Skip to content

Obama is not our advocate

October 14, 2010

Obama the Action FigureThis post is not about whether or not Obama has been a good president, just whether or not he’s lived up to his campaign promise of being a “fierce advocate” for LGBT rights. Here’s a hint: he hasn’t.

His administration decided today to appeal the recent court decision that ruled the military’s ludicrous “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy unconstitutional. As the New York Times reports,

In a 48-page court filing, Clifford L. Stanley, the under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness, argued that the military, particularly in wartime, should not be required to “suddenly and immediately restructure a major personnel policy that has been in place for years.” Mr. Stanley said the injunction would disrupt efforts to prepare for a more orderly repeal of the policy.

“The stakes here are so high, and the potential harm so great, that caution is in order,” he said.

This reasoning is completely specious. Many other countries have allowed gays and lesbians into the military without any ill effects, and it’s not as if the U.S. military has some byzantine policy set up it would have trouble dismantling. It kicks out service members who admit to being gay and doesn’t allow others to join, but… it could just stop.

Obama campaigned on getting rid of DADT, and even though today he took active steps to keep the policy in place, he’s still making empty promises about doing away with it. In a town hall meeting where he said he agreed that everyone should have the right to serve,  he added this:

“It has to be done in a way that is orderly, because we are involved in a war right now. But this is not a question of whether the policy will end. This policy will end, and it will end on my watch. But I do have an obligation to make sure that I’m following some of the rules. I can’t simply ignore laws that are out there. I’ve got to work to make sure that they are changed.”

As Dan Savage points out, it’s not unheard of for the Department of Justice to let these kinds of rulings stand without appeal when the law is an unjust one. DADT has been ruled unconstitutional on what appears to be solid legal ground, and it’s a huge waste of resources for us to expel qualified service members and to deny others when we sorely need them. And while public opinion is never enough to justify discrimination, it is a good indicator of where people stand, and a solid majority of the population agrees it’s time for DADT to end (54% for repeal vs. 35% against).

It’s heartbreaking how quickly the Democrats have expended their political capital without addressing any major LGBT issues. We got federal hate crimes protection that’s barely used, and some federal employees can now get certain benefits for this partners, but that’s absolute peanuts compared to what we’re still waiting for. With the party facing heavy losses as the midterm elections roll around, I can only marvel and how little political progress we’ve made.

9 Comments leave one →
  1. October 15, 2010 12:01 am

    It’s all the political shell game. He wants the law to stay till congress can pass a law giving the executive branch the power to to repeal it. So he can take all the credit for its demise. Sad but true.

    • October 15, 2010 12:04 am

      Interesting theory, but I don’t think that’s his goal at all. In fact, I don’t think congress could approve that kind of law, but I’m sure one of my many lawyer friends will hop in to let us know.

  2. October 15, 2010 12:18 am

    I can’t lie and say i voted for him, but I wasn’t disappointed when he won either. I had a lot of hope for the things that were promised. So far I gotta say…. he is just another politician.

  3. Daniel Sharpe permalink
    October 15, 2010 2:24 am

    For what it is worth, the actual text of the motion requests a 6-week stay to complete the formal military guidelines for soldiers. In short, they are asking to wait until 12/1/10 when the official report on new military code of conduct and anti-discrimination policy is drafted … literally a manual for enforcing non-discrimination as part of the army handbook. President Obama ordered the review and new policy draft back in February. Not arguing – just pointing out what the DOJ is formally requesting in court.

  4. Dante permalink
    October 18, 2010 7:07 pm

    Random. I didn’t know if you’d seen the Glee episode “Duets”. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on the treatment of gays in that episode.

    • October 18, 2010 10:48 pm

      A request?! How can I say no? I’ll do a post on it in the near future. But in brief, I think the main characters showed they’re cowardly (except the new kid) but I was glad Finn called Kurt out on his stalker-ish behavior from last season.

  5. Dan Hall permalink
    October 20, 2010 1:33 pm

    The Military is accepting applications from gay men and woman!

    Translation; Obama/Democrats need votes on November 6th…

    Reality; Gays will “never” be allowed to serve in the US military and “Obama knows that”!

  6. October 29, 2010 11:56 pm

    Ah, our paths meet again. I had a somewhat different take on what Obama’s motivations are (hint hint bigotry):

    Ironic that he’s hiding behind the same argument I at one point made for why Proposition 8 shouldn’t have been over turned by the courts. Of course, he supported the overturning, so it can’t even be said that he’s not hypocritical.


  1. “Glee” grows up… a bit « Gay in Public

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: