Secretary Clinton extends Same Sex Benefits

[Apollo]

I'm sorry. Without equal rights, rights that ELDERLY MEN in the US Senate worked for, Obama's prospects for a career would have been being a porter or a shoe-shine man.

Human rights are not to be traded like pork barrel projects. I highly recommend his post by google.

But Obama's got his rights -- he's set, he's home free, he had affirmative action helping him along the way -- nothing wrong with that. But what about us? Are we not as good as blacks? Are we not good enough to die for our nation? Are we not good enough to marry?

Would you have our rights dealt away so cheaply, for political convenience? Seems so. You're ready -- perhaps even eager -- to wait for generations to die off so you can INHERIT (or so you think) your God damned God-Given rights! That's the easy way out, the slacker's way out (no offense, honest, LL).

Did Rosa Parks wait? Did MLK wait? I'm not willing to wait, not any more. If Obama won't do it, he can kiss my ass -- I'll vote for someone else in 2012.

IF you don't want to wait, then get out in the streets and protest. Thats what Rosa Parks and MLK did, they didn't sit on their ass on a message board complaining the president hasn't done anything. They stood up for their rights, and they forced the president to act faster than he probably would have.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

^I have not noticed Obama showing any concern with promoting black people

That's because it's imaginary, more of the usual hot air from our resident talking head.

IF you don't want to wait, then get out in the streets and protest. Thats what Rosa Parks and MLK did, they didn't sit on their ass on a message board complaining the president hasn't done anything. They stood up for their rights, and they forced the president to act faster than he probably would have.

Girrrrrl you mean I gotta be like, doin' stuff and sheeeeeit? But girrrrl it's mo' fun' tuh just blame da negroes and call it a wrap. My fanguhs be werkin' ovuhtime on dis typin' machine tuh lay the blame errywhere else.

I love hearing about homophobic blacks from people who do absolutely nothing to reach out to the black community. But....like, they should totally, like, ya know, like, have a sisterhood with us, 'cuz, like, they wanted rights and stuff and they got 'em and, like, we want rights and stuff too so, like, why won't they, like, give 'em to us? Ya know?

 

[MystikWizard]

The funny thing is, and I know I'll catch heat for this, but at the same time, I don't really care since I am always pretty blunt with my comments and speak my mind ....

But what I think is somewhat amusing about all of this is that we see everyone all up in arms over Gay Marriage. Once Gay Marriage becomes legal in all states, I dare say that probably the overwhelming majority of people that have posted in this thread, along with other threads voicing their displeasure that it isn't legal yet in all states ... won't be affected by it whatsoever. You'll just go on with your daily lives and find something else to complain about next.

In other words, what my instincts tell me that we really have here, are people who are simply mouthing off about something ... just for the sake of mouthing off and complaining. It's almost as if it gives you some sort of purpose to do so, even though it probably won't be affecting you, personally, at all.

 

[MystikWizard]

I have no doubt you believe that, given your posting history.

I didn't say it for fun. I said it because I do believe it. Someone can feel free to prove me wrong.

Let's see a show of hands (honor system going here) ... of all the posters with immediate plans of getting married, and who would do so tomorrow, if it were legal.

 

[Apollo]

Honey, you don't know me, nor do you know what I have done, do, or will do in the furtherance of gay rights. Here's a hint: it isn't limited to posting semi-naked pix of straight boys on a blog, m'kay?

When I served in the federal government, I was a leader in my regulatory agency's GLOBE (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Employees of the Federal Government) organization. I have done and still do pro-bono photography and graphic design for them, though I'm no longer in government. I have, do, and will continue to attend rallies. I write my elected reps, I write LTE, too. I support (with my vote and money) gay candidates. But that's not enough -- not nearly enough, and I recognize that.

Clearly I can, and will, do more -- and I have been thinking how I can better serve the cause -- I invite constructive suggestions from all. As I stated in an earlier post, something that happened yesterday has deeply changed my beliefs about the unacceptability of gay inrquality.

