"Gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights."

In an amazing speech yesterday in Geneva, Switzerland, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced to the world that the Obama Administration considers LGBT Rights to be Human Rights:

"To the leaders of those countries where people are jailed, beaten, or executed for being gay, I ask you to consider this: Leadership, by definition, means being out in front of your people when it is called for. It means standing up for the dignity of all your citizens and persuading your people to do the same. It also means ensuring that all citizens are treated as equals under your laws, because let me be clear – I am not saying that gay people can’t or don’t commit crimes. They can and they do, just like straight people. And when they do, they should be held accountable, but it should never be a crime to be gay.

And to people of all nations, I say supporting human rights is your responsibility too. The lives of gay people are shaped not only by laws, but by the treatment they receive every day from their families, from their neighbors. Eleanor Roosevelt, who did so much to advance human rights worldwide, said that these rights begin in the small places close to home – the streets where people live, the schools they attend, the factories, farms, and offices where they work. These places are your domain. The actions you take, the ideals that you advocate, can determine whether human rights flourish where you are."

The next part of her speech was the one that moved me the most, though:

"And finally, to LGBT men and women worldwide, let me say this: Wherever you live and whatever the circumstances of your life, whether you are connected to a network of support or feel isolated and vulnerable, please know that you are not alone. People around the globe are working hard to support you and to bring an end to the injustices and dangers you face. That is certainly true for my country. And you have an ally in the United States of America and you have millions of friends among the American people."

It is truly a step forward for LGBT Rights worldwide to have the Secretary of State of the United States making such a declarative, powerful statement. You could well argue that this (and more) should have happened a long time ago, certainly earlier in this particular Administration, but I don't think that takes anything away from this moment itself.

Check out a video of the speech here, or read the full transcript here.

Don't Enforce, Don't Discriminate

I'm sure you all know by now that Federal Judge Virginia Phillips issued an injunction last week that prohibits the Department of Defense from enforcing their discriminatory Don't Ask Don't Tell policy.

The Government then requested that she stay her order pending their appeal of her decision and today she denied that request. All of which means that, for now at least, the United States military is required to allow gay and lesbian service members to serve openly!

That's a huge step forward for gay rights, even if it's not yet an overall victory against this particular means of discrimination. All of this could have happened in January of 2009 with a single stroke of President Obama's pen, of course, and it's ridiculous that this administration continues to drag their feet on this, even now.

Check out author/blogger Matthew Rettenmund's account (with video) of Lt. Dan Choi re-enlisting in the army this afternoon as an openly gay man.

Prop 8 Overturned

I couldn't let the great news from California today go unremarked upon.

If you haven't heard (and how could you not have?!), Federal Judge Vaughn Walker ruled today that California's Proposition 8, the state constitutional amendment that revoked the rights of same sex couples to marry in that state, was unconstitutional.

This is obviously fantastic news for equality in California and in the United States as a whole. We're getting ever closer to the day when LGBT Americans have the same civil rights that heterosexuals take for granted.

Of course, it's also just the latest step in the process, since from here the ruling will be appealed to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and from there to the Supreme Court.

Towleroad has a fascinating round up of reaction quotes from both sides of the issue that's worth taking a look at. Those from the supporters of Prop 8 are irritating, to put it mildly, but they do illustrate the mindset of those we're up against in this fight for equality.

The First Hearing on Don't Ask, Don't Tell

One of the strongest feelings I was left with after watching today's hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee on the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy was of how glad I am that this country didn't elect John McCain to the Presidency last year.

Don't get me wrong, I've always been very glad about that, but today just drove home the point that no matter how much President Obama has been dragging his feet, things would have been far worse if McCain were in the Oval Office.

The Senator from Arizona had a letter signed by 1,000 retired officers and generals (i.e. people out of touch with today's military, much like McCain) who do not support repealing the ban on gays in the military. McCain actually referred to the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy as 'effective'.

The true highlight of the hearing was the surprising testimony of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen:

"Mr. Chairman, speaking for myself and myself only, it is my personal and professional belief that allowing homosexuals to serve openly would be the right thing to do. No matter how I look at the issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens. For me, it comes down to integrity -- theirs as individuals and ours as an institution. I also believe the great young men and women of our military can and would accommodate such a change. I never underestimate their ability to adapt. That there will be some disruption in the force I cannot deny. That there will be legal, social and perhaps even infrastructure changes to be made certainly seem plausible. We would all like to have a better handle on these types of concerns. And that is what our review will offer."

This is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, remember! Back in 1993, the Joint Chiefs were all very opposed to repealing the ban on gays serving, which of course lead to the 'compromise' we've had to live with ever since. I think it's pretty amazing that Admiral Mullen spoke out the way he did today.

The bottom line, of course, is that the Secretary of Defense and Admiral Mullen announced a year long study on how to end the policy. Now, taking a year to study this is ridiculous and Gates also stated that it could take up to a year to implement it after the study is finished, which means that we're probably still two whole years away from LGBT citizens being allowed to serve openly.

The only real upside to this was that Gates specifically stated that the study is not on whether or not to end the policy, but on HOW to end it.

Gates also said that in the next 45 days he'll be recommending changes within the existing Don't Ask, Don't Tell law to make sure it is more fairly enforced.

Given that it has already been stated that the law is unfair and needs to go, shouldn't they be ceasing to enforce it altogether while they do this year long study followed by a year long implementation? Why bother to 'more fairly' enforce something that is admittedly unfair in and of itself?

The truth of the matter is that President Obama could effectively end this policy today if he wanted to. As Congressman Joe Sestak pointed out after the hearing, the President could sign a stop-loss order halting any discharges under Don't Ask, Don't Tell. In fact, he could have done that the day he took office.

The Republicans seem to be jumping on the 'We can't afford to change the policy while fighting two wars' bandwagon (because anything that increases the ability of people to serve hurts the military in wartime?!), and Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama even implied that Admiral Mullen was influencing the outcome of the study by stating his own opinion. I loved Mullen's reply:

"This is about leadership, and I take that very, very seriously."

Putting leadership above politics, what a novel idea!

For more details on all of this, check out David Dayen's assessment of the hearing or watch the hearing itself.

An Essay on Don't Ask, Don't Tell

After a very busy few days, I have two Nuke episodes of As the World Turns to catch up with. Hopefully I will be writing about those episodes tomorrow.

In the meantime, I wanted to direct your attention to the matter of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. It is expected that the Obama Administration will be announcing their plan for moving forward on the matter tomorrow before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Karen Ocamb has a very insightful essay up on LGBT POV about what she calls President Obama's 'Clintonian Compromise' on repealing the policy:

'Let’s face it: the Commander-in-Chief and Congress are secretly afraid of the old men in the military. And the old men in the military, so accustomed to automatic deference by all branches of the US government, are afraid of losing their power as times and the culture change. They cannot fathom that younger soldiers and leaders, the ones the old men are sending to fight two wars, are no longer afraid of dropping their soap bar in the shower.

How else explain the compromise the Obama Administration, the Pentagon and Congress are expected to announce at Tuesday’s Senate Armed Services Committee hearing?

...............

But what will that hearing do? Will it be an hour where Gates simply announces the “stricter” evidentiary rule for discharges? Or will discharged personnel be able to testify how DADT ruined their lives when all they wanted to do was to serve this country? Will evidence be admitted from the Joint Force Quarterly which called “don’t ask, don’t tell” a failure and said openly gay servicecmembers do not undercut unit cohesion? Will the Rand Corporation report – requested by Clinton and Congress in 1993 – be admitted? That report concluded that sexual orientation has nothing to do with military service.

During his State of the Union address, Obama talked about providing greater support for veterans and made note of how First Lady Michelle Obama and the Vice President’s wife, Jill Biden, have taken on a special mission to help military families. Monday, Obama followed through on those promises in his new budget.

