LGBT Civil Rights: I Will Now Be a "Single Issue" Activist.

I have spent over 40 years of my life working in Democratic candidates' campaigns. Forty years. I have been a delegate to two national conventions, eight state conventions, phone banked, stuffed envelopes, canvassed perhaps as much as 1,000 miles of neighborhoods, donated close to $100,000 of my own money, sacrificed my free time, lost friends who were Republicans, alienated much of my conservative family and more.

All those years, this gay man (once a mere Democratic teen in the 1960's), I have fought for union rights, civil rights for non-whites, for women's rights and their reproductive rights, for farm workers, for migrants, for immigrants, for the homeless, for prisoners' rights including the right to vote, for better schools and better pay for teachers, for garment workers, for cleaner water, cleaner air and a cleaner earth. I have also been a animal rights activists. Moreover, I was an organizer against the War in Vietnam, marched against Bush's wars in the Middle East and have been a life long pacifist. I have been "there" for most every progressive battle the Left has waged inside and outside the Democratic Party. And all of that time, I have worked for the Civil Rights of my LGBT sisters and brothers.

And I'm proud of all of that and would not take back one minute of my life and how I've led it.

But after 40 years, I am qualified to say this: there has been very little "reciprocal altruism" by the Left and even less so by the Democratic Party. It is absolutely shameful that the vile "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy --that tells young men and women to lie about who they love -- was challenged by the Log Cabin Republicans and that it was Republicans who won this federal court case declaring it unconstitutional. Ponder that. Ponder the fact that it is Ted Olsen, another Republican, who signed on to fight for LGBT marriage rights.

Reflect on this: American history will now record that the right for "gays in the military" to serve was won in a federal court by a Republican Party group. That is a disgrace to the Democratic Party.

So, it comes down to this: I no longer have "patience" with those on the Left and those in power within the Democratic Party who have always found it convenient to push LGBT civil rights to the back of the agenda. I'm beyond just being nauseated with cowardly admonitions to "have patience" and "these things take time" and "there are other pressing issues" and blah, blah, blah.

I doubt that there are very few here who have given as much as I have over my lifetime on behalf of the Democratic Party. To those who have, I salute you, I honor and treasure you...and you have more than my gratitude, you have my love.

But now, after 40 years, there is no more important or urgent matter to me than the god-damned basic civil rights that every American freely enjoys, that is with the "single" exception of one class of people. Guess who? The LGBT community. We are the sole group of Americans who are denied our civil rights in housing, in employment, to serve openly in the Armed Forces when we bleed and die for this nation. We are not only denied marriage rights, we don't even have federal protections of our "unions".

So, now I will proudly become that marginalized person on the political field who is dismissively called a "single issue" person. Yeah. That will be me. Because it seems fair to conclude that this is the only "single issue" that the Democratic Party is always willing to delay, to postpone, to kick down the road. It's the "single issue" that is always put on the bottom of any priority list. And whenever it finally rises to the top of the list, well how quickly more "urgent" issues appear. Coincidence? Not hardly.

No one ever needs to tell any of us in the LGBT community that we make some people squirm, we make them feel uncomfortable. We've gotten that "message" loud and clear from the very day we were born. Keep in mind, our Gaydar is not just an instinct for identifying others like us, but it also is very adept at clocking not just overt homophobia, but also at recognizing the nuanced and coded language used by many who call us their "friends" as we painfully discover they never were friends at all. And, finally, there those who know that they are inept at using coded language when engaging with us and so they identify themselves by their deafening silence and their absence whenever our "single issue" comes up. It's the "single issue" where they are always found missing in action.

And then, there are those blessed heterosexuals who have no dog in our LGBT fight, but who I've seen show up, stand up, speak up on my tiny minority's behalf. To be frank, there really haven't been that many of you, but to those who did, let me assure you: you are never forgotten and you will always loved. The kid who is bullied never forgets the one person that stood up to the bullying while everyone else wouldn't. We know who you are and we always remember and count you as a real friend, who was a friend in deed.

So, yes, the economy is important. Ending war is important. And so is rescuing a cat from a tree is important. It's just prioritizing, isn't it?

And now, here at the end of 2010, nothing has a greater priority to this old homosexual than the basic Civil Rights of my LGBT community. I do not want any young LGBT Americans to have to endure the bullshit and second right citizenship that my companion and I have all of our lives. I want to leave them a better world than I found it.

So, until the Democratic Party puts our civil rights -- our basic civil rights -- up front and does something about it, I will be a Single Issue Activist.

David Zephyr is a Single Issue person. And proudly so.

...simply for bringing up Second Amendment issues here and on Daily Kos. But those who know me know that I'm a bit more diverse than that - and I support gay rights. :hi:

but with regard to additional issues (education, neutering corporate personhood, poverty, in addition to LGBT civil rights).

