LGBT
Related: About this forumLiberals applaud themselves for championing gay marriage. But there are ghosts at the weddings.
When the news came last June that the New York State Senate had voted to legalize same-sex marriage, I was at a dinner party that felt like New Years Eve, only with genuine emotions. Everyone at the tablestraight, gay, young, oldwas elated. Later, as my wife and I headed home past an Empire State Building ablaze in the rainbow colors of Pride Week, we were still euphoric at having witnessed one of those rare nights when history is made. Same-sex-marriage adversaries constantly proclaim that gay unions threaten traditional marriage. But in truth, its a boon to discover that a right youve taken for granted is so treasured by others that theyll fight to get their fair share of its rewardsand its trials.
Fran Lebowitz is correct to remind us that not all gay people (any more than all straight people) are beating down the doors to what she calls the two most confining institutions on the planet, marriage and the military. But for those who have been, the dawning of marital equality and the demise of dont ask, dont tell are twin peaks in the checkered cavalcade of American social justice.
Since that night, the good news on gay civil rights has kept coming. This month alone, legislative and judicial actions have made same-sex marriage the law in Washington State and Maryland and nudged it closer to reality in California and, Chris Christie notwithstanding, New Jersey. A Valentines week New York TimesCBS News poll, echoing others over the past year, found that Americans now favor marriage over separate-and-unequal civil unions as the legal option for gay couples; less than a third of the public believes that gay families should be denied both. Each day the gay-rights bandwagon attracts unexpected recruits in the vein of the legal odd couple of Ted Olson and David Boies. No less a pitchman than Lloyd Blankfein is making public-service ads for same-sex marriage. Bill OReilly is defending Ellen DeGeneres from American Family Association vigilantes demanding that JCPenney ditch her as a spokesperson. Being in with the gays, its clear, has become a savvy (if not necessarily selfless) way to attach a halo to almost any troubled brand, from Goldman Sachs to some precincts of the Rupert Murdoch empire (though not the New York Post or Wall Street Journal, the only major dailies in the state that disdained large front-page headlines after the Albany victory).
Compared with the other civil-rights battles in America, especially the epic struggle over race that has stained and hobbled the nation since its birth, the fight over gay equality is remarkable for its relative ease, compact chronology, and the happiness of its pending resolution. Theres no happier ending to any plot than a wedding. But, as last Junes celebration has gradually given way to morning-after sobriety, its also clear that something is wrong with this cheery picture. Two things, actually.
http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/gay-marriage-2012-3/
closeupready
(29,503 posts)And additionally, not to be nitpicky, but Bill Clinton was not much of a liberal, in light of DOMA, DADT, welfare deform, NAFTA, and other laws I'm probably missing.
dsc
(52,166 posts)and one name really stood out. Chuck Robb. For a Virginia Senator he was nothing short of amazing on gay issues. He also tried to get open service in the military for gays.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)I won't.
dsc
(52,166 posts)he later admitted it was a mistake but he did vote for it.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)I never heard him say it was a mistake. Do you know where he did that?
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)"The Conscience of a Liberal."
"What troubles me is that I may not have cast the right vote on DOMA,"
"I might have rationalized my vote by making myself believe that my honest position was opposition. This vote was an obvious trap for a senator like me, who was up for reelection. Did I convince myself that I could gleefully deny Republicans this opportunity? . . . When Sheila and I attended a Minnesota memorial service for Matthew Shepard, I thought to myself, 'Have I taken a position that contributed to a climate of hatred?' . . . I still wonder if I did the right thing."
That's a pretty weak repudiation of the vote. He took his dishonor of the DOMA vote to his grave and the stain will never be erased.
dsc
(52,166 posts)and also I think he underestimates the degree to which the Hawaii case brought marriage to the forefront of anti gay issues. I lived in MS at the time and can attest that for anti gay people the Hawaii case was a huge deal and we could have easily wound up with a Constitutional amendment instead of a law.
DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)Also, he did not mention (unless I missed it) that our current Vice President voted for DOMA. Also, Obama was not even mentioned in that article, which took some effort imo.
dsc
(52,166 posts)but it was after saying Clinton was to blame for the votes of those Senators.