SkygreenLeopard
|
Obama reaffirms will end 'don't ask, don't tell' | Quote: | WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama reaffirmed his campaign pledge to end the ban on homosexuals serving openly in the military in a speech Saturday, but offered no timetable or specifics for acting on that promise.
He acknowledged to a cheering crowd that some policy changes he promised on the campaign trail are not coming as quickly as they expected.
"I will end 'don't ask-don't tell,'" Obama said to a standing ovation from the crowd of about 3,000 at the annual dinner of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay civil rights advocacy group.
The law was passed by Congress in 1993 and signed by President Bill Clinton, who also promised to repeal the ban on homosexuals in the military but was blunted by opposition in the military and Congress. Obama said he's working with Pentagon and congressional leaders on ending the policy.
"We should not be punishing patriotic Americans who have stepped forward to serve the country," Obama said. "We should be celebrating their willingness to step forward and show such courage ... especially when we are fighting two wars."
Obama said it was no secret "our progress may be taking longer than you'd like." He followed this by asking supporters to trust his administration's course.
"I also appreciate that many of you don't believe progress has come fast enough," Obama said. "Do not doubt the direction we are heading and the destination we will reach."
Some advocates said they already have heard Obama's promises — they just want to hear a timeline. Cleve Jones, a pioneer activist and creator of the AIDS Memorial Quilt, said Obama delivered a brilliant speech, but added "it lacked the answer to our most pressing question, which is when."
"He repeated his promises that he's made to us before, but he did not indicate when he would accomplish these goals and we've been waiting for a while now," said Jones, national co-chair of a major gay-rights rally expected to draw thousands of gay and lesbian activists to the National Mall on Sunday.
Obama also called on Congress to repeal the Defense Of Marriage Act, which limits how state, local and federal bodies can recognize partnerships and determine benefits. He also called for a law to extend benefits to domestic partners.
He expressed strong support for the Human Rights Campaign agenda — ending discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people — but stopped short of laying out a detailed plan for how to get there.
"My expectation is that when you look back on these years you will look back and see a time when we put a stop against discrimination ... whether in the office or the battlefield," Obama said.
Obama's political energies are focused on managing two wars, the economic crisis and his attempt to reform the health care system.
His message Saturday was one of unity and support for a group that has funneled large amounts of money into Democratic coffers.
"I'm here with a simple message: I'm here with you in that fight," Obama said.
Obama also addressed those who do not favor advancing gay rights. A recent Pew Research Center poll asked about homosexual behavior, and about half said it is morally wrong. "There's still laws to change and there's still hearts to open," Obama said.
Since Obama took office in January, some advocates have complained that Obama has not followed through on promises on issues they hold dear and has not championed their causes from the White House, including ending the ban on gays serving openly in the military and pushing tough nondiscrimination policies.
Richard Socarides, who advised Clinton's administration on gay and lesbian policy, said Obama delivered "a strong speech in tone, although only vaguely reassuring in content."
"The president and Nobel winner came and paid his respects, but tomorrow many will ask: What's his plan, what's his timetable?"
In the past, Obama has urged the gay-rights community to trust him. In June, he pointed to some initial efforts, such as a presidential memorandum he issued that expands some federal benefits to same-sex partners.
Obama publicly has previously committed himself to repealing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that allows gays and lesbians to serve in the military as long as they don't disclose their sexual orientation or act on it. But Obama hasn't taken any concrete steps urging Congress to rescind the policy, and his national security adviser last weekend would only say that Obama will focus on overturning it "at the right time."
Obama also pledged during the campaign to work for repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. But lawyers in his administration defended the law in a court brief. White House aides said they were only doing their jobs to back a law that was already on the books.
The gay community is somewhat split as to whether Obama should be expected to produce results right away.
The Human Rights Campaign, which invited Obama to speak at its dinner Saturday night, holds out hope of seeing more action.
"We have never had a stronger ally in the White House. Never," Joe Solmonese, the group's president, said at the dinner before Obama spoke. In an interview, he said the Obama administration has been working with the group on a range of issues "on an almost weekly and sometimes daily basis."
