to read them. On the one hand are best wishes for the happy couple and gratitude for Morgan's service. On the other, claims that the picture induces nausea or proves the country is going to hell at warp 9.

One individual phrased it thusly on a Miami Herald message board: "Sick, degrading, and deviant behavior. these low life's (sic) need to be dishonorably discharged from the Marines."

Indeed, at least one GOP candidate -- the reliably entertaining Rick Santorum -- has promised, if elected, to reinstate the military's demeaning "don't ask, don't tell" policy, under which gay people were considered good enough to risk their lives for this country but not good enough to be open about their sexual identities while so doing.

That promise is part of a breathtaking Republican lurch -- not just to the right, as a number of pundits have framed it, but to the past. On issue after issue -- gay rights, contraception, labor rights -- the goal seems to be to return the nation to the supposed tranquility of its Beaver Cleaver years, before Martin Luther King Jr. had his dream, before Betty Friedan wrote her book, before Rock Hudson was gay, before everything changed.

[Y]ou cannot put the toothpaste back in the tube. Or, as Fleetwood Mac once put it, "yesterday's gone, yesterday's gone." And the sooner the Grand Old Party concedes that and stops pandering to the bitterness and fear of dead-enders and hard-liners still desperately clinging to the broken remains of Beaver Cleaver's white picket fence, the better off we all will be.

There is something bracing in the very publicness and unselfconsciousness of that lip-lock. Coming after years of government imposed silence and government mandated lies of omission, it feels not unlike sunlight and fresh air blasting into a room that has been dark and stuffy for years. And it suggests four words of advice to those discomfited by this newborn change. Get used to it.

Anti-gay Bigotry Alive and Well in Hampton Roads

While many have applauded the photo of Marine Sgt. Brandon Morgan kissing his partner Dalan Wells upon Morgan's return from a deployment to Afghanistan, the knuckle dragging Neanderthals and Bible beating Christofascists in Hampton Roads reacting to a story in the Virginian Pilot have demonstrated why the region remains a cultural and economic backwater that is non-appealing to progressive and innovative businesses. From the comments, it's obvious that many of those leaving homophobic comments (i) want special rights from far right Christianists and (ii) hold open hostility to some of the concepts enshrined in the nation's founding documents. Concepts such as this one:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Thankfully, the majority of the comments are supportive of Morgan and Wells, so perhaps there's hope for the region as the nasty bigots die off. Here's a sampling of the mindset that shows that Hampton Roads is still a bigoted backwater:

I cant wait until we see the serviceman kissing his sheep or blow up doll on the pier without discrimination.

Thank goodness he wasn't waering lipstick and carrying a purse. Semper Fi?????????????????????

Absolutely disgusting

Yep, these are the same folks who probably voted for members of the Virginia GOP who support invasive vaginal ultrasounds for women, want to buy unlimited numbers of guns, and view women as chattel. They probably go to church on Sundays too and congratulate themselves on their godliness. Here are highlights from the story that prompted the homophobic batshitery:

[L]ast weekend a friend posted a photo of their embrace on the Gay Marines page on Facebook. Morgan, in desert camouflage, is seen wrapping his legs around Dalan Wells' legs. A large American flag, draped floor to ceiling inside an aircraft hangar at a Marine base in Hawaii, is in the background.

Photos of exuberant servicemen and homecomings aren't new. But this one, taken some five months after the repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy prohibiting gay servicemen from openly acknowledging their sexuality, is among the first showing a gay active duty serviceman in uniform kissing his partner at a homecoming.

More than 40,000 people have clicked the "like" button for the photo on Facebook, and thousands have shared it with their friends on several social media sites. Journalists are inundating Morgan with interview requests, and supporters from as far away as Italy are flooding his inbox with messages of thanks and encouragement.

Many of the more than 10,000 comments on the Gay Marine page's posting of the photo page celebrated the image. Luis Perez wrote "Best to you and your loved ones. You inspire so many people with your bravery, including this wonderful homecoming."

Few disparaged Morgan for kissing a man. The critical comments generally questioned the appropriateness of a Marine in uniform wrapping his legs around a partner.

