Today in Gay History ~~THANK YOU PRESIDENT OBAMA

For Keeping Your Promise. Without your leadership, who knows when, if ever, this injustice would have ended.

Today in Gay History

On March 19, 2010 celebrity Kathy Griffin headlined a rally at Freedom Plaza in DC calling for the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Openly gay West Point graduate, Lt. Dan Choi, and Capt. James Pietrangelo marched from the rally site to the White House and handcuffed themselves to the fence. They were arrested and spent the night in jail, being denied the right to make a phone call and bail until the next day. "But what I was taught at West Point and learned in war is -- hope is not a strategy. As officers, James and I both find it a dereliction of our moral duty to remain silent while thousands of our brothers and sister are not allowed to serve openly and honestly." Within a year, the Democratic Congress voted to repeal the 18 year old policy, and before he signed the bill into law, President Obama stated that ending the ban will mean that "thousands of patriotic Americans" won't be forced to leave the military "despite years of exemplary performance, because they happen to be gay…" and that gay people will no longer be be "asked to live a lie in order to serve the country they love."

Move over Columbus

October 12 May be the
New Gay Independence Day?

Judge to military:

Stop discharging gays under

'don't ask, don't tell'

Landmark ruling says government's

17-year-old policy must end

From MSNBC news

RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A federal judge Tuesday

ordered the government to stop banning openly gay men and women from serving in the military under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

U.S. District Judge Virg

inia Phillips found the policy unconstitutional in September. On Tuesday, she rejected an Obama administrat

ion request to delay an injunction and ordered enforcement of the 17-year-old policy permanently stopped.

The decision was cheered by gay righ

ts organizations that credited her with getting accomplished what President Barack Obama and Washington politics could not.

"This order from Judge Phillips is another historic and courageous step in the right direction, a step that Congress has been noticeably slow in taking," said Alexander Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, the nation's largest organization of gay and lesbian troops and veterans.

He was the sole named veteran plaintiff in the case along with the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay rights organization that filed the lawsuit in 2004 to stop the ban's enforcement.

The Justice Department has 60 days

to appeal. Legal experts say the government is under no legal obligation to do so and they could let Phillips' ruling stand.

A Perntagon official

suggested the military may in fact halt all attempts to enforce the policy for the forseeable future. The official told NBC News: "It's important to point out that today's federal court order comes less than t

wo months (Dec. 1) before the Pentagon is to provide Secretary of Defense Robert Gates with a plan on how, not if, but how to implement the repeal of 'Dont Ask Dont Tell' in the military."

Legal experts say government attorneys are not likely to let the ruling stand since Obama has made it clear he wants Congress to

repeal the policy.

. . .The Department of Justice attorneys also said Congress should decide the issue — not her court.

Phillips disagreed, saying the law doesn't help military readiness and instead has a "direct and deleterious effect" on the armed services by hurting recruiting during wartime and requiring the discharge of service members with critical skills and training.

"Furthermore, there is no adequate remedy at law to prevent the continued violation of servicemembers

' rights or to compensate

them for violation of their rights," Phillips said in her order.

She said Department of Justice attorneys did not address these issues in their objection to her expected injunction.

Phillips declared the law unconstitutional after listening to the testimony of discharged service members during a two-week nonjury trial this summer in federal court in Riverside.

She said the Log Cabin Republicans "established at trial that the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Act irreparably injures servicemembers by infringing their fundamental rights." She said the policy violates due process rights, freedom of s

peech and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances guaranteed by the First Amendment.

Gay rights advocates have worried they los

t a crucial opportunity to change the law when Senate Republicans opposed the defense bill last month because of a "don't ask, don't tell" repeal provision.

If Democrats

lose seats in the upcoming elections, repealing the ban could prove even more difficult — if not impossible — next yea

r.

The Log Cabin Republicans asked her for an immediate injunction so the policy can no longer be used against any U.S. military personnel anywhere in the world.

...

AND FROM EQUALITY FLORIDA, ADIOS ANITA

Florida Ends Anti-Gay Adoption Ban

Moments ago, Department of Children & Families' (DCF) Director, George Sheldon, announced that the agency will not appeal last month's court ruling which struck down Florida's ban on gay and lesbian adoption as "unconstitutional."

It is now legal for gay and lesbian parents to adopt children everywhere in the state of Florida.

In an official statement from DCF, spokesman Joe Follick made clear that the 33 year ban comes to and end today. "The DCA opinion is binding on all trial courts and therefore provides statewide uniformity. The ban on gay adoption is unconstitutional statewide," Follick said.

Equality Florida spoke directly with DCF Director, George Sheldon, this evening, and while the official clock for the state to appeal does not officially run out until October 22nd, Sheldon made clear the ban is over. "The Gill family adoption is now final. They can take pride that they are now a family in the eyes of the state and they can take pride that their struggle has closed the chapter on this law for good," Sheldon said.

As we pause and celebrate this tremendous victory, we want to say a special thank you to Martin and his family, the ACLU and ACLU of Florida, Greenberg Traurig, and Charles Auslander for their brilliant work in the courtroom.

While the 33-year ban comes to an end today, the fight is not over yet. We must defend this victory against extremists who are already at work to reinstate the ban. The same anti-gay forces who pushed for Florida's marriage amendment in 2008 will likely try to put a return of the adoption ban up for a statewide vote 2012.

With your continued support, we will be ready for them. Equality Florida has been working with a coalition of organizations and individuals on a project called Adopt Equality. For months, our volunteers have been calling Florida voters and asking them to support adoption by gay and lesbian parents.

But even as we prepare for what's next, today is a day to celebrate the end of an ugly chapter in Florida's history. Florida's adoption ban is no more, as evidenced by a DCF directive sent to department heads statewide that reads:

Based on the ruling that the current law is unconstitutional, you are no longer to ask prospective adoptive parents whether they are heterosexual, gay or lesbian, nor are you to use this as a factor in determining the suitability of applicants to adopt. Focus your attention on the quality of parenting that prospective adoptive parents would provide, and their commitment to and love for our children.

Republicans Filibuster Defense Spending

Candor and The Covenant

from an interview by Jennifer Skalka

of the HotLine Online section of the National Journal

Bishop Robinson: ON OBAMA~~

"...a number of us are beginning to be impatient with him."

Excerpts:

. . . JS: You testified before New Hampshire lawmakers to advocate for the gay marriage bill that was passed last week by the state House and Senate, and I'm curious, broadly to start, what you think of New Hampshire's decision to become the sixth state to allow gay marriage.

GR: It's very exciting to have walked this bill all the way through. To a lot of people it seemed a bit of a tortuous journey. But in the end, I think we took a really good tact -- and that was true of the House, the Senate and the governor -- which was to restate what was already true in the law, but people needed to be reassured about it. Which was to restate the protections for religious institutions not to have to participate in same-gender marriages if they didn't want to and if it went against their beliefs. And I believe that that freed a lot of people, who are not even necessarily at all comfortable with the notion of gay marriage, to support this bill for what it is, which is an action of the state, not of the church.

And I argued that indeed for religious institutions to impose their will against the secular state was an imposition of the church on the state. We're normally worried about the state impinging on the rights of religion, but in this case I believe it was religion impinging on the rights of the state. And that seemed to win the day. And I couldn't be more delighted. . . .

JS: Let me ask you about Pres. Obama. There's much consternation bubbling up in the gay community that he's not visible on issues of interest to the community. Many say, for example, they'd like him to do more in trying to retract the military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy. And yet he's been awfully quiet since taking office on this and other issues. Do you feel like he's losing some goodwill among gays and lesbians?

GR: I think that a number of us are beginning to be impatient with him. The argument that he's got other things on his plate really doesn't hold water since he has certainly demonstrated an ability to multitask and to tackle very, very important issues at the same time. Also, I just saw a poll -- I think it was yesterday or the day before -- showing enormous support for an end to 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' even amongst the military, even amongst conservatives, amongst Republicans, not to mention the general public. I still believe that he is going to move forward on that and on the Defense of Marriage Act and so on, but I do think patience is wearing thin, and I think it's time for him to begin to give this some of his time and energy.

I know that he's put together a study committee around 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' and I don't think he would have done that if he hadn't been assured of what the verdict would be. I don't know when they are due to report, but certainly when they do would be an opportune time for him to act. I think he did that so as not to fall within the same danger zone that Bill Clinton did when he tried to do it by fiat.

JS: But politically, what's holding him back at this point. He has such an enormous mandate for his agenda and the Democrats so dominate Washington. Why do you think he's holding back?

GR: I have no idea. I don't think there is anything politically to be lost here. And I think it would only solidify his base of support in the gay and lesbian community. ... We're not asking him at this point to be open in his support of gay marriage. We're talking about a couple policies whose time really has come to be over. . .

JS: And just finally for those in Red State America who might be watching what is happening in several New England states and Iowa, what would your message to them be on this issue?

GR: I think my message would be that religious people who oppose this idea have nothing to fear from same-gender marriage equality. That no one will be asked to do anything that is against their conscience. On the other hand, let's remember that marriage is a civil act. That becomes quite clear when a marriage, let's say, that was performed in a church or a synagogue or a mosque comes apart. And the couple seeks a divorce. They don't go back to the church or synagogue or mosque. They go to the courts. Because it is a legal and civil action that was done.

It's gotten confused in this country because we have deputized clergy of all kinds to be and act as agents of the state in marriage. And so people don't know when the civil action begins and ends and when the religious part begins and ends. So I think this is a very helpful division between what the state does and what religious organizations do. And when once you understand that, you understand that allowing gay and lesbian people to have access to civil marriage has absolutely no affect on religious groups. And they have nothing to fear from this movement.

|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||