What is the action plan?

[Kixel]

I'm a pragmatic business woman who is on board with GLBT equality. I'm straight and have no real "personal" stake-other than doing what's right. I use the quotes because to me, it is offensive that someone who deserves the same rights as I do doesn't get them. It is personal. But I'm not a true stakeholder, if that makes any sense.

Here's my question-we know what is right. We know we all deserve equal rights. The folks of this forum don't have them. How do we honestly move gay rights forward? Is it a PR plan? Is it legislation that isn't biased? What has been happening obviously isn't working.

Honestly, the continuous threads that show the problems bother me because there aren't any solutions. My mind works in a way where I need to work toward fixing the problem. Is it grassroots? Outrage is great and all, it shows that we have emotions. What's the plan? I have to honestly say I haven't seen a plan other than to bitch. Bitching doesn't solve problems.

I also have to ask if I am just stupid and missed the plan. Maybe it is better to say I've been busy, but either way-how do we make gay rights happen? As a strategic planner...how do we channel the outrage into action? In other posts, I've been told that fighting it through the courts isn't good because it hurts families. I understand that, but what other options are on the table?

We have "bigger" issues on the table that do cause problems on a whole-the economy and the war have gay/straight victims. My thought is that unless we figure out how to focus on changing things, we won't ever do it. Is this a state-by-state battle? Or does it need to be done federally?

The GLBT community has been beaten up. It makes me mad, but I don't know what I can do, and that makes me mad, too. So, taking it to the source-what do I do?



Full disclaimer-I've had too many cocktails tonight and am posting. I rarely post, but this has been bugging me for a while. Inaction isn't my style!

[AntiFascist]

1. I, for one, appreciate your support, cocktails or not :)

The CA Supreme Court decision on whether to overturn Prop 8 will be key, and this may happen after March. I've heard some interesting things about what could sway the decision. On the one hand, they want to make rulings that will lead to social stability and I think the arguments that gay marriage will make society more stable outweight the arguments that it may destroy heterosexual marriage, or corrupt families, or whatever. On the other hand, CA Supreme Court justices may have to worry about reconfirmation elections which happen every 10 years or so, and the Religious Right has threatened to have some of them recalled in 2010 if Prop 8 is overturned (but this would likely be very difficult for them to do).

If Prop 8 is overturned, then this could set the stage for gay marriage to be successful in more states. I think the attorneys prefer to do this in a few more states before taking it to the Federal level, since the Federal Supreme Court has such a conservative bias right now. I'm not sure Obama is willing to do much with respect to gay marriage or civil unions, although if he can help undo DOMA that would be a great start. Even some Republicans have made noise about doing away with DOMA because they feel marriage should be a states' rights issue and the Federal Government should get out of the marriage business.

If Prop 8 is not overturned then we should also be preparing to put another initiative on the ballot in California to reinstate gay marriage. Polls indicate that younger generations are more likely to support it, so time is on our side.

Sorry if this sounds too California-centric but I think what happens in California will be setting precedents for other states.

As for ENDA, DADT or anything else, others probably have better suggestions for pushing the Obama Administration on these fronts.

[Kixel]

2. Glad to be of service!

Your post makes complete sense.

As you can probably tell from my post count vs. my longevity, I don't post unless I'm annoyed or frustrated. The things that annoy me aren't preachers or puff things. It is the real stuff that causes real pain. The article about the child custody case in TN royally pissed me off. Prop 8 didn't help-but I'm thinking the court in CA will correct that error. I HOPE!

I think what is going on in California actually reflects the nation. As a whole, we have sucked at getting the right message out. We have to reframe the debate. People need to know that kids raised by gay parents aren't going to be screwed up, we need people to know that being GLBT is natural. I'm on board, but I am obviously brilliant...(but not smart enough to figure out how to put in a smiley face). It seems incredibly sad to me that there isn't a standard bearing message to counter the freaks who have issue with equality.