So, like, what are you doing? What are YOU going to do, other than scour the Web for pix of semi-naked straight boys?



I have no doubt you believe that, given your posting history.

Now don't worry -- there will always be a seat in the back of the bus reserved for you.

Well good for you. At least you put your money where your mouth is. Which is more than I can say for the majority of people here who "won't wait any longer" for gay rights.

Of course, at least you have the option to not "wait any more" Under McCain, we'd be waiting 8 more years, or until congress tried to do something.

And I used to post semi-naked boys on my blog. Which just is there, I forgot about it till you posted a link to it. Ahhh memories of my high school years.

 

[opinterph]

Point well made.

 

[Apollo]

You didn't answer my question: what are you doing to advance gay equality?

Nothing. But I am also not in a urgent need for gay marriage.

I guess once I have graduated college, and settled, I will protest and do my duty like the rest. If full equal rights still haven't come.

Until then, I am gonna focus on college and getting out of my socio economic status (black and poor).

 

[chuck10x]

As far as I could see from the article, This was between the State Department and Clinton.
The letter is awaiting final approval from senior govt. lawyers.
If President Obama was involved in any way why was he not mentioned?
From what I've seen so far, President Obama is waiting to see how well it is received.
If the benefits are well received and public opinion is good, President Obama will give it the stamp of approval. If not, It's Clintons baby.
Though I said I would wait 6 months to say anything about Obamas Presidency, It is becoming clear that he is going on the publics reaction before making any decisions.
If you want any gay issues passed, The wisest thing to do would be to drown out the opposition and remind President Obama of his campaign positions - Loudly.

 

[Apollo]

But it's NOT just about gay marriage, BW, it's about EQUALITY. Marriage is a subset, an outcome of equality -- it's not the prize itself.



Well, suit yourself. But let me caution you: life has a way of fast-forwarding at blinding speed; Our best life-long habits develop when we are young. I say this not to diminish or dismiss you, but rather to give a bit of advice from someone probably double your age. We can all -- all of us -- do so much more. The puzzle I'm facing is exactly what that "more" is.

And I apologize for taunting you about your blog -- it's really none of my God damned business. I hope you accept my apology for being an asshole.

I understand that it is more than just marriage. And I do want more than just marriage, but because of my status, I really can't do much in person. All I can do is sign petitions, and complain on a message board from my room. Thats why I try not to complain at all.

I do want equal rights, thats why I believe I won't just ignore it once I get somewhere in life. Of course, life is random and nothing stays the same, so who knows. I am holding out hope I voted for Obama for a reason, and I am retaining judgement until the next election year.

I understand why you taunted me about the blog, thats why I never got mad about it.

 

[Lostlover]

Lostlover, your post prompted me to attempt to discover more information about whom it is that we should really thank for this policy directive. My quest helped to remind me that everything is interconnected. Ultimately, I don’t know how many people we should thank, but I imagine there are many who may never receive the thanks they deserve. I also imagine that some of them are much closer than we may realize.

Unlike her predecessor, Hillary Clinton deserves our thanks for acting upon this issue in response to a variety of requests from within and without the State Department. These requests include a formal letter from Representative Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI), Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL). During Ms. Clinton’s confirmation hearing, Senator Feingold also asked her “to consider ways to address challenges faced by the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees, particularly relating to domestic partner benefits and State Department policies that make it difficult for the partners of foreign service officers to travel and live at overseas posts.” Also counted among the requests are nearly 2,200 government employees involved in foreign policy who signed a letter to the newly appointed Secretary of State:




It is prudent to assume that the President is not only aware of this new policy directive, but that he has endorsed it. Though I was not successful in finding a citation to prove such assumption, it is more than reasonable. And so, we should thank President Obama.

As President-Elect, Mr. Obama named at least 7 openly gay individuals to serve on his transition team. One of those he appointed was Michael Guest to the National Security Team, Department of State. Mr. Guest, one of only 2 openly gay US Ambassadors to ever serve at that level in the State Department, had repeatedly petitioned former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her senior management team to change policies that apply to same-sex partners of foreign service officers. In 2007, after 26 years of service to the State Department, he resigned in protest.



I think we should join Michael Guest in extending our thanks to everyone who helped make this possible.

Citations available, upon request.​

Thanks for the link. Yes, I forgot to realize maybe some of the people pushing it aren't exactly the top two (Obama and Clinton). I know Jackson, a black female, in Obama's cabinet is a lesbian because of a conversation I overheard where a mom was chastised by her son for making issue of the woman being a lesbian. He said something like "who cares" or "so what".

I'm not usually for appointing token representatives of minorities, especially when they're promoted like Michael Steele was to counter Obama (and yes, it's a set-up. No way in hell can Steele by himself resurrect the party). But visibility seems to help minority groups gain mainstream acceptance.

 

[Lostlover]

I didn't say it for fun. I said it because I do believe it. Someone can feel free to prove me wrong.

Let's see a show of hands (honor system going here) ... of all the posters with immediate plans of getting married, and who would do so tomorrow, if it were legal.

Not tomorrow for me, but I do have a significant other.

Also, if whites operated with the "civil rights ain't for me" mentality we might still have separate water fountains. I don't like hearing about a gay partner not being a voice in handling a hospitalized partner's welfare. That doesn't apply to me now but I find it extremely evil by the hospital and state governments to not recognize their union. (My brother is a medical doctor, I do hear these stories too.)

Meanwhile, the same hospital gives Bertha Faye these rights unquestioned because she popped out 10 kids by Cletus. And they might not even be married, but instead "living together" which is all the rage now in this all of a sudden marriage-concerned America.

In saying that, there's one queen here-you and I know who he is-that bitches about everything. Ignore that coward. He's going straight to hell and he's trying to take as many people with him. And he doesn't represent any gays' interest.

 

[Lostlover]

Nothing. But I am also not in a urgent need for gay marriage.

I guess once I have graduated college, and settled, I will protest and do my duty like the rest. If full equal rights still haven't come.

Until then, I am gonna focus on college and getting out of my socio economic status (black and poor).

It baffles me how a minority can be so indifferent about inequality. And then to BOAST about being indifferent to it.

 

[Apollo]

It baffles me how a minority can be so indifferent about inequality. And then to BOAST about being indifferent to it.

I am not indifferent to inequality, I just dont have the money to be supporting the good fight for inequality.

Sorry if it offends you that I am honest, but that's just me. I am focused on getting through college, and getting a career going. Of course if i went to a big college that had protests and the such, I would totally be involved. But I don't.

Call me what you want, but thats how the world works.

 

[MystikWizard]

Not tomorrow for me, but I do have a significant other.

Also, if whites operated with the "civil rights ain't for me" mentality we might still have separate water fountains. I don't like hearing about a gay partner not being a voice in handling a hospitalized partner's welfare. That doesn't apply to me now but I find it extremely evil by the hospital and state governments to not recognize their union. (My brother is a medical doctor, I do hear these stories too.)

Meanwhile, the same hospital gives Bertha Faye these rights unquestioned because she popped out 10 kids by Cletus. And they might not even be married, but instead "living together" which is all the rage now in this all of a sudden marriage-concerned America.

In saying that, there's one queen here-you and I know who he is-that bitches about everything. Ignore that coward. He's going straight to hell and he's trying to take as many people with him. And he doesn't represent any gays' interest.

Well, I doubt the Hell part (sorry, I'm not religious, at all) , so I personally don't think the individual you reference is necessarily going there, but he can live in misery all he wants and criticize all he wants for attention. If that is his purpose, than so be it. Whatever gets his rocks off, I suppose. But that is precisely why I simply ignore everything he says. Nobody likes a biased, chronic complainer about every little thing under the sun.

But, with that being said, don't necessarily misconstrue my comments. It isn't that I am necessarily ridiculing those with a true interest in getting married. And I must say I didn't know that things were as serious as they may be with your guy. That's great news.

More so, I am simply amused at those who get all fired up over this issue, as if it is something that will drastically affect their own personal lives ... although they don't and never will have intentions of actually getting married.

 

[MCsNo1Fn]

What a shock. Someone other than Obama does something great, and yet he HAS to be given credit when he could give a shit? Get real. Obama doesn't care, and I feel I've wasted my vote last November. Everyone should have known he was too good to be true. He's worthless.

 

[MystikWizard]

What a shock. Someone other than Obama does something great, and yet he HAS to be given credit when he could give a shit? Get real. Obama doesn't care, and I feel I've wasted my vote last November. Everyone should have known he was too good to be true. He's worthless.

Yep. 4 months into the Presidency of a 4 year term, after one of the worst Presidencies of all time, and apparently Obama is "worthless". All because he isn't making Gay Rights the first priority on his Agenda.

Well, no shit. I would never expect any competent President to make Gay Rights his first and foremost priority. Believe it or not, there are other challenges more important than Gay Rights at the moment, that are prioritized accordingly.

And it is a States Issue. That is what I felt when I voted for Ron Paul during the Primaries. And that is how I feel, today. It is NOT an Obama issue. This really has very little to do with Obama, at all.

Hillary Clinton has publicly said she was also against Gay Marriage. You expect to have that with her?

The House and The Senate need to pass Legislation to make that happen and send it to his or her desk, first.

If you want Gay Marriage to be a National Issue, than perhaps your anger is directed at the wrong person, and you should all be getting in contact with your local Congressmen. Do half of you even have the faintest understand how bills become Law in this country?

 

[Lostlover]

Well, I doubt the Hell part (sorry, I'm not religious, at all) , so I personally don't think the individual you reference is necessarily going there, but he can live in misery all he wants and criticize all he wants for attention. If that is his purpose, than so be it. Whatever gets his rocks off, I suppose. But that is precisely why I simply ignore everything he says. Nobody likes a biased, chronic complainer about every little thing under the sun.

But, with that being said, don't necessarily misconstrue my comments. It isn't that I am necessarily ridiculing those with a true interest in getting married. And I must say I didn't know that things were as serious as they may be with your guy. That's great news.

More so, I am simply amused at those who get all fired up over this issue, as if it is something that will drastically affect their own personal lives ... although they don't and never will have intentions of actually getting married.

Well, my boyfriend and I aren't serious serious. But if it did come to that point (and I wouldn't mind if it did), I would like the ability to cement our relationship and have it recognized by the law. I wouldn't want to be hindered by a few uncomfortable bigots hell bent on destroying others' lives.

I'm not really fired up. I believe in Obama believing in equality for the reasons I outlined in this thread (he's smart, educated and raised as an atheist --> less likely to be homophobic IMO). I too know that he has other priorities, but because he has other priorities doesn't mean he can put gay equality on the backburner.

And I'm not really supporting the "it's a state issue" argument now especially after Bush flirted with the idea of adding a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. He went there...

The tone I took from this thread's OP was more of a congratulatory one instead of a fiery one. Like IC07 pointed it, this is all a bit premature.

 

[MystikWizard]

Yes! Imagine! Getting "all fired up" over demanding equality. You don't get it -- or perhaps you do and don't care -- but the right to marriage is a manifestation, a declaration by the State that WE ARE EQUAL IN EVERY WAY. You know, like:

"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." ​

No, I do get it being part of a bigger picture. However, my theory wasn't really so much that the majority of Gays are interested in the actual Marriage, as much as they are interested in being "treated equally".

Like I have explained many times to my family, what we have here is two groups who are looking at this issue like apples and oranges.

We have one group who feels that this is a religious issue, and that is what drives their motivation (or so they claim), to protect the sanctity of marriage.