Very well-written piece, thank you for sharing your thoughts on this.

I know that Eleanor would not run from our issues if she were alive today. She'd be at the forefront. But we don't seem to have Democrats like her or her husband much anymore, but we sure have an oversupply of politicians. Thank you, Dappleganger.

:patriot:

don't turn away from other progressives who also believe in GLTB rights, and don't turn away from caring about other causes. :(

It's way past time. There are no more excuses.

:)

The LGBT community has always had my back. Anything I can do to reciprocate will always be yours. I wish it could be more. :hug:

:hug:

I love PA. After being tossed to the streets as a teen, I lived on the streets here in LA for quite a while before making my way to NYC. I stayed at a big farm house filled with hippies in Pennsylvania and went horseback riding in Western PA in the Autumn. I still remember how beautiful it was even to this day. And, of course, my hero, Ben Franklin has his shop there in Philly.

Over time, we grew accustomed to the Democratic Party's inaction on LGBT issues.

That changed with Bill Clinton signed DOMA into law in 1996 -- the first time a president ever had signed specifically anti-gay legislation, and it came from the Democrats.

And in the current administration, we're again seeing not complicity but active opposition to LGBT equality, from all the kerfuffle around DADT to, yes, an official defense of DOMA.

I, too, am tired of waiting. Fifteen years ago, there was perhaps some justification because America wasn't "ready" to accept LGBT equality. But now the numbers clearly have shifted, and the current administration is sorely behind the times.

I'm sick of feeling sick to my stomach after casting a vote for a Democratic president who doesn't recognize my right to live and love.

:thumbsup:

how would that work out for LGBT people?

(actually full humanity) for LGBTQI people, how would that diminish the fight for other progressive issues?

If every Democrat picked a single issue, it could be full employment, or pro-choice, or equal pay, immigration, or any number of a host of issues that wouldn't affect gay rights. I think we're better off working together on a host of issues, than dividing into factions based on single issues.

He was explaining why he has reached this point in a long life of activism.

What this OP is saying is that we will no longer be told to wait or that our rights are less of a priority. We wouldn't NEED to be "single issue" voters if the rest of the Democratic population gave some credence and weight to making our rights happen now. The OP stated very clearly and convincingly that he has devoted his life to supporting and fighting for other Democratic causes, but that he has NOT seen the broader Democratic community reciprocate in kind when it comes to LGBT issues. When we complain, we are derided as "single issue" voters, i.e., TRIVIAL issue voters. Well, now it's become necessary to wear the "single issue" mantle proudly.

That is how I read the OP.

this poster has more than earned the right to focus on his attention on obtaining justice for himself and other members of his community.

I'm, frankly, surprised anyone could read this OP without being brought to tears.

if it were not for the fact that this issue is always put on the back burner and the gay community is told constantly to wait. How long are they expected to wait for basic civil rights that the rest of us consider a birthright.

What makes you think that the issues you gave as examples don't affect the gay community or their rights? They do and I'm sure the OP knows that too, (that's why he has spent a lifetime advocating for them), but since he does not have equal rights he will not see the same benefit as us in the event that we manage to get full employment, retain pro-choice rights, equal pay and so on and so on.

That is why equal rights for all should be at the top of the list of things to get done.

This talking point, demeaning the issues that people fight for, started on Democratic blogs a few years ago. I now believe that was because people who focus on one thing at a time, tend to be more successful than those who are all over the place.

I think it's way past time to bring back single issue campaigns. Since the Democrats joined Republicans and decided to mock those issues, which oddly were mostly civil rights for gays and women's issues etc, (I have a vivid memory of a 'progressive' blogger mocking what he called 'the women's studies set' and blamed them for the Dems inability to get anything done) nothing at all has been accomplished.

There is no need to speculate on 'if everyone just focused on one thing'. Make a list, focus on an issue, pressure those who claim to represent us until it's done. Then move on to the next.

DADT should have been done by now. After the court ruling, all that needed to be done was not to challenge it. It was already in effect when this Democratic Administration intervened and stopped it. Funny how people argue that they 'can't stop the dismissals' but they do have the power to stop the implementation of a court order.

Now, are we supposed to believe that having waited for Congress to get it done, as the president said, it's going to be done with a Republican majority?

As the OP says, it was Republicans who made progres on this issue. Which demonstrates that like them or not, they NEVER say 'we can't' which seems to be all Democrats do these days, make excuses for their failure to act. And it was a Democratic president who blocked the results of that successful action.

We've listened for nearly ten years now to all the excuses from Democrats for not getting anything done, impeachment, gay rights, saving SS, ending torture, etc. etc. and none of it worked, I think most people are not beginning to wake up and many believe they have been lied to.

Word!

in keeping their issue in the public arena. We need more single issue activists.

This isn't about me, for example, picking gun control (about which I feel strongly) as my single issue. You're missing the depth of the anger and the depth of emotion and the hurt and betrayal.