I would like to add that I am annoyed and the issue doesn't compare in my life in terms of impact. How GLBT folks move forward knowing that there are so many screwed up people who judge them...well, you are all heroes in my book. When I look at suicide rates for GLBT-when I think about how hard it is to come out...all of that stuff. It is sad. We just need to figure out how to kick some tail and get equality.

[AntiFascist]

4. Exactly ! And again, I want to express extreme appreciation for your kind of support...

both my partner and I felt it would have been much better to feature real gay families (gay parents) in the No on 8 ads, featuring real children who might suffer if their parents were not legally married. This would make people think twice about gay stereotypes.

Suicide and the abandonment of gay kids are also significant problems that the other side never takes into consideration. There's a movie coming out on the Lifetime Channel called "Prayers for Bobby" starring Sigourney Weaver who they predict will take some awards for her performance. I have a feeling this film will change a lot of attitudes:

http://www.prayersforbobby.com/

[Chovexani]

8. I think your heart is in the right place

And I appreciate your support, but this statement bugged me: "The things that annoy me aren't preachers or puff things. It is the real stuff that causes real pain."

That sort of thing is not really appreciated. One of the most important things that an ally of any movement needs to be able to do is to listen and not try to minimize. The analogy I've often used for anti-racism allies applies here: you're a passenger in the car. You can help navigate, point out the hot wing joint down the road if the driver says she's hungry, or point out that the car's almost on empty, but as helpful as you can be, ultimately you're not the driver.

That said, please don't think I'm picking on you or anything. Being an ally of any sort can be tough because no matter what you can never really understand the struggle. As a cisgendered woman who is a committed ally of transfolk, I'm constantly educating myself.

To actually answer your post, the thing is, there can't be a single standard bearing message because people are against equality for many different reasons. Yes, it's homophobic, but I think sometimes that word obscures the fact that there are a wide variety of reasons why people are phobes. Some of these things can be reasoned with, and some just can't. It's real easy and convenient to lump all phobes together, but it's not terribly productive IMO. So I think we need to sort out who can be reasoned with and who to say "fuck it, shut up and deal" to.

[Sub Atomic]

3. HEAR! HEAR!!!

My biggest complaint about the GLBT community has always been the complacence about issues that effect us as a community.



Do my GLBTQ brothers and sisters actually exist?




I have brought the fight to the bars and yet the fags don't seem to care.




Am I alone in this fight? Don't the rest of you faggots see what crimes are being committed against us in God's name?

[MuseRider]

5. Be loud and insistent.

Find an organization in your city or your state and if there is not one make one. Go to your legislators, go to the legislature. Watch the bills coming up for consideration, often there are parts stuck in them that adversely affect GLBT equality. Organize an Equality Day, make it for everyone but run it through a GLBT organization so that everyone knows that the group is powerful, even if you really are not yet (it can be done, believe me).

Be loud and be insistent. Organize and organize some more. You sound like the kind of person who would do that very well. I am not but learned how by the seat of my pants, it is really not all that hard. Never back down and never give up. Do it in your own way. Quiet and persistent protest works just as well as loud protests do.

I was told, although I am still not certain it is the right thing, to speak out as an ally. I know we are important but I could care less that people know that I am not a lesbian, that is not the issue. Still my friends and organizations tell me that is the best way for me to work for them. Start an ally group and make some noise.

Just my opinion but one that works.

[mitchtv]

9. Glad to see you back MR

Unfortunately things have only gotten worse around here. I hanging on by a thread.

[MuseRider]

24. Hang in here.

I would miss you horribly if you left! Do you facebook or myspace?

We all need to have a place where we can stay in touch. I would hate hate hate to lose touch with you.

Yes, they are bad enough here that given my current personal situation I can't even muster up the words to express myself and I am ashamed of that. I have not abandoned but am having to deal with other stuff right now. I will be back.

I hope you are well.

[bluedawg12]

6. One of the biggest problems I see is that there is no central national level

organization with out reach to our community and allies nationwide.

I don't recall any national membership drives.