But will the Armed Services hearing include evidence about how gay and lesbian veterans are left to fend for themselves – and how the families of the estimated 65,000 gay servicemembers currently serving under DADT are not receiving any support and are not allowed to talk about their loved one for fear that such information could lead to a witchhunt and discharge – in a time of war! Will the hearing include testimony about how any new policy or repeal legislation should include retroactive funding to support vets and LGBT families?'

This is just a small highlight of the essay. The whole thing is very much worth reading. Ocamb goes into a lot of detail on how the original 'compromise' that created Don't Ask Don't Tell came about in 1993 and on the progress of President Obama's own campaign promise to end the policy, as well as what we can expect tomorrow at the hearing.

A Few Thoughts on the State of the Union

It's still a bit shocking, after eight long years of George W. Bush, to tune in to a Presidential address and come away from it moved by the President's eloquence. There is no doubt that President Obama is a wonderful speaker who can alternate between a relaxed and amusing moment and soul stirring rhetoric with ease.

I have to admit that I enjoyed the way he hammered the failings of the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress by pointing out the massive Deficit that he inherited from the supposedly fiscally conservative right.

The freeze on Government spending he declared for 2011 really worries me, though, as does the fact that in spite of what the President said tonight, the Democrats seem to be backing off Health Care reform once again out of fear for their jobs.

I have been gravely disappointed over this past year with this administration's lack of action on any of the campaign promises the President made to LGBT Americans. Tonight, he once again brought up ending the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy so that LGBT Americans can serve openly in the armed services.

It was a brief line in the speech, but I for one will be paying close attention to see if this time he will live up to what he promises:

"This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."

No mention was made about his other campaign promise to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

The other moment in President Obama's speech that really pleased me was when he addressed the heinous decision made last week by the Supreme Court which will allow corporations or anyone else to spend as much as they like on political campaigns, sounding a death knell for any chance at real Campaign Finance Reform in this country.

"Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. Well, I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that's why I'm urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong."

I've never seen a President take on a Supreme Court decision during the State of the Union before, but it certainly needed to be addressed. Watching Justice Alito sourly shake his head and grumble under his breath while those around him stood to cheer was icing on top of the cake.

The end of the President's speech was certainly stirring, but then so were the campaign speeches. The first year hasn't been very promising, but there is still time for this Administration to turn itself around. I'd like nothing more than to see President Obama become a great leader and really bring about change for the better.

Jane Lynch on Obama

Just when I thought I couldn't love (worship?) Jane Lynch any more than I already did, she proves me wrong!

The woman who makes Sue Sylvester the true star of Glee just gave a fantastic interview to the Guardian which is not only a great interview in and of itself, but also takes on President Obama for his failures on gay rights.

They are, however, projecting their values on to Lynch's private life. This past year saw a nationwide rejection of legalising gay marriage, stripping gay Americans of their hope for equal civil rights. "Shouldn't there be safeguards against the majority voting on the rights of a minority?" Lynch wonders. "If people voted on civil rights in the 60s, it would have never happened. It took somebody like [President] Lyndon Johnson going, 'F all of you! I'm going to do this.'" She pauses for a moment, then says, "Obama won't do it. He's a huge disappointment to me."

And that's how Jane C's it. (Sorry, I couldn't resist!).

While the Guardian's summary is a bit on the dire side (some states did legalize gay marriage this past year, and our hope has not been stripped!), what Jane had to say is completely awesome.

Needless to say, I'm in total agreement with her. If Obama thinks he's going to win the LGBT vote in 2012 by failing to live up to his promises, he's sorely mistaken. It's great to have someone who is very much in the spotlight for their work, as Jane is, speak out about this and bring that much more attention to this complete failure in leadership.

Setback in New Jersey

The fight for marriage equality in the United States suffered the first setback of the new year in New Jersey today, where the state Senate voted 20-14 against a bill that would have legalized same sex marriage.

It was especially crucial for the bill to pass at this point, since outgoing Governor Jon Corzine, a Democrat, had promised to sign it into law, while incoming Republican Governor Chris Christie is on record as being opposed to the bill.

Still, as painful as it always is when a vote goes against us (and honestly, nothing could be more painful or downright infuriating then the idea that our basic civil rights are something people can vote to deny us!), this was just a setback, not a defeat. Stephen Goldstein, the director of Garden State Equality, had this to say:

"Though we didn’t achieve our final victory today, we’re better positioned than we were a few months ago to win marriage equality. On the one hand, we resent, more than you can imagine, remaining second-class citizens a bit longer. On the other hand, the ball has moved forward."

It sounds like the New Jersey courts are the next stop in the fight for equality there.

The new year started with joyous wedding ceremonies for same sex couples in New Hampshire, and that is the image I'm going to carry in my mind all year, through the inevitable ups and downs of this ongoing fight.

Secretary Clinton on Uganda

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton spoke at Georgetown University earlier this week on the subject of Human Rights and addressed the issue of Uganda, where legislation is pending that would make being gay or lesbian punishable by death. You can check out the full video of the speech on LGBT POV.

I've always admired Hillary Clinton a great deal (I supported her in the primaries over President Obama) and I think she's been far stronger on LGBT issues within the confines of her role than the President has been with far greater power at his disposal.

Speaking out on Uganda is crucial, especially at a time when even the BBC seems to think they can pose the question 'Should Homosexuals Face Execution?' as if there were a legitimate discussion to be had on the matter! Genocide doesn't come with a pro and con list. Uganda isn't the only place where LGBT people are facing grave Human Rights violations, though, and Secretary Clinton demonstrated her awareness of that fact.

After the speech, the Secretary of State was asked a follow up question by one of the students attending the event:

QUESTION: Hello, Secretary Clinton. Thank you so much for speaking to us today. You spoke about the situation in Uganda. Could you please talk to us a little bit more about how the United States can protect the rights of LGBT people in areas where those rights are not respected?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. And first let me say that over this past year, we have elevated into our human rights dialogues and our public statements a very clear message about protecting the rights of the LGBT community worldwide. And we are particularly concerned about some of the specific cases that have come to our attention around the world. There have been organized efforts to kill and maim gays and lesbians in some countries that we have spoken out about, and also conveyed our very strong concerns about to their governments – not that they were governmentally implemented or even that the government was aware of them, but that the governments need to pay much greater attention to the kinds of abuses that we’ve seen in Iraq, for example.

We are deeply concerned about some of the stories coming out of Iran. In large measure, in reaction, we think, to the response to the elections back in June, there have been abuses committed within the detention facilities and elsewhere that we are deeply concerned about. And then the example that I used of a piece of legislation in Uganda which would not only criminalize homosexuality but attach the death penalty to it. We have expressed our concerns directly, indirectly, and we will continue to do so. The bill has not gone through the Ugandan legislature, but it has a lot of public support by various groups, including religious leaders in Uganda. And we view it as a very serious potential violation of human rights.

So it is clear that across the world this is a new frontier in the minds of many people about how we protect the LGBT community, but it is at the top of our list because we see many instances where there is a very serious assault on the physical safety and an increasing effort to marginalize people. And we think it’s important for the United States to stand against that and to enlist others to join us in doing so.

Marriage Equality in D.C.!

Today the City Council of Washington, D.C., the Capitol of the United States, voted 11-2 to allow same sex marriage. Mayor Adrian Fenty has promised to sign the bill into law.

As with any laws passed in D.C., the U.S. Congress has 30 days in which to review it, but Congressional leaders have apparently indicated that they won't be weighing in on this particular law. This means that Washington D.C., though not a state in its own right, will be joining the five states that currently (or, in New Hampshire's case, will soon) have full marriage equality.

The leading force behind this was Council Member David Catania, who is himself openly gay and who voted "I do!" today.

It would be easy, of course, to remember this year for the setbacks in California (where Prop 8 was upheld by the State Supreme Court), Maine, and New York, but let's not forget that it was also the year that saw Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, and now Washington, D.C. legalize same sex marriage.

Even more notable was that most of these states (including Maine, where it was later overturned) legalized it not through the court system but through the legislature. The only exception to this was Iowa, where the victory was won in the State Supreme Court. Even there, though, the majority in the legislature refused to overturn the State Supreme Court's ruling by changing the state constitution.

It's nice to end 2009 with a victory in the fight for Marriage Equality to remind us of what a big year it really was. Let's hope that it is a sign of more to come in 2010!

Houston, We Have A Victory

Today voters in Houston Texas, the fourth largest city in the United States, elected out lesbian Annise Parker as Mayor, becoming the biggest city in the country to ever by lead by someone who was openly gay.

The new Mayor-elect won with 53.6% in a runoff election that saw religious groups and conservatives rallying around her opponent and launching homophobic attacks to try and sway the election.

Luckily, hatred and bigotry did not carry the day this time around! I look forward to the day when openly LGBT people being elected to office is so commonplace that it isn't even news and this is definitely another victory along that road.

Setback in New York

There was bad news in New York State today, where the chance to legalize gay marriage slipped through our fingers. The state Assembly had already passed the bill (for the third time) and Governor David Patterson had promised to sign it into law if the state Senate (which, after the 2008 election, now has a slim Democratic majority) passed it.

Sadly, eight of the thirty two democrats in the Senate chose to vote against the bill, bringing the final vote to 38-24 and leaving the number of states where same sex unions are legal standing at 5.

As with the vote in Maine last month, this sort of thing feels like a slap in the face. It's never fun being told that you are less than everyone else, that your rights can be denied you by politicians. That's just not what America is supposed to be. Shall we vote on mixed gender couple's rights to marry? To have children? The idea is absurd, as should the idea of voting on my rights to marry be.

We will get there, though, and sooner rather than later. Nothing worthwhile is ever given, it has to be demanded, fought for.

Family Ties

Now that I'm caught up on Kish, I'm finally able to read stories about them online without fear of having something that happened a month ago spoiled for me before I can see it!

It turns out that his brother Chris isn't Scott Evans' only well known relative. His uncle is United States Congressman Michael Capuano, who is currently running to fill the Senate seat of the late Edward Kennedy. Capuano's sister Lisa is Scott's mother, who recently played his onscreen mother, Barbara Fish, as well.

I had no idea about any of this until I saw the link to the Boston Herald's interview with Scott on AfterElton. The interview itself is pretty good (Scott talks about how being in the closet was never an option for him in his career, noting that “Before I was ever an actor, I was a homosexual. I hope it won’t affect my career, but it probably will. I hope people will open their minds. At this point, it’s working out for me.”) and there's even an online companion piece devoted completely to Kish and to how great One Life to Live in general is at the moment.

Which it really is. That's why I couldn't fast forward through my accumulated episodes and just watch the Kish scenes. I would have missed so much great soap!

Gay Apartheid

Last weekend, I was in a wedding. Since I do not live in one of the five states that currently have marriage equality for same sex couples, it should go without saying that this was a heterosexual wedding, though it could by no stretch of the imagination be called traditional.

There were a lot of moments in this particular wedding that will probably be talked about for years by those who were in attendance, but in the midst of all the fun there was a moment that struck a sour note for me.

The person marrying my friends (who was not a minister by profession) started his remarks by noting that "Anyone can get married, but..." I was standing there, beside the happy couple, and the thought that such a day may not be able to happen for me, at least not legally, for a very long time was already on my mind, of course.

To hear those casual words was a sharp reminder of not only my lack of rights but of the fact that even the most well meaning of straight people take marriage completely for granted. I'm not saying they shouldn't, mind you, it's just that I'd like to be able to take it for granted, too!

I'm very upset by the results of the vote in Maine yesterday, and that moment from the ceremony, along with the thought of all those LGBT couples in Maine who won't be able to have the ceremonies they'd been planning for themselves, has been very much on my mind all day.

Gay Rights Activist David Mixner had some very powerful words to say about the subject:

"...call this campaign against us what it is - Gay Apartheid.

Refuse to allow any of our fellow Americans, President Obama or our allies to view this as a political issue who time hasn't quite come. America is in the process of creating a system of Gay Apartheid. We will not quietly sit and accept it. All over the place, this nation is creating one set of laws for LGBT Americans and another set for all other Americans. That is the classic definition of Apartheid. Either our political allies are for Gay Apartheid or against it. If they are against it, they must fight with us and no longer duck like President Obama did in Maine and Washington. There is no half way in fighting Apartheid.

Today many will claim that we must surrender the word marriage or accept some sort of separate but equal arrangement. It didn't work in the African-American struggle for freedom and it doesn't work for us. We want full equality with the same rights, benefits and privileges as all other Americans now."

It's easy to become depressed when faced with results like we saw yesterday, but the fight is far from lost and Mixner's words reminded me that we won't be cowed by the results of any vote, that when equality is lacking, it's not given at the ballot box but fought for and won, no matter how long that takes.

Even our so called friends in power are busy relegating LGBT issues, such as Don't Ask Don't Tell, to some future time when all the other issues that seem to be more important to them than our equality have been dealt with. Clearly, we rank higher on the priority list of those who are against us than we do of those who are (supposed to be) our allies.

The National Equality March doesn't seem to have lit enough of a fire under those in Washington who have benefited from our votes and our contributions, so maybe it's time to give those votes and contributions to others.

Yesterday wasn't all bad news on the LGBT front, of course. Gaypolitics has a rundown of some of the openly gay and lesbian candidates who were elected in record setting numbers across the country.

Setback in Maine

It looks like we've suffered another setback in the fight for marriage equality. I'm talking, of course, about Maine, where last May the state legislature passed a law allowing same sex marriage. The law was put on hold until voters had their say on it, though, and today they went to the polls. The latest projections seem to indicate that 53% of those who voted today did so in opposition to equality.

As certain as I am that you cannot halt progress forever, that we'll get to full marriage equality throughout the country eventually, it still hurts when people go to the polls and vote to deny basic rights to a huge segment of the population. It hurts not only because I am a part of the group being denied their rights, but because that's just not the America that we're supposed to live in. In the America that they teach us about when we're growing up, the very idea that someones right to get married could even end up on the ballot would be unthinkable.

At Last

As you've probably heard, President Obama signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act into law earlier today. He had this to say:

"After more than a decade of opposition and delay, we've passed inclusive hate crimes legislation to help protect our citizens from violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray, or who they are. I promised Judy Shepard, when she saw me in the Oval Office, that this day would come, and I'm glad that she and her husband Dennis could join us for this event."

Earlier this week, I finished reading The Meaning of Matthew, Judy Shepard's book about her son's brief life, his murder, and the impact it had both on the world and on her family. I basically cried throughout the entire book, for Matthew, for what his family lost, and for the countless others who have been attacked and killed both before and after Matthew.

This new law is long overdue.

A Conveniently Timed Appointment

David Huebner, an openly gay lawyer and founding board member of GLAAD, is to be named the United States Ambassador to New Zealand.

Call me cynical, but I don't believe it's a coincidence that word of President Obama's first appointment of an openly gay Ambassador (and the third such appointment in U.S. history) comes just days ahead of the National Equality March on Washington.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that the President decided to appoint someone from the LGBT community, but the timing of the appointment seems suspicious at best.

The fact is that this is coming from a President who promised so much on LGBT issues during his campaign and so far hasn't followed through on a single thing. His administration can barely even bring itself to pretend that they're still going try to repeal DOMA or end Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Then, just days before a huge march that is going to be highlighting every promise he's failed to live up to, the President seems to scramble to toss us a bone of sorts, as if appointing a gay Ambassador will make people think that sooner or later he's going to live up to what he said during the campaign.

I really wish I could be in Washington for the March. As soon as I heard that Cleve Jones had called for it, I wanted to take part, but it's just not financially feasible for me at the moment. I will be there in spirit, though, and I hope the number of people who attend (each representing countless more who cannot) and the passion and commitment they're bringing to the issues will force the President and Congress to stop with the empty promises and start delivering results.

Pelosi Sounds a Warning

Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, sounded a warning today that I hope those in politics and those who make it their business to cover politics, will heed. Referencing the assassinations of Harvey Milk and George Moscone back in 1978 and tying the nasty political climate of that period to the one we're going through at the moment, Pelosi had this to say:

"I think we all have to take responsibility for our actions and our words. We are a free country and this balance between freedom and safety is one that we have to carefully balance. I saw...I saw this myself in San Francisco. This kind of rhetoric was very frightening and it gave—it created a climate in which violence took place. I wish that we all again would curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made, with the understanding that some of the ears this is falling on are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume."

Given some of the incredibly hateful things that are being said- and, more sadly still, believed by far too many as fact- about President Obama and others who are trying to improve the health care system in this country, Pelosi's warning comes at a pretty scary time. Will anyone pay the slightest bit of attention, though? Those in the business of stirring up this kind of hate don't seem to care what the results are, as long as it helps achieve their short term political goals.

I think most Americans are disgusted by the kind of hateful propaganda we've been seeing, but there is a core group out there all too ready to believe it, and who knows how many among them are capable of being driven to extremes by it? It's truly scary.

I wish people would step back and remember that no matter how passionate you feel about an issue, no matter how much you disagree with someone, you can do so in a civil way. So much of the political discourse in this country is so hateful and ugly, and instead of doing anything about it, we seem to have just accepted it and started looking the other way.

Honors for Milk & King, Nothing for the Rest of Us

President Obama is awarding the highest civilian honor in the United States, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, to out tennis great Billie Jean King and, posthumously, to slain gay rights legend Harvey Milk.

The honor is way overdue in the case of Harvey Milk and I'm very glad to see it finally happening. I think, though, that if Milk was still with us today he'd be the first to point out that these honors are a nice gesture that in no way excuses the Obama administration's complete lack of action gay rights.

All of the President's campaign promises on ending Don't Ask Don't Tell and repealing the Defense of Marriage Act evaporated into thin air right around the time Rick Warren opened his mouth at the Inauguration. The President has been a huge disappointment so far and while I'm glad to see him honoring Milk and Billie Jean King, that amounts to about half a drop in a very large bucket.

And, gee, it's not at all suspicious that news of these honors comes the same week that it was revealed that the Obama Administration pressured Congressman Alcee Hastings into removing his addition to the Defense Spending Bill that would have blocked the military from spending any money on removing LGBT members from the armed services.

So, not only does this Administration not want to actively pursue what they promised the LGBT community, they're actually working behind the scenes to achieve the exact opposite! Something to keep in mind as 2012 approaches and we begin to hear fresh promises.

Obama's First Supreme Court Nominee

President Obama announced his choice to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter today: Federal Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

Sotomayor would be a historic pick as the first Hispanic ever to serve on the court, as well as being the third woman (and only the second currently) to take her place as a Justice.

From what I've read so far, Sotomayor seems to be a promising pick. I was hoping that Obama would select a woman (I still think it's a disgrace that the number of women on the court is as low as it is and that the last President allowed the number to be cut in half!), and Sotomayor has a very inspiring personal story, having been raised in the housing projects of the Bronx.

She's also been quoted as saying something that I think sums up exactly what I'd be looking for in a Supreme Court Justice:

"I strive never to forget the real world consequences of my decisions on individuals, businesses and government."

I want to hear more about her record, especially in relation to LGBT issues if she's presided over any cases involving them. So far, though, I'm really happy with this nomination. She isn't likely to change the balance of the court, since she'd presumably be a liberal voice replacing another such voice, but since she's only 54 she could easily serve for two or three decades, which would significantly strengthen the liberal half of the court.