What if this was 1962 and the issue was civil rights for African Americans? What if African Americans could still face legal discrimination? Would you feel that it was wrong for the African American community and those of us who strongly supported civil rights for ALL to make that our single issue? For many, it was the single issue, the push for the issue swelled and damn it, we FINALLY got a civil rights act in 1964. People can still hate and be bigots, but African Americans FINALLY had legal protections and, at least on paper, equal rights.

The LGBTQI community has faced horrific discrimination and the community and those of us who love LGBTQI people damn well better see that the push for equal rights swells and becomes an issue the Democrats can no longer push to the back burner. Nothing will change otherwise.

I applaud you, David, and totally support you.

Can't add anything to what you wrote as you covered it all. Thanks, tpsbmam. :)

person to passionately champion the cause or causes they have the most passion for, with general support from other Dems.

I'll lead the march on X if you lead the march on Y. But we both need to be at each other's marches.

never mind

David stated that it's sad (and ominous, as we glimpsed two weeks ago) that movement on repealing DADT is coming from Republicans, and NOT from Democrats.

While I am still pragmatic in my reflection on some issues, enough is enough. This straight, happily married, father of two, will proudly stand beside you any time I am given the opportunity ... no ... the privilege, of doing so.

:)

Seriously though...

Just keep doing what you're doing.

Single-issue and multi-issue and pragmatics all have their function.

Why settle for just one arena? ;-)

I'm proud to stand with you, David. It's now or never.

Thanks, TriMera. :)

I am sick of the waiting, It is time for civil disobedience. Disrupt and annoy, no business as usual that includes Democrats

Many here don't know that mitchtv and David Zephyr know each other. This man has been at it for decades and he is a treasure to have here at the DU. :)

I am only sorry that I cannot particpate much anymore

But not everything in politics is "team blue" vs. "team red." I feel sorry for you that you seem to be stuck viewing politics through that prism, and that this limitation on your point of view seems to have prevented you from understanding the point and the spirit of this OP.

of a 20 year old daughter who, aside from being kind, generous, lovely and inspiring, is gay, I thank you for your hard work and your humanity.

Your daughter has an amazing mom and you tell her I said so. :hug:

...never seems to make any actual progress towards absolutely
ending abortion (because then, having achieved that goal, they
would then lose much of their hold over the god-mongers), the
Democratic Party will *NEVER* willingly take bold, affirmative
steps to ensure Gay Rights or Women's Rights because they
would then lose a significant hold over those two demographic
groups.

David, I understand your decision completely.

Tesha

"much like the Republican Partynever seems to make any actual progress towards absolutely ending abortion (because then, having achieved that goal, they would then lose much of their hold over the god-mongers)".

I don't think you are cynical at all. Thanks.

You've nicely summed up exactly what's going on here.

I've pretty much reached that point myself. I've spent the last 40 years marching and writing letters and (professionally) taking care of people at the bottom of our society, while cleaning up the wreckage of other people's messes. I was one of the founders of Gay Liberation at my undergrad university in 1973. Now, in my dotage, I'm spending my energy primarily on improving the world for our younger LGBTQI brothers, sisters, brother-sisters and sister-brothers.

Whenever you see a well-adjusted, LGBT youngster, you can know you made a difference. For me, it's all about leaving them in a better place than we were. :hug:

I'm ready to become a single-issue voter, quite honestly, in that I won't ever cast a ballot again for someone who does not support gay and lesbian couples' right to marry.

Words are cheap now. Thank you, Zenlitened. :)

including MARRIAGE.

That includes Mr. Obama in 2012, unless he changes his tune. My patience with the lesser of two evils has run out. I will vote FOR someone who truly supports me, or for no one at all.

And to those "pragmatists" who would condemn me or this OP for such an attitude, look to yourselves for not doing enough, for justifying too much. YOU will share in the negative consequences from LGBTs not voting for Dems. That's how a coalition works.

Bravo and K/R

I like that.

And that was, if there is no one to vote for that supports our rights, then I intend to use the write-in option, and express my disgust by writing in Harvey Milk. I think if the gay community (and its supporters) banded together at election time and used the write-in option, it would be a show of solidarity and our displeasure with how we're being treated by both parties.

I too have been in the struggle for many years. I remember marching in protests for the ERA when I was a teenager for example. I was in the Gay Liberation Front in the seventies. More recently I was the host of a LGBT issues radio show on the Head On Radio Network. While I cannot claim as extensive a history as your own activism I've put in my efforts for progressive causes both financially and physically over the years.

At 57 I have reached the point that I'm just not taking this crap anymore. Please consider me as standing with you.

Single Issue.

Peter Godbold

First, let me thank you for your activism. You can know you made not a difference, but did it on many dimensions that you'll never see, but believe me, you did. And I am grateful for it. Your post spoke to me very powerfully. Living on the streets as a gay teen here in Los Angeles, I was volunteering at the LA Free Clinic in 1970 (I got a hot meal), a young lesbian about my age (17 or 18) walked in wearing a tight t-shirt with a small pink button that said "Gay Pride". This was only months after Stonewall. My heart nearly popped out of my chest. That single act was so self-affirming and she will never know what her wearing that button on that day did for me. I was already a leftie, anti-war, anti-Nixon kid, but she told me (without a word spoken) that there would be a better day.

Single issue. Proud to know you Peter.

There need to be people who concentrate all their activities on one issue. But I'll never be one of them. Good for you, though.

I've decided to be a single issue activist and single issue voter.

Here's to us :toast:

I share your sentiments. A big K&R for a powerful post.

:yourock:

theHandpuppet rocks! :)

To think that your wants, needs and desires are at all important.

:sarcasm:

Amazing post. Proud to give it a boost.

You are a one-person, non-stop, 24/7 steam roller for our community. I see your tireless efforts just here alone at the DU and I'm so friggin' proud to know you. :)

:patriot:

:kick:

I am delighted and proud to recommend this.

Thank you, sir, for your committment and passion to the fight for our rightful equality.

And I appreciate your kind words, terrya. :)

Apparently, "the list" needs to be posted again.

:sarcasm:

Thank you for posting this, David. I truly admire and value your activism, and I share your goal of leaving our world and our country more GLBTIQ-friendly than it was when we entered it. I am largely a single-issue activist as well, and I gladly share this fight with fine folks like yourself.

I'm done with the excuses for delaying gay rights. As a politician you either support and work for full equality for everyone, or you are a craven political coward. I will no longer support the latter with my time, money, or votes, regardless of political party.

Yours is a very powerful post. Thank you! :hi:

K&R!

You are an amazing person. I read your posts and say to myself, "I wish I'd said that" because you speak from your heart and that's always the best place to begin a conversation. Thanks for all you do. :hi:

I really appreciate that very much David, and the feeling is definitely mutual. Thank you!

:pals:

K&R

I think it is a shame that there are Republicans who care more about our civil rights than most in our own party. We've seen it time and again.

Of course, there are many in our own party who are right there beside us speaking up and standing up for our civil rights, but they are just as powerless as we are in our own party. To them, I have nothing but the utmost respect and love. They are heroes in my eyes for standing up for what is right even if it they are not directly affected by whether or not we have rights. To me, they are heroes.

As to the ones in our party who do not care about our rights, message received. We know you have nothing but contempt, scorn, ridicule, and in some cases, outright hatred for us. Message received loud and clear.

There aren't that many, but they are "heroes" when they step up. In fact, I think we had more pull in the Democratic Party in the past than we do now. President Obama promised to end DADT "this year". He needs to keep his word now or else his words will only be just that: words.

:)

...... rather than candidates. IMHO, people invest way too much time, energy and aspiration on individual politicians. Civil rights didn't come about because JFK did the right thing purely out of what was in his heart - they came about because marches and boycotts and sit-ins forced him and LBJ to do the right thing.
I've said it before, when movements become big enough, the politicians will have no choice but to support them, or get steamrolled by them.

Stonewall was direct action. Rosa Parks was direct action. And on and on.

Politicians are politicians. But teasing the oppressed with promised civil rights is truly wicked.

Your comments are spot on the mark, marmar.

I may not have been a teen in the 60s, or 70s, or 80s... but I have been working for this party my entire adult life.

And I'm done. No more triangulation. No more waiting. No less full citizenship and all the rights that comes with that. It's not too much to ask... and we don't need to be more "patient". For every day we are patient, another one of our brothers and sisters lives are impacted or even ruined.


It's time for LGBT and our true allies to unite around this. No more excuses.

Thanks for your support. :thumbsup: :hug:

Solidarity!

I wish I could do more than post on boards. :(


ETA: In the past I did but now I'm a "keyboard activist" because of health problems.

Sorry for whining, I needed to explain a little. I love your posts BTW. :hug:

K&R

This is not really a "SINGLE" issue, as LGTB rights encompass far more than any one thing.

Furthermore, I have, as you have, donated thousands of $$ to the Democratic Party, hours & hours hours of my time, canvassing neighborhoods, manning phone banks, knocking on doors, registering voters, etc, etc, etc. I am FUCKING sick of being told to go to the back of the bus & told to be patient and that "things could be worse." Hmmm. I don't know that I see that anymore. I certainly would NEVER vote for a repig, but are the Dems going to give me what I need? I am, indeed, looking at the "Big Picture,", but I have to ensure that my needs are being met as well.

:applause:

I spent my formative years in the middle-East, where the left was predominantly concerned with traditional concerns such as poverty, education and colonialism.

When I arrived in Australia, I was surprised to learn that there really wasn't a "Left" to speak of, instead there was a "new Left". The New Left did not concern itself with issues of poverty and economic inequality and instead was mainly concerned with issues of gender, ethnicity and sexuality. It seemed that not a year went past without there being some new kind of sexuality. First there was transexuality, then intersexuality (people born with Klinefelter's syndrome and the like) and then there was asexuality. The funny thing about the asexuals was that they seemed to be mainly on the lookout for a like-minded asexual boyfriend or girlfriend, which seemed to render the whole thing rather absurd.

In any event, I was never under the impression that the gay activists were anything other than single-issue partisans. This is not to say that I disagreed with their agenda. If anything I thought that same-sex marriage was eminently reasonable. But it is probably true that I did not regard their concerns with the same level of urgency as, for example, the plight of people in the third world. It seemed that being middle-class* and without material want was a prerequisite for being one of these activists.

It should be remembered that at least gay issues get oxygen in the media. The fact that the minimum wage has not been increased in the last 30 years does not.


(* middle-class in the traditional sense, ie bourgeois, rather than in the contemporary American sense, meaning average)

:patriot:

bravo.

Perfection.

I enjoyed reading this post.

Maybe if more people put in all of their time on this one set of issues, we'd see more progress.

My daughter (in the 11th grade) and I were recently discussing her concerns with how some other students are disrespectful and sometimes cruel to her friends who happen to gay. She mentioned how some people, who otherwise seem intelligent, are "jerks" when it comes to this issue.

I told her something that is kind of similar to part of what you wrote in this OP. I've been active in political/social issues for many a decade. And in a heck of a lot of these, among the most reliable allies we've had -- for example, in protesting the lack of serious legal consequences for the hate gang that brutally attacked my nephew, because they hated black people -- was the gay community. And, of course, I'm not talking about just friends and co-workers: I mean people who live in other communities, who fully understand the dangers of such hate groups, traveling every week for months, to provide support. And likewise on Native American issues, environmental struggles, and on and on.

It requires an ultra-obnoxious form of vanity for people in the Democratic Party, including the democratic left, to take this type of support for granted. Or to assume that, if not out of a sense of human decency, then at least an appreciation of the dynamics of creating a united front to promote one's own issue(s), it is realistic to expect the support of the gay community when others do not return the favor.

Politicians who are willing to sacrifice the human rights of any segment of the united front that I believe in, are wasting their time if they expect a penny from me. I don't want to hear anyone say to be patient, that these things take time, when speaking of the right for one adult to marry another adult. Later for that weak shit.

But then, you always were. :)

I've knocked on the doors, waved signs at intersections, phone banked, wrote letters to the editor, talked to friends and neighbors, held campaign parties, given money, asked for money, and celebrated ecstatically when my issue or candidate won - even though it was never my issue. I was happy to do it and still am.

But now I'm 50 years old and still recovering from my second bout with cancer. Will I ever get to marry my partner, Dwaine - the guy I fell in love with the moment I met him 15 years ago? The guy who still makes me laugh every single day?

If we can't even end an obviously discriminatory practice like DADT, then I have no hope.

Here's an affectionate abrazo for you and your beloved.

It's fascinating to me that the concept of reciprocal altruism, which is what has sustained the human race (indeed life itself) seems alien to the party apparatus in the Democratic Party.

Take care of yourself. And, I thank you for those years of your activism. You have a real priority and that's taking care of yourself now. :hug:

I hear ya brother.....

justice but Civil Rights for us all. I do not understand why more do not understand that unless ALL of us have Civil Rights, NONE of us will truly be free. It seems odd that no one thought of the Civil Rights workers of the 1960's as "single issue activists".

Did you know you are a noble person? Your gifted and insightful posts all these years say so. :)

I cannot thank you enough for your long service, DZ.

Like you said to another poster, know that when you see a well-adjusted LGBT young person, or a child in a poor family who managed to get enough to eat and get a scholarship and make it, or an elderly person who has a dignified, content retirement, the list goes on and on...you made a difference.

But the weasel words do get really old, don't they? People who are vocally "uncomfortable" with the queer community and keep finding excuses to cling to their superstitious bullshit, or throw slurs around and defend them on the basis of use and tradition, or say one thing when they're talking at an HRC fundraiser during the campaign and a totally different one when they actually have power---feh. Life's too short.

Withywindle, I checked out your profile and you are from Chicago! I love that city, the people, the food, the history. My Haymarket Martyr heroes are buried there along with Lucy Parsons and Emma Goldman. Now those were fighters!! Thank you for your very sweet and encouraging words.

I've lived in Chicago for almost 20 years and I love it so much. The awareness of the Haymarket martyrs and Lucy Parsons is still strong here, and--well, I'm most in love with the music, honestly. And the fact that there are jobs here, unlike my home area.

I grew up in SW VA--Appalachia, now that's an area with an amazing tradition of resistance that is never ever told in mainstream histories. But, alas, still not friendly to "our kind." One of the reasons why I had to leave.

I'm sorry.....did you lose the vote???

If you did, what was the tally?????


How many Republicans gave you their vote???

n/t.

And if the votes weren't there before the election, they can't be there now.

You're tone is silly.

There's no reason to still think there's hope on this issue.

And the Dems have proven they'll never be a pro-LGBT party.

They'd rather chase the "center" that doesn't exist than do what's right.

It is tiresome to be told to "wait for the right time," yet it never seems to be "the right time." gAyTMS around the country need to start popping out "insufficient funds" receipts for those requesting our money (and time) and do nothing to further our cause. It is also important to teach our youth about our struggles and how to overcome oppression, not adapt to it!

As for allies, you said it best:

"And then, there are those blessed heterosexuals who have no dog in our LGBT fight, but who I've seen show up, stand up, speak up on my tiny minority's behalf. To be frank, there really haven't been that many of you, but to those who did, let me assure you: you are never forgotten and you will always loved."

You also struck it home with your comments about our gaydar, it isn't just limited to picking up hotties in the supermarket at the "10 items of less" line, it has been equipped, at least for me, to sound an alarm when there is danger, and that includes those who claim to be allies but aren't!

Great post! A real show piece!

It's almost 2011. Enough is enough. Promises don't mean anything anymore. Keeping them does. :)

In pursuit of a "center" that doesn't exist and NEVER did, this party has, in one way or another, turned its back on EVERY part of the coalition that elected the Obama administration.

The center doesn't exist.

There's no such thing as a "centrist" voter.

And there's no such thing as a sustainable "centrist" politics.

all else is homophobia. K&R

if you have been involved in the fight for our rights all that time, as i have, then you must know that every single codified right we have ever gained has been gotten by democratic party members who have put their own careers on the line for our rights. they have always had to do that while walking a tightrope of possibly making life even worse for us, or causing a backlash that eliminates them from government completely.


deriding democrats, and effectively enough to cause a large number of lgbtqi...s to vote against their best interest, threatens all progress we have made, all the endless work we have done to eke out what we already have. and compared to what was, we have changed the lot of lgbtqi...s, phenomenally.

repuke queers serve only their own personal selves.

btw, if you know our history, then you know that re: DADT, president clinton acted believing, albeit misinformed on the method, that he would protect us from worse, and begin progress away from an all-out ban.

we live surrounded by a massive number of people who want to do far worse to us than withhold rights.

seriously consider the meaning of 'all-or-none.'

peace

* edit punctuation

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

First, you, perhaps unintentionally created a straw horse, assigned it to me and then argued against it when you wrote: "deriding democrats, and effectively enough to cause a large number of lgbtqi...s to vote against their best interest, threatens all progress we have made". I said no such thing. Where did you see that in my OP?

But let me get to the overarching point you were struggling to make.

I plead guilty to this: I will not distribute unmerited praise to Democratic politicians for the meager rights the LBGT community can cling to right now. I'll let you give politicians credit if you want to. With very few exceptions (Governor Jerry Brown in the 1970's), none deserve much praise at all, unless one mistakes promises with deeds.

Let's review where the great majority of LGBT rights sprang from:

Unions began extending many employment protections and recognition to LGBT workers long ago. No Democratic Party politician did that.

Boycotts against discriminating corporations like Coors pushed back against employment discrimination. Again, no Democratic politician did that.

Boot strap organizations like PFLAG, ACTUP, GLADD, HRC and more have spent decades working publicly and privately pushing for equal rights for the LGBT community. Not Democratic politicians.

Corporations like Disney and Microsoft bravely extended rights to LGBT workers. Zero lifting by Democratic politicians.

The American Psychiatric Association and the American Medical Association broke with convention and took away the stigma used against us. Not Democratic politicians.

Lawsuits against sodomy laws all the way to the Supreme Court twice by brave LGBT Americans ended this travesty. Again, no help from the Democratic Party.

Lawsuits by monogamous, committed homosexual parters in state after state pushed the courts to open up civil unions and even marriage in some cases. The Democratic Party had nothing to do with this whatsoever.

Lawsuits by LGBT Americans pushing for the rights to keep their children and to adopt won watershed victories for our community. No help from the Democratic Party.

European nations began breaking down the legal obstacles to LGBT humans along with work within the United Nations. International pressure. No Democratic politicians.

The ACLU and Amnesty International took up our cause for civil rights and to protect us back when we didn't even register on the radar of the Democratic Party.

I could go on and on for hours with the early efforts of the Mattachine Society and more , but let me be very clear in where you and I have a great disagreement: To begin lavishing praise to Democratic politicians for all of the above victories not only would be a grave misrepresentation of history, but it would be highly insulting to the brave women and men who really sacrificed, who paid the price -- some with their very lives. You can give the Democratic Party credit if you want to for the above. I will not.

Our march to equality has come from direct action, not electoral action. It was organizing and hard, thankless work by the LGBT community that got us this far. Sometimes we took our victories in the streets as with Stonewall and other times in the Courts.

And now, the glaring fact is that the Log Cabin Republican Club, a group I have derided for decades, has now won in a federal court a powerful judgment that DADT must end now. That quantum game changer for LGBT rights came without the Democratic Party.

With respect, I submit to you that whenever the precious few times Democrats "codified" something, it was almost always only because they were pushed into it, forced by the courts or by unrelenting pressure from my LGBT sisters and brothers. I know. I was there all these years.

vote as their constituency intends them to vote.

i will reply more completely later, just running through right now.
thank you for discussing.

is about ideology.

"forcing" legislators to enact legislation is how it works, if people will do what it takes to do that. many won't do that work.

lcr, and some others in sheep's clothing to recruit disgruntled glbts, did not succeed, and their method is not more effective in reversing an act of congress than having congress reverse it will be.
a number of lcr heroes were among those who filibustered efforts to repeal dadt.

local lgbt rights have been fought for for almost a century, have always moved us forward, and have always been fought for by democrats, fought against by repukes.

my own unrelenting pressure went into eking out this progress for more than forty years.

and yes, you do deride democrats.


peace

If there's any humor in all of this, it's that Democratic politicians have really been the "single issue" folks when it comes to LGBT civil rights. With very few exceptions, it's the "single issue" they don't want to touch and that is radioactive. So I ask, who really is the single issue crowd after all? Thanks for all you do. :)

I say this as a queer woman with a disability.

I definitely see what you're saying, and I loathe the hostility towards LGBTQ rights.

However, seeing sexual orientation and gender identity as "the last frontier" doesn't help us.

Women often face huge barriers to accessing safe and legal abortion in the US. They still make 73 cents on a man's dollar. There are still horrible racist laws on the table aimed at immigrants. State violence is a reality for many groups of people, including, disproportionately, LGBTQ people. There are a hell of a lot of second-class citizens in our so-called civilized society, including, but not limited to, LGBTQ people.

I will never be a Single Issue Activist because intersectionality is so damn important.

That being said, I also can't stand people who insist on seeing rights for any group of people as a fringe issue and putting it on the backburner.

It certainly isn't the last frontier for me. It's just that the promises have been made, people were sold on bill of goods in return for power. The promises must be kept.

lightningandsnow, whether you intentionally or unintentionally, you correctly point out this out: oppression breeds oppression. Those in power, who were entrusted with that power by the oppressed must keep their word to the oppressed. Sadly, it is those in power who pit the oppressed against the oppressed.

Still, the Civil Rights in housing, employment, marriage, adoption, immigration and military service are all forbidden to only one class of American citizens: those of us who are LGBT. That's truly a great wrong that can no longer be winked at.

well-designed to make sure that we don't ever have to expect to win any issue; as soon as we start demanding, we are framed as the problem.

I'm almost a single-issue activist. For PUBLIC education. For supporting, protecting, and defending fully public education. I'm a teacher.

I say "almost," because, while most of my time and energy is focused on the destruction of my profession, I haven't forgotten the other big issues. And LGBT rights are one of those.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Most single issue political activists are anti-abortion or pro guns.

Great post.

:dem:

My issue is corporate handouts as I see that destroying our country at a faster rate.

I stand with you on your issue though as well. Vocally here and elsewhere as well as the voting both. I wish us both luck in ending the vile treatment of the LGBT community.

I'm doing my happy dance for you right now! :toast:

What the hell does democratic mean if we allow some to be less equal than others? this is the core of the issue. How can we fight poverty, racism, classism if we can't fight for this.

When I was a kid thrown to the streets by a homophobic family winding up in L.A. and then later in NYC, I can not tell you how many straight men and women reached out to give me a hand up, a hot meal, a bed to sleep on. I've marched with friends of mine who have long passed in the 1980's to draw attention to the AIDS catastrophe, and there marching alongside me were some of the finest people one could ever know: straight women and men who showed up, who joined in from the goodness of their hearts.

Thank you, Scruffy1, for your post. :)

Inequality is a cancer.

Having second and third classes of citizens makes expanding these lower "castes" of people always a step or two away along with ever increasing layers of classes of people.

This one stinks especially bad because it is a direct assault on self determination, if the government or voters can dictate who someone loves and builds a life with here then it establishes and encourages a precedent that virtually any thing we do in pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness is at the whim of a fickle and unthinking majority.

If gay folks can be dictated to like this then we all can, its just a step away.

:)

I don't think I have thought about gay rights in those terms before, but you're absolutely right.

