When the Republicans Sweep in November, What is the Future of Gay Rights?

[DiamondSkin]

Most political pundits agree that Republicans (and Tea Partiers) are likely to sweep votes in November allowing them greater control over our nation's government.

The public at large is fiercely dedicated to fixing the nation's economy at any expense. All other issues are at the bottom of the totem pole.

With rather extreme Republican/Tea Party candidates stating that homosexuality is choice/sin/unnatural/etc., gay marriage is wrong, their support for the DOMA, their advocation against gay rights and even extreme views stating that homosexuals should be jailed, Americans (even some gay) are handwaving these views as they are more concerned with the lack of jobs.

Gay Americans are put in extremely uncomfortable position:

1) The Democrats have failed to further major issues in regards to gay rights. With the continued failure to repeal DADT, the passing of ENDA, and their ho-hum support of gay marriage, gay rights has not been furthered much since Obama and the Democrats took power.

2) When the conservatives take back more power over the nation's political system, they're are almost certain to back anti-gay legislation and to be against pro-gay legislation to keep the votes of the Moral Right.

Gays can only hope that Republicans/Tea Party don't press against gay rights and focus on the economy.

It's a lose-lose situation for gays.

If the Republicans disregard gay rights as an issue and don't attempt to squash gay American's rights as they have done in the past, then while gay Americans won't suffer more anti-gay legislation, they won't gain any gay rights. either.

If the Republicans do press the anti-gay agenda to keep the Religious Right on their good side, then with their greater numbers, anti-gay legislation may pass and gay Americans will lose more rights.

 

[T-Rexx]

Absolutely nothing will change, of course.

We were going nowhere with gay rights before the sweep, and we will be going nowhere afterwards.

Maybe some day, an enlightened candidate will get elected somewhere who will actually work to advance the cause of gay rights. But I don't expect to live to see that day.

 

[CowboyBob]

The Republican plan for Homosexuals if they gain power:

What America will look like if Republicans get control:

(the last three photos were taken during the last Republican President's term. You want to return to that?)​

 

[DiamondSkin]

So we shouldn't elect a Democratic Congress which has made progress on gay rights because the President is defending a law he doesn't like?


So even if that makes sense to you, how on Earth do you justify that?

I am most certainly thankful to the Democrats (and the Log Cabin Republicans) for voting for and furthering gay rights when they could.

However, the perception is the "window of opportunity" to further gay rights has ended with the Republicans coming back into power. With a few Tea Partiers to boot.

The question is what will happen next?

 

[Kulindahr]

^Oh please...

Ditto that.

Bob, you're starting to look like a liberal version of laika.

 

[Piquechampion]

The Republican plan for Homosexuals if they gain power:

​

Is this photo for real????

From where it's from????

 

[Kyanimal]

So you mean Obama didn't have the DOJ appeal the recent court ruling shutting down DADT?

Actually, given our system of "checks and balances", the Pres. can't TELL the DOJ to do ANYTHING! (Although some have tried!)

That appeal is legally mandated. It is the DOJ's JOB to "defend" all "Current" laws! (Whatever they may be!)

THAT is why the current administration is focusing on getting the LAW repealed through an act of Congress! It's the only way to get DADT to LEGALLY, completely, go away!

And, if you're so concerned about it, please note THIS ...

http://www.justusboys.com/forum/showthread.php?t=322676

And, yeah! ...

Keep smilin'!!
Chaz

 

[CowboyBob]

Ditto that.

Bob, you're starting to look like a liberal version of laika.

Thanks!

I was trying to get my point across and you noticed.

 

[T-Rexx]

So you mean Democrats in the House didn't vote this year to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell?


You mean Democrats in the Senate Armed Services Committee didn't vote to attach a repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell in the Defense Authorization Act for 2011?


You mean Democrats didn't pass the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act in 2009?


You mean Democrats didn't introduce legislation this year to protect kids from bullying, uniting gay immigrant couples, and protections employment discriminiation, education discrimination?


You mean Sen Harry Reid (D-NV) didn't bring up a repeal vote two months ago only for Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) to threaten a filibuster?



Geez I must have been dreaming after all...

So, the Matthew Shepard Act passed.

It only took eight years since it was first introduced.

In the last ten years, we can at least say that murdering someone because he's gay is now a hate crime.

We move forward with lightening speed.

I stand by my statement. We were going nowhere before, and we will be going nowhere after the Republican sweep.

 

[T-Rexx]

My point exactly, even though you chose not to acknowledge the other four because perhaps you are uncomfortable acknowledging the progress which this and other Democratic Congresses have made.

No. I didn't acknowledge them because backing a measure is not progress.

It does not matter to me if a lot of Americans back gay marriage. I still can't marry. That's not progress.

It does not matter to me if a lot of Americans back repeal of DADT. I still can't serve. That's not progress.

We move forward when things change. And that's not happening.

 

[T-Rexx]

It took 90 years to get a comprehensive civil rights law established for racial minorities.

Compared to that, nine looks like a lightning speed doesn't it?

The Matthew Shepard Act is not "comprehensive civil rights." It is a miniscule baby step which nevertheless required eight years to achieve.

This is precisely my point. It's gonna be another 90 years before we make any progress, at the rate things are happening. And I don't care to wait that long.

It certainly will be true that nothing positive in the way of gay rights is going to come out of Washington after the Republican sweep in 6 days. How is that any different that the last ten years?

 

[hotatlboi]

However, the perception is the "window of opportunity" to further gay rights has ended with the Republicans coming back into power. With a few Tea Partiers to boot.

It only ends legislatively, the court cases can still continue.

Now yes the courts cannot enact new rights, they can't pass an ENDA for example, but they can strike down anti-gay laws that currently exist which is functionally similar in many cases.

And there is still another 2 months left before the current Congress ends, we might be able to get DADT repealed in that time.

 

[chrisrobin]

Virginia Foxx, R.-North Carolina, an exemplary member of the U.S. Congress, informed us that the Matthew Shepard murder was a hoax.

In the words of St. Ronald Wilson Reagan, "you ain't seen nothing yet!"

In the words of Homer Simpson, "doh."

To me, advancement in gay rights with Republicans in charge is inconceivable.

 

[Kulindahr]

Actually, given our system of "checks and balances", the Pres. can't TELL the DOJ to do ANYTHING! (Although some have tried!)

That appeal is legally mandated. It is the DOJ's JOB to "defend" all "Current" laws! (Whatever they may be!)

THAT is why the current administration is focusing on getting the LAW repealed through an act of Congress! It's the only way to get DADT to LEGALLY, completely, go away!

And, if you're so concerned about it, please note THIS ...

http://www.justusboys.com/forum/showthread.php?t=322676

And, yeah! ...

Keep smilin'!!
Chaz

My review of things in this thread might be helpful:

http://www.justusboys.com/forum/showthread.php?t=324144

 

[Kyanimal]

repealing DOMA is already dead in the water, with all the Obama and the Democratic Congress have done on it.

there's a chance that DA/DT gets voted on in the lame-duck session, but if not, the last hope for repeal is the court case that the Obama DoJ is fighting against.

so, status quo after November. Republicans aren't going to have the votes to push a social agenda and, tbh, the teaparty nutjobs seem to be more nuts about economic issues than pushing social issues like the religious right.



I'm open for enlightenment... what aspect of the law requires that the DoJ appeal a court case and refuse to accept the judgment of a lower court?

and of course the president can direct the DoJ to do something. Eric Holder servers at the pleasure of the president and is as much an extension of the Obama administration as every other Cabinet office. do you think that Obama doesn't direct State Department policy or the direction that the Defense Department takes with the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan?

Of course the Pres. can give "direction", but he is also bound by the Legal Limits of his Office. I don't believe that any Pres., before Obama, has had a greater understanding of his limits, or potentials!

With his extensive understanding of the LAW, our current Pres. KNOWS that he can only go so far, and also KNOWS the most effective ways to attempt to achieve his overall goals.

The DOJ, though serving at his "pleasure", as far as to whom he may appoint, is still bound, by LAW, to "preserve and protect" ALL Current LAWS!

The BEST, and only TRUE way, to repeal ANYTHING, now in effect, is through an act of Congress! FRUSTRATING? YES!! But, it's the way the System is set up, and the way it works!

That appeal, though not wanted, is Mandated!

All the more reason to ... no matter what ...

Keep smilin'!!
Chaz

 

[Centexfarmer]

I am most certainly thankful to the Democrats (and the Log Cabin Republicans) for voting for and furthering gay rights when they could.

However, the perception is the "window of opportunity" to further gay rights has ended with the Republicans coming back into power. With a few Tea Partiers to boot.

The question is what will happen next?

Well fortunately most of the "appointed judges" aren't up for any type of election, so I figure that our issues will continue to work their way through the Federal Courts, and we'll have to listen to a bunch of harping from Republicans and "Conservatives" about "activist judges" even though a good percentage of them were in fact Republican appointees.

Democrats have probably introduced more legislation in our favor, than Republican have either soundly rejected, used the "States Rights" issue (but only when it served their cause), or introduced legislation to energize their base for some upcoming election.

Either way we've managed to make some progress somewhere, even when it looked like a defeat.

We're not going anywhere, regardless of how much either party wishes that we'd just go away.

 

[hotatlboi]

Also a number of executive decisions recently have benefitted gays, for example HHS now requires all accredited hospitals to permit visitation for gay couples.

 

[Kyanimal]

I think you're wrong in your interpretation.

when people were arguing that Obama should simply stop enforcing DA/DT, I granted the reality that the executive is required to enforce the laws that our on the books regardless of his personal opinion... but I really don't see how the DoJ is legally required to appeal every single ruling ever decided against it to the Supreme Court.

Granted! But ... it is the rule of LAW that the DOJ "defends" the LAW as it Currently stands! Thus, the need for Congressional Revocation!

Therefore ... the "Quag" of the "Mire"!

All the more reason to ... no matter what ...

Keep smilin'!!
Chaz

 

[T-Rexx]

The Democratic House has not only backed gay rights legislation it has also had successful votes, and that my friend is progress.

I do not define success as a majority of Democratic votes. "Success," to me, is actual passage of legislation into law.

How you can belittle gay rights legislation and claim to care about them at the same time is astonishing to me.

I do not agree that advocating for actual passage of gay rights legislation is "belittling" the movement. The logical corollary to that is that accomplishing absolutely nothing is advocacy - but I know that you cannot mean that.

How long were there human beings involuntariliy shackled in the chains of slavery in is country while activists tried to free them? 200+ years? Too long. I can't even count that high.

We're lucky the gay agenda is moving as fast as it is considering the tenacity and backwardness of our opposition. You need a history check if you think civil rights progress is made quickly and easily, like say in less than nine years.

Appreciating that much of the rest of the civilized world is already where I want the US to be, waiting another 200+ years seems completely unacceptable to me. No, I do not think I am being impatient. Demanding that the United States rapidly acquire the enlightenment of the rest of the civilized world is not too much to ask, in my opinion.

And if you want things to move faster, get off your ass and do something about it.

What part of my work over the past few decades do you find inadequate?

I already provided a number of legislative achievements by Democrats, including a number of successful House and Senate votes on gay rights legislation.

You define success as advocacy, I define it as accomplishment.

I do not care if every Democrat on Earth votes in favor of gay rights or if every Democrat on Earth votes against us. What I care is that gay rights legislation passes into law. A majority of Senators voted to repeal DADT, but DADT was not repealed. You see that as success. I don't.

 

[bike10]

We already know the position of the current Republican members of the Congress in regards to gay rights. They are oppose us and those running for office as GOP/Tea Baggers preach hate, intolerance and prejudice for the gay community.