No group that I can point to and say, "Oh yes, the head person was on Charlie Rose, or Mathews, or Maddow's show and so on."

I don't recall any national convention, conference or seminar.

Yes, it is California centered, I suppose with reason, but still, there are millions of untapped supporters nationwide.

For immediate action I usually recommend supporting Lambda, as they fight the legal battles for us in the Courts.

Thanks for your support.

On edit:

Check out these two links. The top is along the lines of this discussion, the second is the nationwide effort for same-sex marriage equality.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=111513&mesg_id=112925


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=112337&mesg_id=112337

[keepCAblue]

7. Equality needs to be mandated by the federal government...

...just as it was for blacks via the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We have no clear, no effective leadership at present. The black civil rights movement of the sixties had MLK, who had behind him an army of some of the country's best lawyers, organizers, clergy and scholars. The Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), led by King, was created to "harness the moral authority and organizing power of black churches to conduct non-violent protests in the service of civil rights reform."

We have no moral authority figure to serve in the role of leader, as was King, which is why the rightwing religious extremists are so effective at pushing us down -- we have no equivalent "moral leader" of prominence to push back, as King did against the bigotted religious leaders of his day.

I would love to see the Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, the first openly gay bishop of the U.S. Episcopal Church, step up and form a similar organization which would, like the SCLC work with the dedicated lawyers and activists who are presently fighting for our equality. Bishop Robinson would represent an unassailable "moral authority" and bring much needed cohesion to our community.

I've read and re-read the letter King wrote to newly-elected JFK, urging Kennedy to remedy the inequality of blacks in America, either by executive order or through mandate to the U.S. Congress. King's letter, "Equality Now: The President has the Power," published in the Nation just days after Kennedy took office, should be the template for our own demands to Obama for equality. Several pages long, it is articulate, reasoned, meticulously researched and eloquent. It also offers Kennedy concrete solutions on how to achieve the actions King and the black civil rights leaders were demanding.

The LGBTQI community is today collecting signatures across the country to accompany a similar letter to Obama, urging him to keep his campaign promises of equality to us. Unfortunately, the letter we will be sending Obama is a one-page tear-sheet, at best. It appears to be (and most likely was) written by college kids. It offers no solutions for Obama, no guidance, no eloquence, no moral authority. While the folks at Join the Impact are doing the best they can, this letter, as compared to King's, exemplifies just how sorely lacking in leadership is our community. Our efforts, compared to that of the civil rights movement of the sixties, under the architectural geniuses of King, Abernathy and Rustin (and so many others), appear amateur and haphazard.

[nightrain]

10. hear hear!! :)

[donco6]

16. Excellent post. Thank you.

May I quote portions of it to others as appropriate? It gives a stupendous rationale for rapid rather than incremental change.

[keepCAblue]

17. Feel free to repost...

It seems to be difficult for people, even within the LGBTQI community, to wrap their heads around the reality that ours, like the blacks of the sixties, is a FEDERAL issue. Demanding Obama to repeal DOMA is meaningless, especially if doing so gives Obama the "out" of passing the buck back to the states. Obama's position has been, and still is, that LGBTQI rights are a matter for states to decide, in spite of the fact that there are many federal laws which impinge upon marital status. Until we can get Obama to recognize the need for a federal mandate to force states to comply (which is what the Civil Rights Act of 1964 achieved), then there is no prospect of attaining unilateral and uniform equality for LGBTQI Americans. The U.S. Constitution's 1st Amendment (freedom OF religion; freedom FROM religion) and 14th Amendment, under the equal protection clause, unequivocally throws the issue of LGBTQI rights squarely under the legal umbrella of federal legislative oversight. To argue that LGBTQI rights, including marriage equality, are up to individual states to dictate, is ridiculous. Imagine applying "states dominion" to any other minority's rights -- slavery could be legal in some states but not others? Women allowed to vote in some states, but not others? Interracial marriage legal in some states but not others? Oh, wait...all of those scenarios were long ago deemed unconstitutional. So why should it be allowed for states to individually decide upon which rights and protections LGBTQI Americans are or are not entitled to? Obama isn't stupid, obviously. He knows damn well the parallels between LGBTQI civil rights as compared to blacks, women and other suspect classes, and that there is no valid argument to treat LGBTQIs differently than other minorities by refusing LGBTQI Americans their civil rights under the U.S. Constitution. Obama's continued dodging of responsibility by passing the buck onto the states is an act of cowardice. But Obama can do for today's oppressed what Kennedy (and ultimately, Johnson) did for black Americans. Obama has the once-in-lifetime opportunity to make history, by choosing to stand on the righteous side of it. Cowards rarely make history -- if they do, they are not oft or fondly remembered. However, those who rise above their own cowardice and prejudice to defend all of humanity -- it is THEY who shall be hailed through the ages.