Then, we have another group who actually views this as a Civil Rights issue. And that's fine.

But no, it isn't an absolute priority of mine that needs to be put first, and yes I feel that Gays who are pressing for this need to take a serious chill pill and simply wait.

In addition to that, then I also question why Gays are pointing the finger at Obama, when you should be looking at Congress. The President doesn't make law. He signs bills into law. And he can have his signature ultimately overturned by a 2/3 majority vote in Congress. So I think you are looking at the wrong Branch of the Government, and blaming the wrong person, frankly.

Right wingers like yourself scare me, not for my own safety, but for their lack of respect for our blessed Constitution and for all the sacrifices generations have made to protect it. They cheapen it, they soil our core beliefs.

Give me a break. If I was a Right Winger, I would have never voted for Obama, now would I?

Fact of the matter is that I am a Centrist. I always leaned slightly to the Right, but after this last Presidency, I lean slightly to the Left.

And no, Gay Rights isn't one of the first and foremost priorities I need to see tackled. I can respect that there are more pressing matters that face the country first, as opposed to Gay Rights.

If Gays were being treated like they were in the Middle East, here in the United States, then it would be an entirely different story.

 

[Lostlover]

No, I do get it being part of a bigger picture. However, my theory wasn't really so much that the majority of Gays are interested in the actual Marriage, as much as they are interested in being "treated equally".

Like I have explained many times to my family, what we have here is two groups who are looking at this issue like apples and oranges.

We have one group who feels that this is a religious issue, and that is what drives their motivation (or so they claim), to protect the sanctity of marriage.

Then, we have another group who actually views this as a Civil Rights issue. And that's fine.

But no, it isn't an absolute priority of mine that needs to be put first, and yes I feel that Gays who are pressing for this need to take a serious chill pill and simply wait.

In addition to that, then I also question why Gays are pointing the finger at Obama, when you should be looking at Congress. The President doesn't make law. He signs bills into law. And he can have his signature ultimately overturned by a 2/3 majority vote in Congress. So I think you are looking at the wrong Branch of the Government, and blaming the wrong person, frankly.






Give me a break. If I was a Right Winger, I would have never voted for Obama, now would I?

Fact of the matter is that I am a Centrist. I always leaned slightly to the Right, but after this last Presidency, I lean slightly to the Left.

And no, Gay Rights isn't one of the first and foremost priorities I need to see tackled. I can respect that there are more pressing matters that face the country first, as opposed to Gay Rights.

If Gays were being treated like they were in the Middle East, here in the United States, then it would be an entirely different story.

Gay rights doesn't supersede what we're doing in Iraq and Afghanistan for me. As well as the economic crisis. But it's right up there nonetheless. And you're right, Obama can't write in laws. No one serious is asking him to. But he can (and should) reverse Don't Ask Don't Tell.

That is within Obama's reach. It's a policy, not a law. I want Obama eventually to get around to it. It might take one press conference one morning much in the same fashion Obama recently called for more fuel efficient cars.

Obama has high approval ratings. As his numbers slide, and they will, reversing this outdated policy becomes less and less likely, especially considering how eager Obama is to play up to opinion polls.

I think what you dislike, and I dislike, are the voters with tunnel vision. One issue voters. And I'm not like that. Just because I and many are in the gay community, that doesn't mean the sun rises and sets on gay marriage.

 

[opinterph]

[President Obama] can (and should) reverse Don't Ask Don't Tell.

That is within Obama's reach. It's a policy, not a law.

Though the President could issue an executive order halting discharges of gay service personnel from the US military, DADT is codified law.

Through no courage from Democrats, the issue of DADT could eventually wind its way through the courts with a positive outcome. But it sure won’t be because Pres. Obama, his Administration or the Democrats in Congress showed leadership or any courage on the issue. [Taylor Marsh]

Until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system. – White House spokesman Ben LaBolt, May 2009 [WSJ]