Feedback from fellow Marines has been positive too, Morgan said, though he has some regret for jumping on Wells. He called that "excess amount of public display of affection." His superiors have talked to him about it, he said, and he agrees he went a little too far. The Marines have rules, even at homecomings, Morgan said.

Meanwhile, via the Seattle Post-Intelligencer here's a photo from the homecoming of the aircraft carrier USS Stennis on Friday, March 2, 2012 in Bremerton, Washington, as the USS Stennis returned to home port after a seven-month deployment in which the aircraft carrier launched the last Navy air mission over Iraq and more than 1,000 flights over Afghanistan.

The Neanderthals need to crawl back into their caves and under the rocks where they belong. Like it or not, the world and society are moving on.

Quote Of The Day - Sgt. Brandon Morgan

Like the photo of a returning female sailor returning to port in Virginia Beach being kissed by her partner not so long ago, the photo of Sergeant Brandon Morgan kissing his partner (I posted about the homecoming recently) has become emblematic of the new U. S. military where gay and lesbians can proudly serve their country without hiding who they are and constantly fearing witch hunts and forced discharge. In this region with a huge military personnel presence, the repeal of DADT has been a wonderful development.

Brandon Morgan spoke with The Daily Beast and it is instructive that like so many of us in the LGBT community for a period of time he threw himself into religion in an effort to deny that God had made him gay. Having engaged in that pattern myself for roughly 37 years, I fully understand why so many of us try to deny our reality. I also know all too well the amount of wasted energy and hidden internal strife (and outright self-hatred) that such denial engenders. Here are some highlights from The Daily Beast interview:

When Marine Sgt. Brandon Morgan, 25, returned home to Hawaii on Feb. 22 from a deployment in Afghanistan, he found partner Dalan Wells, 38, waiting for him. When a friend snapped a photo of their welcome-home kiss and posted it online, it quickly went viral and has been viewed tens of thousands of times on blogs and Facebook. It has been interpreted as a sign of a more open military in the wake of the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Sergeant Morgan tells Matthew DeLuca how the photo came to be.

I used to be a very, very fanatical Christian, not that there’s anything wrong with being a Christian, but my beliefs, my core beliefs, definitely have changed as I’ve grown up because of the way I live, the way I am. I joined the Marine Corps because I felt I wanted to be the voice of God in the Marine Corps.

I’m pretty sure people very close to me like my mother, my father, and my sister always knew that there was something different about me. I was always at the church, and had those values, had that idea that homosexuality was wrong according to the Christian faith.

Eventually, nature comes out.

I was married at one point to a woman, but that was a huge mistake, because looking through my faith beliefs I mistook a friendship and thought it was love, which it wasn’t. It took so many mistakes in my life to have the courage to know who I was.

Dalan works on the base and we actually met at the Single Marine and Sailor Program. I walked in and I saw him, and I have to say it was love at first sight. I’ve loved that man ever since I first saw him.

Dalan and I have known each other for four years, and we’ve been really good friends. He helped me through the divorce. As time went on and we were ramping up to deploy, I asked him out, as I knew who I was but couldn’t come out under the DOD policy [“don’t ask, don’t tell”]. He said no because there is a significant age difference.

Every email he sent me I would read a hundred times. Weeks just flew by and I couldn’t wait to get home, and I was like, “When I get home, I’m going to give him the best kiss I can think of.”

All my superiors are happy for me that I finally have a love, someone to be with, that I’m not always hanging out at the single Marine center on the weekend. I believe that the general consensus was that the military didn’t want this, but the people who say that can’t really speak on the behalf of my Marines. My Marines, my family, have welcomed me, they’ve been very happy for me. We’re a family. They care for me the way they always have.

I was a little worried, to be honest. I was afraid that some people’s views of me might change. But that was just my own personal misgiving, a fear I had to overcome. I should have had more faith in my Marines than that. I’m not always right, and I was very glad I was wrong about that.

No doubt this beautiful story of love and two souls finding each other will have Elaine Donnelly, Tony Perkins, Maggie Gallagher and similar hate merchants in convulsions with sheets of spittle flying across the room. But, love is love and who are we to presume that God, the creator, Allah, or whoever made a mistake when he/she made some of us gay and allowed us to find pure, sincere and unselfish love with some of the same sex? To me, it's those who question God's creation who are the blasphemers, not LGBT individuals.