Obama noted new hate-crimes legislation, which would make it a federal crime to assault people because of their sexual orientation. Approved by the House this week, Obama predicted it would pass the Senate and promised to sign it into law. |
|
coastie
|
this will be interesting.
|
SkygreenLeopard
|
| coastie wrote: | | this will be interesting. |
Something that should have been done a long time ago. Now if he would only man up a bit more on gay-rights and do the right thing. This civil-unions bull won't cut it.
|
coastie
|
I think SUN, if you look at polls - you'll find that most americans are opposed to gay marriage. Most (and most importantly - military people), are opposed to gays serving openly in the military.
Heterosexual members are not allowed to shower with heterosexual service members of the opposite gender, Heterosexual members will be very uncomfortable showering with known homosexuals.
Morale and discipline in the armed forces will suffer.
Why is it necessary to change the definition of marriage to accomodate a minority point of view?
|
doomster
|
I'm with Coastie on this one.....
|
flyupsidedown
|
SAR: | Quote: | | Now if he would only man up a bit more on gay-rights and do the right thing |
Funny you should use that phrase "man up", and "do the right thing". Man-up should probably be changed to 'girlie up', and doing the right thing would have to be based upon some foundation of moral clarity beyond just the hopes of the gay lobby and NAMBLA. Americans as a whole, both Christians and non do not believe it a natural alternative 'sexual orientation'. Doesn't matter if they riot in the streets or not. It is physiologically harmful and unnatural. Obama has an agenda to keep 'sexually deviant oriented' individuals as a major part of his party's constituency. So be it. It does not make it right or wholesome or good. It isn't.
|
Outsider
|
One thing is for certain, if things got serious enough and the military needed the cannon fodder bad enough, the sex issue would quickly become a non issue both to the American people and the military.
|
lemontrail
|
| flyupsidedown wrote: | SAR: | Quote: | | Now if he would only man up a bit more on gay-rights and do the right thing |
Funny you should use that phrase "man up", and "do the right thing". Man-up should probably be changed to 'girlie up', and doing the right thing would have to be based upon some foundation of moral clarity beyond just the hopes of the gay lobby and NAMBLA. Americans as a whole, both Christians and non do not believe it a natural alternative 'sexual orientation'. Doesn't matter if they riot in the streets or not. It is physiologically harmful and unnatural. Obama has an agenda to keep 'sexually deviant oriented' individuals as a major part of his party's constituency. So be it. It does not make it right or wholesome or good. It isn't. |
Please, provide your sources for this information.
|
lemontrail
|
| coastie wrote: |
Why is it necessary to change the definition of marriage to accomodate a minority point of view? |
You've made an inappropriate preseumption in assuming that the heterosexual conception of marriage in the only correct one. It begs the question.
|
coastie
|
lookee around lemontrail, and you're right.
until 2009, most sources defined marriage as between a man and a woman.
now, many are gender neutral.
We're all entitled to our opinions - my OPINION is that marriage should be between a man and a woman - you and others are entitled to your opinions.
Hell.. within a few years, they're liable to tell me that green is yellow. I'm still gonna call it green.
|
doomster
|
| coastie wrote: | lookee around lemontrail, and you're right.
until 2009, most sources defined marriage as between a man and a woman.
now, many are gender neutral.
We're all entitled to our opinions - my OPINION is that marriage should be between a man and a woman - you and others are entitled to your opinions.
Hell.. within a few years, they're liable to tell me that green is yellow. I'm still gonna call it green. |
Agreed again! 
|
flyupsidedown
|
lemonfreeze: | Quote: | | Please, provide your sources for this information. |
Can't remember the name of the book, and I gave it away to a friend to read 10+ yrs ago, but the physiological problems related to the homosexual lifestyle are numerous. For one, the anus is designed for 'things' to pass out not in and is thinnly membraned for a specificly designed task. The vagina in contrast is thickly skinned and perfectly designed for heterosexual sex among other things. Copulation of the other kind tears the intestinal membrane allowing diseases to pass readily. This type of sex also has an immuno-suppressive affect encouraging the incubation of disease. This is one of the reasons, along with the promiscuity that accompanies the lifestyle, that HIV was so rapidly spread.
We won't even get into the weirdness of two bearded hunks kissing in public. Nothing much sweet about that. It is only natural to the unnatural minded. If you are so-minded, so be it. I watched part of the LGBT lesbian, gay, bisexual, transexual rally on C-span the other night. I'm not impressed. They are still some of the most profane, ugly spirited, common people when they show themselves. There is the act, for heterosexual consumption promoted by hollywood, and then there is the reality of their profane and ungodly worldviews. Not sorry, not convinced, not buying.
|
|
|
|