OUR PRIDE! Our Independence? If Democrats want 2 find our votes in 2010 .... repeal DADT & DOMA now, or more QUEERS will become Greens & Libertarians!

*PLEASE NOTE THIS POST HAS A MAJOR DOMA & DADT UPDATE BELOW*

It is official! June was GLBT Pride Month!

It was declared first by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and then sheepishly a few more hours after that by President Barack Hussein Obama. The Gay & Lesbian Community has finally received a boost toward equality because as of now thirteen states have considered and eight passed or decided to make marriage available to everyone. Nevada and Wisconsin are in the process of creating Domestic Partnerships and the approximately 18 thousand Same Sex Marriages in California performed during the 6 month window last year were also retained as valid. Ironically even Rhode Island is considering legislation to allow for Same Sex Divorce proceedings. But wait, before you hoist your lovers across the threshold, that initial euphoria has begun to ware off.

That hope was quashed recently by two drastic legal injunctions done by the Obama Justice Department in recent Supreme Court cases which, as some speculate, set our fight for equality back five to ten years, as well as negate legislative and judicial victories across the fifty states. This has brought the GLBT Community to honestly call into review all of the previous promises made and financial investment in not just political campaigns but also national queer lobbying organizations also. Soon after the threats of such boycotts, like the DNCs 10th Annual LGBT Leadership Council Dinner fundraiser in D.C. last week (which still raised 1 million dollars supposedly), the Obama Administration made several courtship moves to keep the GLBT Community from curtailing any future investments in his and others of his Party's campaigns, leading up to the 2010 federal mid term election cycle.

WHEN JOHNNY COMES MARCHING HOME WE WILL ALL FEEL GAY!

Previously on F6 we covered the story of Air Force Major Margaret Witt whose case in the Ninth Federal Circuit Court elevated homosexuals judicial scrutiny to a suspect classification, in need of greater legal protections, and raised the bar in 9 western states for Military discharges based on United States Code 10§654 to include that "the military can't automatically discharge all openly gay soldiers, but must prove in each case that dismissal would promote troop readiness or unit cohesion" in order to permit the constitutional discharge from Military service, based upon sexual orientation or association within a judicially protected minority group.

The Obama Administration refused to challenge the decision in the Witt case to the Supreme Court, which 1. allows the precedent while the case is brought back to lower courts to be retried; 2. allows for the Obama Administration and certain Lobby Groups to strategically delay a Judicial Review of DADT; 3. puts pressure on Congress to repeal DADT through HR1283 Military Readiness Enhancement Act.

However at the same time, "President Obama's Solicitor General, Elena Kagan," interjected in the 1st District case (formerly Cook v. Gates) of James Pietrangelo II whom along with 12 other plaintiffs originally challenged their separation from US Military under DADT, "filed a brief with the Supreme Court urging it not to hear Pietrangelo's appeal. But Kagan's brief said that the 1st Circuit "properly upheld" the statute." The 1st District ruled that: 1. DADT is an exercise of Congressional judgment in the area of military affairs and warranted enormous deference from the judicial branch; 2. laws based on animus Romer v. Evans (1996) couldnt be used against DADT because the policy, it said, was based on legitimate concerns, not animus. 3. the military should do more than prove homosexuality to warrant dismissal 4. ensuring national security outweighs arguments from 12 former military members who say their rights were ignored when they were dismissed for being gay. The Supreme Court declined to hear the Pietrangelo appeal on the 8th of June 2009. (Source: The Bay Area Reporter)

Rather than standing on the principles of equality now for our Troops, by not having the Witt case go before the Supreme Court, The Obama Administration also threw off the 1st District case from being reviewed, as this would have forced the Supreme Court not only to deliberate the role of scrutiny in the lower courts, but also deal at the same time with the lower courts interpretation of the Supreme Court's legal precedent in Lawrence v Texas (2003) which was cited in both the 1st District and 9th District case regarding the same issues under law. In other words, certain politicians in Congress and the Administration are both trying to make DADT a mid term election cycle victory and at the same time prevent the Courts from doing their job by using legal tactics which remove the exercise of scrutiny and review of these two distinct precedents, and possibly overturning DADT, before Democrats in Congress could claim it as a victory for equality coming up to the midterm elections cycle in 2010. In summary Gay and Lesbian Service Members are nothing more to the Democrats than bargaining chips in an upcoming election cycle and they are using every trick to keep us and them in line.

There is nothing "LEGITIMATE" about the arguments in support of DADT, and "CONCERNS" over UNIT COHESION or GENERAL ORDER and MORALE are simply defamatory! Every time someone utters the absolute fallacy that is the arguments for the restriction on integral and honest lives of Gay and Lesbian Service Members they disrespect the honour of all of our Service Members. The very nature of the arguments for exclusion in fact surmises that our men and women in uniform cant uphold themselves to the highest standards. That is a slap in the face to every person who has, does, and will, wear the uniform in service and sacrifice for our freedom and liberty!


There have also been three more recent public cases of career soldiers being affected by the illegal implementation of Dont Ask Dont Tell. On the 7th May 2009 (video above) we were introduced to 2nd Lt. Sandy Tsao of the US Army,who originally told her story in an exclusive open letter to the American public in Audrey Magazine (pic to right open in new tab to enlarge) this past spring of life under DADT and received a personal hand written note from Barack Obama in return.

We also received followup on the story of Arabic Linguist and Environmental Engineer now an Infantry Platoon Leader, Lt. Dan Choi, who came out on national television back in March to announce the founding of of Knights Out for GLBT Graduates of the US Military Academy @ West Point. Lt. Dan Choi served in Iraq with the 10th Mountain Division for 15 months in 2006 and 2007, leading combat patrols through a region called the Triangle of Death and serving as a translator and language instructor and also helped rebuild schools and hospitals. In 2008, he left the Army and joined the 1st Battalion, 69th Infantry of the New York National Guard, based in Manhattan. Lt. Choi will also be the first to be discharged out of New York (Source: Today In The Military). On the 19th of May we were also introduced to Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach (1st & 3rd videos below) an eighteen year veteran of the Air Force. who flew 88 combat missions with over 2100 flying hours and 1800 of those in combat. (Source: Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC News Politics News)

Even though he continued to patronize our struggle for equality, by signing a light list of rights for federal employees, allowing GLBT partners to use their married name on their US Passports, and throwing a party on Monday at the WHITEHOUSE on the 40th Anniversary of the STONEWALL RIOTS. He still refused to act as Commander In Chief, as 78 members of Congress have requested him, to also suspend by Executive Order the unconstitutional discrimination towards our men and women that serve in the United States Uniformed Services, from being able to do so openly, without fear, reprisal, or discharge, based upon whom they love and not the merit of their service and sacrifice. The Secretary of Homeland Security did just the same thing with another law in regard to Immigration and Naturalization policies regarding an early death otherwise known as the 'widows penalty' (Source: Dan Savage c/o SLOG).

However over the last week new information has come to light that the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, whom originally stated that DADT was "something to kick down the road for awhile (13 April 2009)", like a can of tuna in a game of street hockey, while traveling back from the US European Command Center in a recent statement Stars & Stripes, The Associated Press, and ABC News, all report that, under his direction, Pentagon lawyers and Administration officials are now looking at ways to add "flexible enforcement" to the existing law to accommodate when a Service Member is outed by a third party specifically citing a scenario of a jilted ex lover or someone with an axe to grind with the Service Member or their family, while the Congress takes its sweet ass time to repeal the 16 year old law, which it unconstitutionally created.

WE'RE GOING TO SEEK JUSTICE BUT WE CANT EVEN FIND MERCY!

The California Supreme Court in their ruling on the matters surrounding Proposition 8 in essence created three classes of people when it maintained the validity of the 18 thousand marriages performed during the six month window in 2008 when it was legal to do so. Besides the actions by the Obama Administration in the above cases of law you also have the Justice Department interjecting with another case brought by Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer out of San Francisco, California, in regards towards the validity of Proposition 8 in California, which directly challenges the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA based on several Constitutional grounds and previous Court precedent.

After having the case pulled from the State Courts to the Federal Court The Justice Department, according to John Aravosis of The AMERICA Blog, in order to maintain the defense of the current law's discrimination towards homosexuals they compare homosexuals to pedophiles, citing several previous domestic and foreign cases of heterosexual incest and adults marrying children, in their 54 page brief (pdf)to the Court.

Why did the Obama Administration file the brief if they are opposed to the law?

At first Justice Department Spokesperson Tracy Schmaler said that, "... until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the Administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system." After an outcry and official boycott of two DNC Fundraisers one in Boston (with picture to left c/o Wicked Gay Blog) and the 10th Annual LGBT Leadership Council Dinner in the District of Columbia began a week went by and Robert Gibbs, The WHITEHOUSE Press Secretary stated to Jake Tapper during his Daily Briefing on the 17th of June:

"Well, as you know, that the Justice Department is charged with upholding the law of the land, even though the President believes that that law should be repealed....Well, again, it's the President's Justice Department. And, again, we have the role of upholding the law of the land while the President has stated and will work with Congress to change that law."

Then during a panel discussion 10 days later President Obama's Staff "Secretary Lisa Brown, expressed personal reservations about some of the language in the Justice Department brief against same-sex marriage" by deflecting the conversation "It was an awful lot better that the brief that was written in the Bush administration," and trying to one up the Obama brief by comparing it back to the original Bush era version of the brief. (Source: Jake Tapper, Political Punch, ABC News)

That was not even an apology! That was an excuse, and a bad one at that!

After the DOJ brief in both the San Francisco DOMA case and the several DADT cases, the GLBTIQAS Democrats have finally had enough, and called the National Democratic Committee and certain elected officials to task for their pandering to and blatant disregard for our struggle for equality. The call went out across the blogoshpere and twitaverse and exploded center stage with the National Democratic Committee getting spanked across sidewalks and caught fudging the numbers to make it look like they raised up to and possibly exceeding 1 million dollars during the fundraisers, when most of the main players for the event backed out in protest of the political pandering and judicial slams against Our Community.

Why shouldn't our protests affect the lives and fortunes of politicians? One of the strong components of Libertarian thought and philosophy is that an open, transparent government is automatically drawn down and simplified because everyone is living by the same rules and laws that are passed on to by We The People. We have allowed our Congress to become a bloated self sustaining source of power for the certain 538 people, that We keep electing, who keep making the same promises and never deliver nor honour the oath of office that they take. The one thing we do have the ability to control is financial investment in political campaigns and the other is voting out the people whom just maintain the status quo in governance rather than doing what is right, defending the Constitution by protecting individual and minority rights from the tyranny of the majority rule and religious thoughts or opinions on civil issues.

OUR QUEER PRIDE! OUR COUNTRY'S INDEPENDENCE?

As I have stated many times before, specifically in F6's original format back in June of 2005, GLBT PRIDE is not just about being proud of who we are or forcing everyone to accept our flamboyant displays of independence. OUR PRIDE is outlined by individual sense of dignity and our collective value as created equal in the image of God/dess and viewed as such under the law of this land too. OUR PRIDE is defined as a group formed not necessarily based on heredity or biological connections, similar to that of a pride of lions. When we shout and holler back about OUR PRIDE, the rally cry doesn't mean we are a bunch of Dancing Queens but that We ARE Family!

E Pluribus Unum, Out Of Many One, is also why OUR PRIDE is very much attached to our Country's Independence, and why we can also say We The People with the greatest of honour and demand at the same time that self evident truth declared so many years ago "That All Men Are Created Equal" be applied to us also. That is what also caused our Founders during that first Continental Congress to not just Declare Independence from the tyranny of an oppressive King and a clueless Parliament that refused to hear our forebearers redress of grievances. That is what makes the United States of America by definition a Republic and not a Democracy. That is what prevents the majority from eliminating the rights of the minority.

America, please pay attention to your own words:
Have We forgotten to swear to one another our lives, fortunes, and sacred honour?
Have We traded each for the sake of ego, greed, and power rather than brotherhood?
How long will We stop declaring our independence and let these truths be denied us?


WE THE PEOPLE DEMAND THE SIMULTANEOUS REPEAL OF DADT & DOMA

In all reality both pieces of legislation DADT & DOMA are tied at the hip they revolve around the same issues of law and the same religious prejudices within Civil Society, but they also revolve around similar issues within the Constitution too.

1. The Declaration of Independence
A. The DOI has the force of law today as it is included in the United States Code at the beginning under Organic Laws of the United States of America. As the Constitution falls within that same category, The DOI, if not equal to, is at least subordinate to, and applicable in, interpretation of, the Constitution by the Courts and implementation of law by Congress and enforcement of law by the Executive Branch.B. We either hold all 5 truths self evident or none. Either "all men are created equal" or they're not. Make up your mind America, which do We The People hold dear? You cannt declare Life and Liberty without the Pursuit of Happiness. Yet Religious nut jobs thinks that they can deny equality to 1 of every 6 to 10 by law.

2. The Constitution Of The United States of America
A. Obviously 1st is the Full Faith & Credit Clause of Article 4 section 1:
... shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.
B. Article 6 paragraph 3 (specify last clause)
... no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust.....
C. Amendment 14 (1868)
section 1 All persons born or naturalized...subject to the jurisdiction...are citizens of the United States....
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Marriage and Military Service an Office of or part of the Public Trust?

I would argue that they are. When clergy perform the marriage ritual they evoke two authorities to solemnize the act of Sacred Union, that of Deity and the State: "By the power invested in me by the State of Indiana and (insert affiliation) I now declare you (plural) to be partners in life" As I stated here a month ago, originally Civil Unions were intentionally done to strip religious test out of marriage in this Country, by the Puritans. Some how between the Civil War and Reconstruction through World War II and Korea religious test found their way back into the public ambiguity of normal regulation, to preventing interracial marriages from happening, until 1967 when Mildred and Richard Loving took on the State of Virginia at the Supreme Court.
The United States legally established tax code which recognizes married partners as a joined legal entity, or juristic person, which is also dually licensed by the State, and established to promote Public Trust. The Partners whom having entered into such arrangements by swearing an oath of allegiance, thereby become Officers of a Public Trust, whom at a minimum receive benefits and special privileges for that status. What is the first thing that happens when one enlists in the United States Military? They swear an oath or affirm to Defend the Constitution! That also means that both married partners and military personnel gay or straight are Officers holding the Public Trust, and therefore immune from any religious test and that includes any moral and religious objections towards homosexuality in Civil Marriages and Military Services!This is not just an issue of equality but the relationship and proximity between our Men, our Money, and our Mouths!We The People still swore to each other our lives, fortunes, and sacred honour; but can we honestly say "We hold these truths to be self evident:", when we deny them to one out of six of our fellow Americans? The reason why Congress is STONEWALLING on DADT and DOMA is simple: ego, greed, and power. Lets remove them from office, starting in 2010!

But the conversation can not stop there. When DADT is repealed DOMA will fall right behind it because about most* of the Military (*CORRECTION: 1.2 million, of which, 42% are E-4s & 5s and 75% are E-3 through E-6 ranks respectfully) is made up of Enlisted men and women.The minute DADT is repealed or found unconstitutional, DOMA will have to go right along with it because you are going to see a lot of really hot men and women in uniform walk their lovers down the aisles, get married, and then turn around and apply for off base housing, which locally ranges between $678-1180 per month and is overseas approximately $2 thousand dollars a month in increased income, multiplied by an estimated 65 thousand soldiers at a minimum. Military housing whether off base or on base is down right horrible. Out of the 134 thousand housing units 43% are substandard and approximately 25% are 7 years over their viability or years of service standard. Not forgetting to mention the spouses and children' health benefits and counseling and education services and all the other expenses from living on or off a Military base can include. Let's also not forget to mention the cost to reenlist at least 30 percent of the 12,000 that have already been discharged under Dont Ask Dont Tell back into service and an additional 20-45 percent of those that previously didn't sign back on when their original contract ended, and approximately 40 percent of them will be married by now, therefore requiring off base or non barracks housing. (Source: DODs DUnderSec's Report on Military Housing)

I HAVE FOUR MORE QUESTIONS FOR YOU AMERICA:

Are We The People willing to put our money where our mouth and motives are, not in politicians hands? Are We The People willing to allow the men and women whom fight for our freedom be free to love?
Are We The People willing to let them live together with whom they choose and raise their children?Are We The People willing to deny them the very sacrifice they offered us freely, personal liberty?

F6 LINKS & RESOURCES

Normally there would be a full battery of links, resources, and recommendations for the readers and other works cited either stated and/or recapped here from throughout the post, However due to both the length and the detail of both this post and the amount and individual text of the works cited, I felt it necessary to create a separate post on F6's LINKS PAGE for this post alone. Please refer to it for some pretty cool finds over the last month that it has taken me to write this post out, please. Thank you for your consideration.

F6 EDITORIAL POLICY STATEMENTS F6 has several resources and commentaries regarding GAYS IN THE MILITARY. As an issue of editorial policy, F6 will challenge any assertion that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is either Constitutional or proper policy in our great country, the land of the free and the home of the brave, especially in a place where all men are created equal!

F6's EDITOR UPDATE: 08 JULY 09 US Representative PATRICK MURPHY of Pennsylvania, a retired Army Captain, and West Point Professor, has taken pointe on HR1283, The Military Readiness Enhancement Act which will cause the repeal of Dont Ask Dont Tell by Congress. Please also note that Representative Murphy, four days after this post was originally published, specifically used (7:15 mark) my direct arguments above, that the Oath of Office that both Members of Congress and the Military both swear and affirm are equal and therefore our Troops have status as an Officer of or part of the Public Trust and therefore are free from any religious test or bias to hold such positions. Thank you Congress Member Murphy for picking up the ball for the final run across the field! (MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Show via News Politics News)

F6's EDITOR FOLLOWUP: John P. Mortimer, Esq., a retired civil rights attorney, has a wonderful post that I was just referred to by RobMuch on You Tube, which also outlines similar ideas and develops deeper the arguments against The Defense Of Marriage Act, details stringently President Obama's hypocrisy and political pandering when dealing with the Gay and Lesbian Community's struggle for equality, and why he wants to keep DOMA out of the Court's proper place of review. I'm glad that he also chose to speak out about the disenfranchisement we have and are suffering at the whims of a religious bias in a secular nation.

F6 This post has been modified and revised in both content and format as certain multimedia was no longer unavailable from its original source it has been removed to allow the free flow of ideas and perceptions even if they are at this pointe historical and could be perceived by some to be archaic. Thank you for your continued patronage. (rvsd by editor 08Oct12)...

Why does the Government really want 2 change the name of the Swine Flu? & Other stories surrounding the outbreak of unkosher politics and canned Spam!

So why did the United States Government change the designation of the swine flu to H1N1? Because the Pork Industry was loosing business. Nope! It was because they are afraid of when We The People realized that indeed pigs did in fact fly and what we allowed our Government to get away with in our name.

With new scandals breaking almost every 60 hours if not shorter on both sides of the Congressional isle, and out of the White House, and even in local politics, one would begin to wonder if there is in fact an actual reset button somewhere in the Constitution or one of the other founding documents.

Fortunately there is but it involves the very sensitive topics of congressional apportionment which I covered on a previous post (14th ip, look for the Ford Truck and continue reading) as well as secession on this other post I wrote on the Libertarian Party of Allen County blog. As for now, just watch out for flying barrels of spam (deep fried pork product) coming from both sides of Congress and the White House, and then consider voting for third party (Libertarian or Green, especially) candidates in 2010 when Congress (every House seat and a third of the Senate) comes up for reelection.

ONE HUNDRED DAYS AMERICA!

How do you measure a man? Elton John and Clay Aiken (videos) sing about it in the form of conditional (eg: if this then that) questions or statements that more references the spirituality of the masses rather than providing an answer. But based on the criteria in their songs, how does it make sense to measure a President by his first 100 days in office? The format only started seventy plus years ago under Franklin D. Roosevelt whom managed to get Congress to pass 15 pieces of "New Deal" legislation in the 14 week time frame, and since then the press has usurped that mile stone and just over analyzed it for all other Presidents after him. So aside from trying to assign a grade point average of 81% percent or 60% depending on which poll numbers you read, or more accurately, hear on cable television news we need to take an honest look at what the Administration has and hasn't done.

From a GLBT perspective, especially with recent activity on the White House's website under Civil Rights/Liberties policy statements regarding Don't Ask Don't Tell (Links: Joe My God: Post 1, Post 2, Post 3, Post 4, in order from oldest to newest) amongst other issues, proves that the Administration is performing less then satisfactorily when it comes to keeping promises to Gay and Lesbian Americans and its continuing willingness to minimize the struggle of GLBT Americans in their public policy statements and decisions. Fortunately the offense was modified in the end to both return the original language but also blend it in with the revisions.

This is the seventh time that I can count where the Administration has blatantly put its foot in its mouth regarding GLBT issues and tried to stop choking on it only to leave a trail of drool and dismay from the cover up. There will probably be another press release to brush over the trail of tears and explain it away to the public this week.

Talking about putting ones foot in ones mouth, then leads us to Congress whom also had an eventful week during the 100 Days festivities. The Senate was forced by the outbreak of the Swine Flu to finally confirm Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius to head the Department of Health and Human Services, regardless of previous Republican objections due to her record on abortion issues. Meanwhile the House of Representatives, decided to take on the *Hate Crimes Bill, which passed 249-175. This resulted in another outcry against bigotry from and calls for the resignation of North Carolina Representative Virginia Foxx who took to the floor of the House and called the consideration of a 10 year old murder of 19 year old Matthew Shepard as a hate crime, "a hoax", with Matthew's mother Judy present in the lobby area above.



Besides being misinformed and insensitive no amount of apology will do Ms. Foxx until you acknowledge that what happened to Matthew was, and what happens to thousands of GLBT persons annually is, a hate crime; and that gays and lesbians deserve equality under the Constitution and Declaration; and personally apologize to both Judy Shepard and publicly to the Queer Community, from the floor of the House under oath with the penalty of perjury applicable, then we can begin to forgive you for your absolute misrepresentation of the facts of record and the insensitive nature by which they were put forth from the floor of OUR Congress.

This also leads me to one other question of ethics and concern. You Ms. Foxx are not allowed to excuse your actions based solely on bad information, We The People elect our Representatives to serve as our voice not just their own bias that ignores the proven facts of history and official record. To insist that your bad information was a result of an incomplete Google Search, is to say that you failed in due diligence of your job duties to find all the information, and instead followed talking pointes which were neither collaborated or researched with any depth. Ms. Foxx it is time to be a woman of character that you claim to be and either apologize from the floor of the House under oath or resign from office based on your incompetence to perform the full duties of the office to which you were elected.



The above video is from O Virginia written by folk artist Lee Waters (links below), which is available in full performance quality download via 7Digital for one dollar, with all money going to the Matthew Shepard Foundation in the name of Virginia Foxx, as part of the growing online petition to censure or oust Ms. Foxx regarding these homophobic and insensitive comments.

I would love to see the look on Ms. Foxx's face when she hears the song for the first time. I also wonder, How much politics in Washington would change if members of Congress had to swear under oath before they spoke from the floor under penalty of perjury? What are your thoughts of how to improve our government?

Top Photo: Dominique Garny in Wedding Trough (1974, Belgium) [IMDB]
3rd Photo: Bad Behaviour Publishing Company [Website]
4th Photo: Virginia Foxx c/o Stephen Rader, Chicago
LEE WATERS: [Website][YouTube]
Matthew Shepard Foundation [Website]
Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Bill aka Local Law Enforcement Protection Act H.R. 1913

DADT: Gates wants to add 2.8K Special Forces and Employ 50K+ civilians but not protect the GLBT Service Members already sacrificing everything for US?

Gays and Lesbians are not people you can just "kick down the road" like a can of tuna in a street game of roller hockey, without expecting some sort of backlash.

Before his big budget announcement, Secretary Robert Gates stated "The President and I feel like we've got a lot on our plates right now and let's push that one down the road a little bit.", in an interview two Sundays ago with Fox News regarding "Dont Ask Dont Tell", which bars service members from proclaiming their sexual orientation and commanding officers from asking about it. However, the policy states that if it becomes known that a service member is gay, he or she is to be removed from the military. He went on to say, "the Pentagon will continue to enforce the existing policy...It continues to be the law and any change in policy would require a change in the law....We will follow the law, whatever it is." He also revealled that within the Administration "That dialogue, though, has really not progressed very far at this point in the administration."
(Source: Fox News)

Sadly, as I stated before, the Obama Administration is going to wait for the Supreme Court (Major Margaret Witt) and Congress to fight it out rather than getting involved and using up what little political capital they have left with the American public. Some in Congress stated back in 2008 that they wouldnt deal with the repeal of DADT until 2010, according to a report by QUEERTY, even though there is already legislation, that was reintroduced in the beginning of March. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act (HR1283), authored by Representative Ellen Tauscher (pic to right) of California's 10th District , with 137 cosponsors, is making its way through the Congressional process. The MREA after a month is currently held up in the House Armed Services sub committee on Military Personel. You may contact the 60 members of the main Committee individually, especially if they are in your District, and ask them to expedite this legislation through the process for the sake of all our men and women in uniform.



We have an estimated 65 thousand serving in silence and suffering the worst form of inequality and sacrificing their integrity and honour to assure our freedom and liberty. Another three thousand per year decide not to reenlist or enlist because of the discriminatory policy. The Congress is allowing the removal of 2 Service Members on average per day to be removed from their post for no longer living a lie. We owe them so much more than any talking pointes can conceive or contrive.

Meanwhile Democrats and Republicans are quibbling over whether or not the new Defense budget that is a 4% budget increase instead of a 15% increase, is in fact a cut or a 21 billion dollar increase in spending. Two weeks later the pundits, Congress, and military industrial lobbyist, are rambling on with no end in sight, as they try to save their pet projects in the budget proposal. Or the other distraction caused by Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma, whom while standing in the middle of one of our airbases in Afghanistan, claimed that the new budget and Secretary Gates is "gutting the military". When in fact, as outlined by CNN's Rick Sanchez (video) place, Senator Inhoffe is actually upset over a military factory in his home state loosing a contract because the plan would discontinue the production of the controversial decade old faulty designed and 87 billion dollar budgeted Future Combat System's vehicle component. Along with other pundits bitching about the discontinuation of the F22 fighter jets and switching the force over to F35 Joint Strategic Air Ships

The Secretary's announced budget besides, the detail of a 28 hundred troop increase Helicopter Crews and Maintenance and in Special Forces Combat Units and switching the 50 thousands in previous held Defense Department positions by independent contractors to actual government employees and civil service agents, also increases the Cyber Squadron from 80 to 250 students per year as of 2011, and immediately stops the reduction of forces in the Air Force and Navy. His budget also proposes to maintain planned increase Army Brigade Combat Teams strength to 547 thousand personnel and eliminate use of stop loss to maintain battle readiness.

Before we add all those people to the ranks, would it not be a good idea to have them all on equal footing?
I am tired of reading the horror stories of this failed policy in enlistment processes and everyday life.

It would also be easier to call people back whom have already left the service, either because of or as a result of DADT, and who decided to come out in their personal life only to be kicked out a second time under DADT when you call them back in to fill in the gaps, which has happened on 20 separate occasions that I am personally aware of.

You have 35 thousand people at a minimum who are willing to serve whom you removed from their Civic Duty, usually based on rumors, false accusations, and the United States Military's refusal to actually make a legitimate argument regarding us queers serving with honour or from being harassed within the scope of personal, religious, and political, biases or prejudices.

We have one more option to change this bastard child of a federal law, described by Aubrey Sarvis the Executive Director of the SLDN, whom asserted the the following on FRONTLINES:

Mr. President, if I may address you directly, you've got another situation looming ahead that also should come as no surprise. It is not the same order of magnitude as the global financial meltdown, but like that meltdown it is predictable and it has the potential to be exploited for political gain -- not your political gain but your opponents'.

In five weeks the House Armed Services Committee will begin hearings on your Defense Department budget for 2010. Senate hearings will follow. You have a choice. You can take the lead and put language calling for repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell in the legislative budget -- or you can wait until your opponents bring it up. The opposition, which may be loud and ugly, will be out to ambush you, Mr. President. Alarmingly, there have been no signs that your administration is prepared for that.

The principle, the truth, is self evident, Congress, and Mr. President, "All Men Are Created Equal". Allow us queers the ability to serve our country openly as equals. After all, we have already been there and are currently on the front lines and are treated as less than equal even after having given twice as much, including our partners and our children, whom aren't able to receive the same support an unmarried mother of three children, each of different fathers, would receive.



F6 Editorial Policy Statement

F6 has several resources and commentaries regarding GAYS IN THE MILITARY. As an issue of editorial policy, F6 will challenge any assertion that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is either Constitutional or proper policy in our great country, the land of the free and the home of the brave, especially in a place where all men are created equal!

16th Anniversary DADT: Do We Spank! Or Thank! Congress To Achieve Repeal Of Dont Ask Dont Tell Within One Year?

This was originally suppose to be Wednesdays post, commemorating the 16th Anniversary today, of then President, William Jefferson Clinton's, signing of this historic piece of discrimination into Title 10 of the United States Code, and provide highlights of how the policy of Dont Ask Dont Tell Dont Pursue is truly failing to enforce those protections presumed back in 1993. Along with excerpted updates on previous posts on this forum.

Instead this post is going to make a dramatic turn and issue a warning to any Democrat that thinks twice about not repealing DADT, by not reintroducing and passing the Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2007-08 or some variation within one year. If you don't repeal DADT, in some way in the next year, more than likely, you will be voted out of office in the midterm 2010 elections, and possibly replaced with LIBERTARIANS, who will get the job done, because we believe in the individual being equal in law!

GLBT Service Members have been serving sometimes openly already, even after the laws were passed by Congress and Presidents who were Calvinist and Fundamentalist Christians. The laws against homosexuality in the military have only existed since about 1916. The problem comes because Congress and Command are still holding the bible as a weapon while having their head in the sand and crucifix shoved up our posteriors.

Personally, they should have been repealed along side the civil sodomy laws, in tandem with the Supreme Court decision of 2003. The Lawrence vs. Texas case, which has already proven its self to be an effective precedent in current legal decisions, could start taking an effect on DADT, later this year from the Ninth District United States Circuit Courts unless the Supreme Court puts the cases under review.

So first lets rehash some basic principles and facts: If WE THE PEOPLE believe that all persons are created equal as a self evident truth, per the Declaration of Independence which is Constitutionally binding on The United States, then under no circumstances should anyone whom is physically and mentally capable of serving should be restricted from doing so. Of course no one in Congress or Command who served previously want to admit what happens between brothers in arms is love and sometimes gay sex as well.

Before I go any further, not only do they not want to admit or deny anything, the UNITED STATES AIR FORCE, as reported earlier this month, also want to now engage the social political commentator on their own turf, the comments section:

Air Force Releases 'Counter-Blog' Marching Orders
by Noah Shachtman WIRED Blog Network 06 JAN 09

Bloggers: If you suddenly find Air Force officers leaving barbed comments after one of your posts, don't be surprised. They're just following the service's new "counter-blogging" flow chart. In a twelve-point plan, put together by the emerging technology division of the Air Force's public affairs arm, airmen are given guidance on how to handle "trolls," "ragers" -- and even well-informed online writers, too. It's all part of an Air Force push to "counter the people out there in the blogosphere who have negative opinions about the U.S. government and the Air Force," Captain David Faggard says.

Over the last couple of years, the armed forces have tried, in fits and starts, to connect more with bloggers. The Army and the Office of the Secretary of Defense now hold regular "bloggers' roundtables" with generals, colonels, and key civilian leaders. The Navy invited a group of bloggers to embed with them on a humanitarian mission to Central and South America, last summer. Military blogger Michael Yon recently traveled to Afghanistan with Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

In contrast, the Air Force has largely kept the blogosphere at arms' length. Most of the sites are banned from Air Force networks. And the service has mostly stayed away from the Pentagon's blog outreach efforts. Captain Faggard, who's become the Air Force Public Affairs Agency's designated social media guru, has made strides in shifting that attitude. The air service now has a Twitter feed, a blog of its own -- and marching orders, for how to comment on other sites. "We're trying to get people to understand that they can do this," he tells Danger Room.

The flow chart (right click and open in a new tab) lays out a range of possible responses to a blog post. Airmen can offer a "factual and well-cited response [that] is not factually erroneous, a rant or rage, bashing or negative in nature." They can "let the post stand -- no response." Or they cancan "fix the facts," offering up fresh perspective. No matter what, the chart says, airmen should "disclose your Air Force connection," "respond in a tone that reflects high on the rich heritage of the Air Force," and "focus on the most-used sites related to the Air Force."

Despite the chart's sometimes-stiff language, former military spokesman Steven Field says he's "a fan." Field, who's been occasionally critical of the armed services' blog outreach efforts, tells Danger Room: "I've always thought that a military-like process would be a good bridge to connect the services with the blogosphere. There's a field manual for everything in the military, so this flow-chart presents online communications in a DoD [Department of Defense] friendly format."

One stipulation -- While it should be a guide of communications, it shouldn't become a ball-and-chain. Online comms require some level of nimble, on-your-feet response. As long as the Air Force doesn't use the "evaluate" phase to get approval from every Tom, Dick and Harry in the Pentagon, it should be a good tool.

"Now they just need to lift those damn IP [Internet Protocol] filters," Field adds, so airmen can actually read those blogs that they're supposed to respond to.

Source: Phillip DeFranco 07 JAN 09

I know that several people from the DOD read this blog regularly. I welcome any one from the UNITED STATES UNIFORMED SERVICES, with a deep bow, on bended knee, and arms open, to leave a comment here. Your opinions will always be respected and treasured just as my commentary while always informative and well thought out is yet snarky, lewd, and sarcastic, is done with the greatest of honour for those who serve and defend the basic inherit right from the infringement of free speech,the press, and to redress grievances, and your sacrifice for my life and liberty and our homeland.

DADT: Two Military Men Tell Their Stories
by Scott Stiffler EDGE Contributor
Sunday 18 JAN 2009

One year from now, we may very well be able to look back upon this era as a less enlightened time in which the men and women of our all-volunteer military were not yet allowed to serve if they were openly gay or lesbian. But until that time, the military’s "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" policy--which mandates not confiding a service person’s sexuality and in return not being asked about it--continues to devalue, demean and discharge those who are anything other than avowed heterosexuals.

EDGE recently spoke with two gay men who served and emerged from their experience with different perspectives on what it’s like to be a homosexual within an institution that requires you to deny who you are--but has no trouble asking you to risk or give your life.

Brett E. Stout: ’Classic Gay Overachiever’ v. The System

When Brett Edward Stout joined the Marines, the physically and academically gifted young man soon became what he calls "your classic gay overachiever. I did all the badass things you could do: recon, linguist, Marine. I thought if you keep your appearance and academics up, if you look and play the part of a Marine, that would protect you from any type of real criticism or attack."

But when Stout got to recon, "the system started to buck back against me. It’s such a boy’s club. They really didn’t want me there - and there were already rumors about my sexuality."

It soon became apparent to Stout that "they were not going to stop trying to get rid of me; it broke my spirit--a little bit." But rather than give in, he decided he wouldn’t be "working so hard to prove I am not something that I am." Stout decided that the next time he was confronted with questions about his sexuality, "I was going to be a little in their face about it."

That decision came out of his simmering resentment of having to constantly edit his conversations on the military base: "I made the conscious decision to live openly, not ambiguously. ’Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ meant that I would no longer hide or change the subject. I would attack it by boldly being honest about not answering the tainted questions concerning my orientation."

Shortly thereafter, he was confronted in the barracks by a Marine who came up to him and said, "So I hear you’re a fag. Are you fucking queer? Are you gay?" Stout replied "Why, do you want me to fuck you? From that moment on, people actually started to respect me."

Robaire Watson: Not ’In Your Face’ About It

Navy Veteran Robaire Watson’s six years of service (1989-1995) occurred before and during the days of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Throughout his career, Watson "spent six years in the Navy as an openly gay military man." He is telling his story because he wants people "to hear a positive story and not a negative one."

Watson served as a US Navy Ship’s barber aboard the USS Kansas City and participated in the Gulf War and Operation Southern Watch off the coast of Somalia in 1993. "I’m black and openly gay and never encountered the slightest discrimination aboard my warship," he says of his time serving in Arabian Sea.

Although Watson’s sexuality was talked about and people knew, the implementation of DADT was soon followed by comments such as "We don’t have to ask and we don’t have to tell. They knew. I said thank you to them. You learn how to take control of your lifestyle, and say I am in the military. The mission comes first, then my lifestyle. I lived my life the same way I live it now as a civilian. I’m not flamboyant but I don’t hide anything either."

Not initiating conversation about his sexuality--yet not manufacturing stories of heterosexual conquest for cover --led to an existence in which Watson says he was given respect and tolerance in exchange for not "necessarily flying a rainbow flag for people. You don’t have to do that for people to know what your lifestyle is." Many times, Watson says, he was told "I know you are gay and I don’t care because you don’t put it in my face or do anything to offend me with it."

An Uneasy Compromise

But while that uneasy truce let Watson live his life in the military without constant denial, is it enough? Stout left the Marines reluctantly and looks back on his time served and closeted with regret. Now a writer in Iowa City, he wrote about his transition from military to civilian life in his debut 2008 novel, "Sugar-Baby Brigade." (picture to right; more information below)

It deals with a gay Marine coping with life after the Corps. "The moment of getting out was sad," he says now. "There’s a deep sense of regret that you’ve lost that moment in time. What I wasn’t prepared for is losing the strong straight environment I was in. My life became very one sided. Everything I did was gay because all the straight elements of my life evaporated, and that was a bit jarring. The institution itself, it was really hard to leave."

Stout expresses concern for those who must still serve in the closet, and emphasizes the emotional cost of DADT. The policy, he says, "robs you of any recourse if anybody threatens you. You can’t let people into your life even if you want to."

A repeal of the policy would at last allow LGBTs to "come home and tell the people you’re living with what you did that weekend," Stout says. "It’s trivial, but it’s important that they be a part of your actual life if you choose to let them in."

Watson, who thrived by employing the opposite approach of not sharing his off-ship activities, still advocates for a policy in which "each of us are viewed based on our skills and accomplishments. We must prove to the government that sexual preference has absolutely nothing to do with one’s work ethic whether it be military service or otherwise. Sexual orientation is nobody’s business but your own."

The stories don't end there. There are too many more to tell. Directly above is a plea by JOHANN aka GAY MILITARY MAN for you to sign the petition by the Service Members Legal Defense Network, and ask Congress to pass the Military Readiness Enhancement Act. Below is the final story of Johann's service to our Country whom until three months ago served quietly but was still active in the fight against this historic discrimination. F6 has been proud to link with to Johann's channel, pretty much since our inception in this format, and continue with prayers and support and thanks for the great sacrifice he made for both our Country and Our Community.


This discrimination must end if we are truly going to ask these men and women to live with integrity and brotherhood and liberty, by wearing a uniform which demands nothing less than our best and our brightest!

Unfortunately, THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS, has refused to accept our best and brightest, by insisting for and allowing such discrimination to continue for sixteen years and choosing to give waivers, "to felons over faggots!" (not my quote)! That was a big mistake on their part to assume that GLBT Service Members wouldn't have PRIDE!, or bring honour to our great nation, while wearing the uniform and openly serving the Country.

So, can we get this bad legislation over turned within a year? There is still a 50% chance, it probably wont happen, but then it will be to late.

Because after four years of control of both Houses Democrats will more than likely be voted out in the midterm election. If they get replaced by Republicans, even in one of the Houses we are pretty well screwed. However if even a third of the entire Congress gets replaced with Libertarians, it will be a new era for our Country! It will mean the end of the two named political party monolithic power structure, and the final death blow to discrimination against GLBT individuals across the board, especially in the United States Military.


F6 Links and Resources

Gay Military Man
[MySpace] [YouTube] [MySpace Group]
Service Members Legal Defense Network
[Petition] [Website]
Military Readiness Enhancement Act [HR 1246 Text]

Please note: Since a new Congress was sworn in January 2009, this bill needs to be reintroduced as the previous version linked above was wiped off the record since it was never voted on. Please sign the above petition and then call your Representative and Senators and demand they reconstitute this legislation and bring it to a floor vote.

Brett Edward Stout [Website] [Novel: Sugar Baby Bridge]
[Article: Profile In Patriotism Gay Military Times]
Robaire Watson [Blog]
[Article: Profile in Patriotism GMT]

F6 Editorial Policy Statement

F6 has several resources and commentaries regarding GAYS IN THE MILITARY. As an issue of editorial policy, F6 will challenge any assertion that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is either Constitutional or proper policy in our great country, the land of the free and the home of the brave, especially in a place where all men are created equal!