March 02, 2006
The Bay Area Reporter has an excellent and in-depth article about the DNC's decision to eliminate the "Director of GLBT Outreach" staff position written by Bob Roehr.
Be sure to read the whole article here. Here is one quote from Ken Sherrill, a political scientist at Hunter College:
Sherrill called Dean's reorganization "an extraordinary mistake. It's not just a slap in the face, it's a gratuitous slap in the face at a time when we thought we had educated political leaders." He remembers how early gay money helped to make Dean a credible presidential aspirant in 2004.
"People who are not powerful don't like having to rely on others to speak for them. One of the reasons for getting involved in the Democratic Party is to speak for ourselves," he explained.
Posted by David at March 2, 2006 05:10 PM
We seem to be at the same point with the Democratic Party as we are with religious extremists: we can’t even get them to recognize Gays’ EQUAL right to exist with all the freedoms straights enjoy. Regardless of what the DNC says about Democratic support of Gay rights, to paraphrase H. L. Mencken, when someone says it's not about marriage equality — it's about marriage equality.
Therefore we must confront Democratic indifference to full, unalloyed Gay equality on our terms, and refuse further debate that is solely limited, as it currently is, to pragmatic, political terms of reference.
Too many Democratic politicians, and virtually all Republicans, have no scruples. If Gays exhibit scruples by, for example, not directly criticizing the radiantly irrational and ignorant so-called religious basis for most politicians’ shying away from full support for Gay equality and freedom, then we place yet another weapon in the hands of the enemies of freedom. If that means telling those who equivocate on full Gay support, in no uncertain terms: “if you are not for us, you are against us,” then so be it. If that means shaming them for their anti-Constitutional - and un-American - stand, then so be it. How would Kerry, for example, feel about showing up on a GLBT "Enemies List?"
Confront the political leaders of all parties we must - but never in anger. What is sacred in the world of civil discourse remains dispassionate fact. The fact of Constitutional guarantees of freedom, for example. Facts are neutral; twisted Machiavellian rationales for not effecting full equality are not. If we Gays calmly stick to the facts, epitomize ethical action and insist on reason as arbiter, we cannot lose in a fair discussion. What if the DNC refuses to debate on those grounds? All the more reason for us to point unceasingly at their, and the GOP’s, thinly disguised bigotry, using its factually correct name. Shame, after all, may be the only way that most political “leaders” can be reached on this issue.
Why do Democrats hold back from full support of equal rights and freedom for Gays? It goes without saying that many Democrats, and all Republicans, are in thrall, if not subsurvient, to the vocal, extreme “religious” right. The sad fact is that the sacrosanct American tolerance of others’ religion, at long last, has become corrupt because such forbearance clearly facilitates Gay suffering at the hands of thugs. As Sam Harris recently said, tolerance of religion’s dangerous, unsupportable certainties is “reason in ruins.” What’s next to crumble, the Constitution?
Slamming the democratic party for not being good enough on the issues of equal rights for gays should be kept in perspective. It is the Republican party that has embraced gay bashing and has made a campaign out of linking the Democratic party with the idea of the legalisation of gay marriages. Sometimes it is good to step back, take a deep breath, and look at the big picture. Dems have gone gently toward legalising gay rights, Republicans have made a policy of inflaming "the Gay threat." Dems may be boring, but they are a hell of a lot better than the alternative.
Glenn,
I'm tired of folks telling me that my only alternatives are to support Democrats or support Republicans. As Bob Roehr stated in his article, many frustrated LGBTI Americans may decide not to vote at all. This could have a devestating inmpact in 2004.
But beyond votes, there is time and money, and there are a million different ways we can show how we feel.
For one, if the situation doesn't change, we can stop giving money to the DNC, and trusting them to make our political decisions for us.
We can give ONLY to the INDIVIDUAL Democratic candidates who are willing to stand with us completely.
We can give to the Stonewall Democrats and lend our time and energy to building their infrastructure rather than trying to build the infrastructure of State Democratic Parties. (We've given millions to the DNC, imagine what Stonewall could do with that kind of cash).
We can SPEAK OUT against Democrats-in-name-only (DINO's) who are unwilling to stand with us.
Stop telling me that the Republicans are my only choice. I have a million choices (including the choice of walking away from it all and picking up a new hobby like bowling.
I think I have to agree with David.
I also want to say though that if I saw some actual action from the supposedly local, grassroots movement to engage the LGBT community by the DNC, I would be ecstatic.
Unfortunately, I haven't seen this. If a national liaison was eliminated to do more on the local level, then it's time to see some action on that level. I'll be the first one there to welcome them with bells on. So, how do we know when (if) that's happening?
It looks like this reorganization happened some time over the summer. I'd be interested to see how things are these days in the infrastructure of the party, if anyone has any idea...