Great post, and thank you for your solidarity.

:hi:

the media is a good place to start vocally supporting equal rights for our friends who have been waiting for so very long.

:)

to say I'm with you 100%. Back in the early 70's we thought things were changing.... we were told to be patient and things would change. We formed groups (proud co-founder and president of Temple Lambda here) supported the cause, and had faith.

Last year my husband and I went to Equality Forum and as I listened to the speeches on marriage, DODT etc. I realized how disgusting it is that we're still discussing these issues. If anyone had told me, after Malkovich came out that gays in the military would be an issue twenty-five years later... or that spousal rights would be controversial in 2010... or that equal employment would even be discussed...

Patience, my ass. From now on you're either with me or against me.

This is so well said and absolutely true.

There always seems to be a reason it can't happen this year. There is always a reason we aren't quite good enough.

I have been much more active in politics than any straight person I know. While I have not been as active as you, I have canvassed, donated, marched, called. I haven't seen many changes for our community over the years. Perhaps becoming a Single Issue Activist is the only way to go.

Thanks for your OP.

This is not the time to receive mediocre support from our colleagues.

You've more than done your part for other liberal causes and have certainly earned the right to direct your full energy to this. I still shake my head with embarrassment over the fact some DUers wanted to abandon gay rights after the 2004 election. After all, Gay Marriage caused Kerry to lose, right? :sarcasm: We lost a lot of great contributors (like Plaid Adder) to DU over that shameful act.

If anyone gives you crap over this, tell them to FOAD.

But I do have a set of three filters a politician has to pass to get my support. Open support for LGBT rights is one of them. Support for women's rights and labor/unions are the other two. (Support for the three typically go hand in hand anyway.) I've got a whole lot of other preferences, but I'm tickled to death when I can vote for someone that openly and fiercely supports all three. Even if they don't win, by openly supporting LGBT rights they push the conversation back to the left about support for them. You know, instead of having two candidates, one who openly declares homosexuality should be illegal and punishable by death and one that thinks it should be punishable by stripping of rights and shaming.

I think the left stands behind you for the most part. It's why so much grief is being thrown upwards over DOMA/DADT.

Have you considered fighting against the root cause of homophobia...which is religion?

There are many other victims of religion...and we get kicked around by the Democrats just as badly as the GLBT community. I've always thought GLBT have much in common with atheists, scientists, intellectuals, etc...in that we are somehow a threat to the dominance of Christianity. You will almost never find a homophobic atheist....we realize that homophobia comes directly from religion...and so we hate it as much as you do.

There is no more time to wait. LGBT liberation is matter of life and death for many people.

And I expect that as with other things, you will do it well, and strongly advocate for equality.

We all come at politics from the perspective of our own deeply held, personally-affected concerns and convictions. I'm impressed with your decision to put this issue of yours and others fundamental rights at the forefront of your advocacy and activism. Best of luck to us in your endeavor and best regards.

It cracks me up when anti LGBT folks think these people are flippantly choosing to be gay or bi or T, I mean really. Why would anyone choose to face all those troubles if they had a choice?

I've never figured out why anyone is worried about who zooms who if it isn't them. I think they ought to be spending more time and thought on their own love life or lack thereof. But then wingnutty and religious types want to tell everybody how they should live - and I'm reasonably sure those that protest the most have certain issues of their own, I'm just saying, are you listening Ted Haggard?

this planet, and as I look at those who are supposed to represent my interest, I'm filled with an unavoidable anger at the outright disparity between what I'm expected to put into the party and what they're expected to give back to me and those like me.

The democratic party is too neutered to do anything about our issues, or they simply don't care. Like you I will not support a party that does either of these.

We are two different people at different stages in our lives, yet we stand together, unified, as single issue voters.

Q3JR4.

This is THE civil rights fight of my generation, and too many Democrats are not on the right side of history on this. It disgusts me and shames me. And I agree that we straights have not been active/demanding enough in this fight.

When Dan Choi annouced at that rally he was going over to the WH and chain himself to a fence, why that entire crowd did not join him and at least stage a sit-in in solidarity stunned me. We need to let Washingtom know that this is not just a "gay" issue (too easy to dismisis or play games that way), it is an American issue -- either this country is for full civil rights or it is a sham.

may the dem party earn your loyalty and support again

Hats off to you. :hi:

you have never been considered equal when you are.

:hug:

Each of us only has so much time and energy in our lives. At some point we have to put it into the cause that means the most to us. Keep it in the public eye and never give up!

Thank you for all your hard work and for sharing this with us... :yourock:

It's past time for full equality!

:)

:hi:

:)

:kick:

Very moving post - you have earned your right to move to the front of the bus if anyone has.

civil rights, women's rights, for the animals (a cause that's dear to my heart) and all the progressive causes. I so hope that one day you will have the rights that you are being denied and deserve to have. :hug: