June 02, 2003
#518 - Three Cheers for Queers

To say that the Bush administration sees gays and lesbians as morally reprehensible is, sadly, not going too far. Bush agreed to meet with the gay and lesbian group known as the Log Cabin Republicans as part of his 2000 campaign, but only after he was forced to and even so he was battered by the howls of "catering to the homosexual agenda!" from the far right of his party.

We're not sure just what a "homosexual agenda" entails, unless it means the freedom to live a life as full and as free as any other person, but somehow we're guessing that's not what they meant. Bush opposes granting domestic partners the right to health and tax benefits enjoyed by heterosexual couples who are married, which is the very least they deserve, to say nothing of addressing the broken "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the military or bringing gay and lesbian issues into the national discourse.

Queer rights are the civil rights movement of our time, and let's not forget who had to drag the non-believers into the right last time: the federal government. Yes, it was the power of the presidency and its friend the Justice Department that forced the south to integrate and, slowly, began to change minds. You're not doing the job this time, Mr. President, and some day, when queer relationships are as accepted as mixed race schools or an integrated army, you'll be ashamed. Just ask Trent Lott.

Comments

But wasn't "don't ask, don't tell" instantiated by Clinton and friends? If you're admitting that's broken policy, then you're providing an opening that says, "Sure, Bush has some weaknesses, but so does any other President--and isn't it better to stick with a known factor than introducing an entirely new and potentially destabilizing one?"

Bush has a lot of leverage just as the incumbent; on top of recommending his ousting, you might also consider recommending a viable alternative--if one exists.

Posted by: Eric on June 2, 2003 07:46 AM

Gays don't have kids. That's why they don't deserve health and tax benefits, asshole. If they adopt, however, by all means they should be allowed the tax credits. But not without.

Posted by: Reed on June 9, 2003 01:13 AM

Gays and Lesbians are the same as you and me, excpeet that of their sexual orientation. therefore, they should get treated as equals and get these benefits. it makes no sense to take these benefits away becuase the govt feels thats not the american way. america stands for freedom, but are we realy free if we cant chose who we love?

Posted by: alex on June 27, 2004 07:37 PM

Reed, are you implying that married couples without children also do not deserve health and tax benefits?

Posted by: Michell on August 26, 2004 02:49 PM