[AntiFascist]

19. Very interesting post and this is an important discussion

Ultimately, I feel that it will be up to the Federal judicial branch to enforce marriage equality for all under the 14th amendment, the stumbling block may be that the current Supreme Court may not respect the Constitution enough to be able to do this.

For Obama to stand up for these principles would be a great thing, but keep in mind that MLK's efforts were speaking from his heart and from his deepest religious convictions. Obama has already made it clear that his deepest religious convictions do not represent marriage equality for all, and in fact, place heterosexual marriage on a higher spiritual plane. Obama may be able to work from his Constitutional principles, but we should note that has already expressed a personal conflict with his religious beliefs.

The other problem is that Federal legislation often involves compromise (we learned this lesson from Don't Ask, Don't Tell). If Federal Legislation would only ever get us to the point of Federal civil unions, for example, a "separate but equal" solution may work against our interests in the long run. Should all states be required to conform to such a Federal mandate?

[keepCAblue]

20. A "separate but equal" mandate would not fly...no more than

would such a compromise been acceptable in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Congress will always try to compromise, but it is the Executive Office who is the final arbiter of what passes into law and what doesn't.

Johnson would not have accepted a Civil Rights Act from his Congress had it been watered down to please the racists; likewise, if Obama were to sign a "Civil Unions" bill, there should rightfully be protests and rioting over the hypocrisy of forwarding a "separate but equal" mandate -- one which could inadvertently trump the civil marriages already allowed by states such as MA and CT (and, soon, again in CA).

And comparing Obama to MLK is the wrong analogy. Compare Obama to JFK, not MLK, for it is JFK that represents Obama's historical counterpart. When MLK wrote his letter to the newly-elected JFK, JFK was not on board with King's agenda for racial equality -- much like Obama's present day position on LGBTQI equality. Two and half more years would pass, in fact, before Kennedy jumped on board and directed Congress and all Americans to do likewise via his nationally broadcast Civil Rights Address on June 11, 1963. In his address, JFK acknowledged and co-opted most of the racial inequities which MLK detailed in letter two and half years earlier. Kennedy sent the bill to Congress just eight days later, setting into motion the bill's ultimate passage in 1964, facilitated largely by newly-sworn president, Lyndon Johnson, who exercised his considerable muscle power to force Congress to act quickly.

[AntiFascist]

22. Great, I hope that Obama can be convinced in the same way as JFK...

just keep in mind that Obama already has publically stated his religious conviction that heterosexual marriage is more "sacred", and this is likely something that would be difficult for him to take back from the many of the Christian moderates who gave him their vote. I don't know if JFK had any similar prejudices toward full black equality.

[keepCAblue]

25. JFK remained largely on the sidelines of racial equality...

Immediately after his election, Kennedy proceeded cautiously with respect to civil rights. Despite pleas from King and other civil rights leaders for federal intervention during the violence surrounding the Freedom Rides and the Albany Movement, the Kennedy administration remained largely on the sidelines. In 1962, Kennedy slowly began to push ahead a civil rights agenda with the creation of the Voter Education Project. Later that year, he sent federal troops to Oxford, Mississippi, to quell riots at the University of Mississippi following its integration by James Meredith.

The 1963 Birmingham campaign, headed by King, proved to be a catalyst for increased federal involvement in the struggle. As the national media was bombarded with images of peaceful demonstrators being attacked by police dogs and high-powered water hoses sweeping people down the street, Kennedy had little choice but to increase efforts to restore peace. On 11 June 1963, he directly addressed national concerns over civil rights, describing it as a "moral issue."

###################

Kennedy's decision to step in to take executive action in ending racial inequality was not due to any sort of epiphany or change of heart; King and the civil rights movement gave Kennedy no choice by refusing to back down or stop their demonstrations.

And that kind of societal pressure and discomfort, I'm afraid, will be required to get Obama to budge...we must give him no choice. But are we LGBTQI Americans and our allies prepared to push Obama to the point of accepting our demands for equality as a "moral issue?" Not at present, I'm sorry to say. At present we have no leader, no moral authority, and no movement. Our so-called "leaders" are so busy with in-fighting, finger pointing and appeasement, there is nothing being accomplished. Yes, we have an awesome team of attorneys, allies and activists working on the CA Supreme Court case to invalidate Prop 8, and they are most assuredly going to win. But where does that leave the rest of the country, the forty-one states which currently have statutory Defense of Marriage Acts and the thirty states which have defined marriage in their constitutions? Where does that leave the Matthew Shepard Act, a bill introduced to the U.S. Congress TEN YEARS AGO and which has failed to pass every year since? Where does that leave Don't Ask, Don't Tell and ENDA, the Employment Non-discrimination Act? Etc, etc, etc...?

We have no singular leader or group of leaders and, hence, no one to ignite the masses we need in order to *compel* Obama to move beyond his own prejudices and bigotry and uphold the U.S. Constitution. On Saturday, the most effective grassroots group formed in response to Prop 8's passage, held a National DOMA Protest, with a goal of collecting one million signatures to send to Obama along with a letter urging him to hold true to his campaign promises. The turnout was dismal. The actual number of signatures collected even more embarrassing. Unless we as a community can set aside our (often petty) differences and stand together, we will never achieve the masses necessary to force Obama to stick his neck out on our behalves.

There are a lot of similarities between Obama and JFK, in terms of their own personal prejudices, political cautiousness, and hedging on doing the right and moral thing. The problems in whether or not LGBTQI Americans can, like the blacks of the sixties, achieve equality through federal mandate lies not in the differences between Obama and Kennedy, but in the differences between the leadership and movement of the black community of the sixties and the LGBTQI movement of today. The onus of responsibility is not so much upon Obama as it is upon our own people. It is up to us to give Obama the motive and justification to make our fight his fight.

[AntiFascist]

26. This is where comparisons to the black struggle fall apart...

black communities suffered through generations of oppression, and each generation passed down to the next their experience as part of the culture. The black church grew out of this experience, and Reverend King grew out of the black church. All of the focus for change was centered on a product of this shared experience.

Gays and lesbians do not come from a singular community with familial ties to a shared experience, in fact we cut across all cultures and races and this diversity is symbolized and celebrated by the rainbow flag. The experience that we do share from such diverse backgrounds gives us a very unique perspective in relation to other 'cultural' types of struggles. We are Jewish, Black, Caucasian...we are capitalists, socialists, rich, middle-class and poor. Some of us identify strongly with a gay and/or lesbian sub-culture, some of us choose to mostly ignore it, and some of us overlap with it on weekends.

Trying to unify such a diverse group of people may often be like trying to herd cats on DU. There is a certain power and spontaneity unique to this culture which I feel must be tapped into in order to bring about the leverage required for legislative change. Perhaps if our governmental leaders could look beyond the sexual aspect of our commonality and see the ultra-creative and oftentimes spiritual characteristics that bind this class of people together, then maybe that would be a good start.

[keepCAblue]

30. Excellent points...very well stated -- Thank you for offering that perspective...n/t

[Fearless]

11. There was a thread a couple of days ago listing the accomplishments of the GLBTQ movement...

in the past decade. If I find a link I'll provide it. IMHO, we are not losing. It's just taking longer than we want, which I suppose is to be expected, realistically, as we want it now.

[donco6]

12. OK, here's the plan:

First, we recognize who we are and who they are. We are a tiny minority of 2 to 5% of the population. Therefore, a direct assault is foolhardy. We have to find powerful allies. Say, like a major political party to take up our cause. We can then work with them to build our issues into the party platform, and start to support like-minded candidates. We can support them with our time and money to get them elected. And of course, once they're elected, they'll work hard to change existing laws so that we are no longer discriminated against.

Or not.

[Fearless]

13. Careful, people have been getting attacked for mentioning percentages

:eyes:

Unfortunately, and I realize your sarcasm, the flaw in the aforementioned plan is the same that allowed Jim Crow Laws to run rampant for 100 years. Changes in law do not necessarily change public opinion. Likewise, laws won't be enforced (cite anti-sodomy laws and the non-prosecuting of straight couples who partake).

[donco6]

14. I'll take the law change for now.

Considering I only have about 25 years left or so. I'm not sure I have time to wait for "inner transformation."

[Fearless]

15. Oh I agree completely...

But I also have to see that the law alone doesn't protect us. And do yourself a favor, don't count the years, count the memories. :hi:

[Vanje]

23. Percentages

I'm 100% gay!

[Creideiki]

18. There's no way it will work! Now, if only we had a holocaust cloak, then there would be a chance...

[Vanje]

21. Obama does care what you think

Otherwise he would not have asked Bishop Gene Robinson, to speak.

Keep writing him with your views on gay marraige, dont-ask-dont-tell , and , especially his having Rick Warren invokate at his inauguration.

(That party was supposed to be for us too!)

[Two Americas]

27. if I may Kixel...

I think that there are things that straights can do that are easier for us, and that we should not look to GLBTQ people and place the burden on them for our need to....what? Relieve ourselves of guilt? Polish up our self-image as progressive people? Feel good that we are "doing something?" The most important thing is to speak out, to go to where the problem is - the fear and ignorance in the straight community. If we merely "join" or "support" what "they" are doing we are hiding behind them in a way, and we are at risk of placing our own need to be good guys above having the courage to confront and tackle the actual problem. We run the risk of seeing the problem as being in the GLBTQ community, rather than where it actually is.

Straights need to speak out, to straights, not about "their" cause which "don't get me wrong I fully support blah blah" but rather about our problem, our failure, our sickness.

This isn't happening. People are not hearing the message. Make it up yourself, start your own program, where you are, with what you have. Not to "promote gay rights" but rather to confront and address bigotry and hatred where it exists - all around us.

That is how I see it.

[yardwork]

28. Very well said.

I don't think I've ever asked an African American person "what can I do?" I know what needs to be done. When somebody makes a bigoted remark I express my disapproval and disagreement, rather than taking the easy way, which would be to ignore it, pretend I hadn't heard, or worst of all make some craven kind of neutral wishy-washy response.

When I'm standing in line and the person behind the counter attempts to ignore the African American man standing in line in front of me (this still happens sometimes in the part of the country where I live), I turn to the man in front of me and say very clearly and firmly, "I believe that this gentleman is next." This tends to make the bigot behind the counter mad at me, but it's never failed to achieve immediate service for the person who was next in line.

When I'm at a party or something and somebody makes a joke about another minority, I turn slightly stiff, don't laugh, and say in a calm, quiet way, "I don't think that's funny." Maybe the bigots see me as a spoil sport, but my reaction never fails to stop the bigoted remarks, and I don't want to be admired by bigots anyway.

For gay rights, it's really the same as anyone else's rights. Separate is never equal. None of our other laws are based on a handful of obscure biblical passages - why should gay people be discriminated against just because some people think that their version of biblical text says so?

There's nothing exceptional about gay rights. It's the same as everyone else's rights.

[Zuiderelle]

29. Exactly. You both put it very well.