It is fine to serve and die for your country, as long as you are not seen to be gay, with being 'seen' on occasion involving surveillance of email, blogs and Facebook or other social media profiles. Gay people have indeed died in service - as highlighted in works such as Randy Shilts' Conduct Unbecoming: Gays and Lesbians in the US Military (St Martins Press, 1993) and Allan Berube's Coming Out Under Fire: The History of Gay Men and Women in World War Two (Free Press, 1990) - and on occasion because they are gay, ie have been the victims of violence inflicted by fellow servicepeople.
Like St Augustine, Obama made all the right noises - give me chastity (or an 'out' and gay-friendly service) but not quite yet.
The President said "Do not doubt the direction we are heading and the destination we will reach" and reiterated that the US could not afford to lose people who had much-needed skills for fighting but were - inconveniently - gay.
We should not be punishing patriotic Americans who have stepped forward to serve the country. We should be celebrating their willingness to step forward and show such courage.The celebrations may be delayed, despite Obama's comment that the US had made progress on gay rights and would make more, because the President has failed to indicate a timetable for when the change will be implemented.
I appreciate that many of you don't believe progress has come fast enough. Do not doubt the direction we are heading and the destination we will reach.He had earlier said that
For nearly 30 years, you've [ie the HRC] advocated on behalf of those without a voice. That's not easy. For despite the real gains that we've made, there's still laws to change and there's still hearts to open. There are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors, even loved ones - good and decent people - who hold fast to outworn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families like their families; who would deny you the rights most Americans take for granted. And that's painful and it's heartbreaking. And yet you continue, leading by the force of the arguments you make, and by the power of the example that you set in your own lives - as parents and friends, as PTA members and church members, as advocates and leaders in your communities. And you're making a difference.Fine words, finely crafted, but surely the President isn't one of those people "with little power or influence". Sceptics won't be reassured by Obama's call for Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (which limits recognition of gay partnerships) and his call for a federal statute law that would extend benefits to domestic partners. His delay in implementing his recurrent commitment to expunge DADT will presumably be read by many audiences, including Congress, as an indication that he is not truly committed to those changes.
That's the story of the movement for fairness and equality, and not just for those who are gay, but for all those in our history who've been denied the rights and responsibilities of citizenship - (for all who've been told that the full blessings and opportunities of this country were closed to them. It's the story of progress sought by those with little influence or power; by men and women who brought about change through quiet, personal acts of compassion - and defiance - wherever and whenever they could.
Obama might look back to Lyndon Johnson, a President who demonstrated both a personal commitment to human rights and the ability to persuade Congress to adopt his policies. Would we be comfortable observing a head of state who promised to remove racial discrimination within government ... but not quite yet, and indeed at an unspecified time that seems to drift into the future with every request to 'trust me'. Leadership, irrespective of whether it's decorated with a Nobel Prize or gold braid and a screaming eagle, involves boldness and action when responding to systemic disadvantage. It requires more than an acknowledgement that
the struggle waged by the Human Rights Campaign is about more than any policy we can enshrine into law. It's about our capacity to love and commit to one another. It's about whether or not we value as a society that love and commitment. It's about our common humanity and our willingness to walk in someone else's shoes: to imagine losing a job not because of your performance at work but because of your relationship at home; to imagine worrying about a spouse in the hospital, with the added fear that you'll have to produce a legal document just to comfort the person you love - to imagine the pain of losing a partner of decades and then discovering that the law treats you like a stranger.No candles for Bo
The major excitement on the official White House blog, meanwhile, is an entry celebrating the birthday of First Dog Bo. His 'official portrait' is here.
The US armed forces presumably have other things on their mind than candles for Bo. US Air Force officer Lt Colonel Edith Disler (with 25 years of service) last week revealed that she was disciplined and barred from teaching at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs after she invited three gay academy graduates to speak to her class about the DADT policy in 2008. Such an invitation seems reasonable, given respect for human rights, recognition that DADT is an issue facing officers (who presumably have some capacity for independent thought) and disagreement within the Pentagon evident in last month's 'The Efficacy of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' [PDF] by Colonel Om Prakash in Joint Forces Quarterly (a journal published for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff). Prakash comments that "there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that unit cohesion will be negatively affected if homosexuals serve openly" and concludes that the Obama administration should "examine how to implement the repeal of the ban" rather than "reexamine the issue".
Disler reportedly learned after the talk that she was under investigation, was not allowed to return to her classroom and could not discuss the matter with students. A formal letter of counseling indicated that the talk "had the potential to generate the perception that the USAF Academy has taken a position on gays in the military that is contrary to current Air Force and Department of Defense policy on this matter" and reproved her for failing to recognise "that negative publicity ... had the potential to create the perception that the USAF Academy does not support current Air Force and Department of Defense policy on a this sensitive manner."
Perhaps misunderstanding that it's unwise to talk or ask about DADT Disler commented that "It's amazing to say that Air Force Academy combat veterans are not welcome on campus just because they're gay". The Academy's reportedly explained that she should have sought and gained clearance.
