Pages

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Don't ask, don't tell



This is probably the only Lady Gaga video I'll ever post, but she focuses on a serious issue here, the end of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," which is up for a vote in the Senate Tuesday. (It passed the House of Representatives in May.)

It's ironic that DADT has become the conservative position these days, isn't it? And as quickly as national opinion has been changing on this issue - and on gay rights in general - it's pretty clear that it's doomed, at least eventually.


At the same time, though, the Republican Party has been rushing ever further towards the extreme right. You really can't be too extreme for the GOP these days. In fact, right now, nearly every Republican politician is terrified of that dreaded "moderate" label.

And so you have people like John McCain flip-flopping on nearly every position he once held, even denying that "maverick" label he used to embrace. He started running to the right as fast as he could in 2008, and he's been running ever since. But nevertheless, he had a primary fight on his hands this year, because he still wasn't considered to be loony enough. Funny, huh?

But he won't make that mistake again. Even now, he's leading the filibuster against ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Of course, that's another complete flip-flop. During the Bush administration, he claimed he'd go along with military leaders on this one. Well, I've long ceased to have any respect for McCain.

This has always been about discrimination. Right-wing distaste for the "immorality" of homosexuality is the whole point. Seventeen years ago, when Congress passed the DADT law, conservatives angrily fought against it. They wanted homosexuals rooted out of the military with McCarthy Era vigor. But since then, public opinion about homosexuality has changed dramatically.

In the Gallup poll noted above, acceptance of gays and lesbians has increased in every single group - men and women, conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, the religious and the irreligious. Acceptance among men age 18 to 49 has increased by 20 percentage points in just four years. As I say, it's increased in every single category.

Therefore, the right-wing doesn't even try to argue the morality of it now (except among themselves). Now, they claim it's all about "unit cohesion" (pretty much the same argument they used to fight integration in the military, too). And now, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is their position, the conservative position. But it's a losing proposition in the long run.

Public opinion is changing this rapidly because gay people have been coming out of the closet (a clear lesson for us atheists, wouldn't you say?). More and more people know someone who's openly homosexual - a friend, a co-worker, a neighbor. And more and more people are discovering that a family member is homosexual. Even conservatives frequently become supportive of gay rights when it's all about their own son or daughter. (It's really tragic when this doesn't happen, but the terrible stories about this also help change opinions.)


This is happening much faster than civil rights for racial minorities, and partly, it might be because that long, difficult struggle came first. But mostly, I suspect, it's because homosexuals look just like you do. In fact, they're often a member of the family - literally. Segregation isn't possible when it comes to gays and lesbians, not really. And it's easier to hate and fear someone you don't know, and someone who clearly looks... alien.

It's telling that anti-Muslim bigotry seems to be increasing, in virulence and in frequency, at the same time that anti-gay hysteria is decreasing. But most people don't have Muslim sons or daughters - or even Muslim co-workers. And Muslims tend to be more distinctive in appearance (not always). It's easy to hate and fear "them." It's harder when "they" are more obviously just like you.

So, yes, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is probably doomed, in the long run. But in the short run, people's lives can still be ruined by it. Let's not be complacent. It's not inevitably doomed on Tuesday, that's for sure. Republicans are filibustering, like they filibuster everything. And these days, any politician or conservative pundit who won't go along with a filibuster is considered a traitor to the party.

In the GOP these days, you're not allowed to have personal opinions that differ from those of the party as a whole (or, at least, of the right-wing loonies, especially those on Fox "News," who currently control the party). In the GOP, obedience is the ultimate virtue. And, as I mentioned previously, you absolutely cannot afford to be seen as a "moderate." That's the kiss of death for Republican politicians right now.

Why do you think that John McCain has flip-flopped on this issue and is now leading the filibuster? He's learned his lesson. When the inmates are in charge of the asylum, you absolutely must demonstrate that you're just as loony as they are, if not loonier. It's the French Revolution all over again. When extremists rule, you can't be too extreme - and it can be a grave danger if you don't appear to be extreme enough. (But these days, Republicans only lose their heads in a figurative sense.)

What's hard to understand is why so many Americans seem to be OK with this. Ordinarily, when extremists take control, they lose elections in landslides. In the past, this has kept both parties near the middle. But that doesn't seem to be happening these days. Republicans have been nominating far-right lunatics, often tossing out mainstream conservatives, but it doesn't seem to be affecting their chances much. Well, this is our fault - too many Americans ignorantly buying into this Fox "News" lunacy, or else just being too lazy or too apathetic to bother voting at all.

There is no guarantee on Tuesday, and there is no guarantee in November. And there's no guarantee that America will prosper, or even survive, either. It's up to us. If we're too dumb, too cowardly, or too lazy, it's all the same. A democracy cannot last if the people aren't smart enough, brave enough, and determined enough to do what's right, no matter what. No excuses! You can't control what other people do, but you can control yourself. So, are you going to be part of the problem or part of the solution?

6 comments:

  1. I'm impressed with Lady Gaga doing something in an such a normal fashion.

    I'm not confrontational but I let my Republican friends know I'm an atheist and liberal. The other day I was visiting a rather conservative family that hates Obama and I said how much I loved him, which shocked them. The matriach of the family, a woman in her late eighties, asked me if I was a liberal, and I said yes. And she asked if I thought gays should marry, and I said of course. And then I asked her back, why not. And she said it was wrong, but then her son, a very anti-Obama guy said he didn't mind, and then a lady friend of the family, who is about sixty, but a college professor said she was for gay marriage too. Eventually the tide turned. The issue of gay marriage stopped getting any protests. I don't know if people were being polite, or others were surprised that friends and relatives considered it acceptable, or they just wanted to let the topic die down.

    Now the old lady loves me, I'm her token liberal friend and we watch Fox news together. She asked me to define liberal. I said liberals want to give freedom to more people, like gays, minorities, women, etc. This lady is very Catholic. I said, as a liberal, I wonder why the Catholic Church doesn't have lady priest. Oh no, she replied, that's terrible. But then her daughter and family friend chimed in they would like lady priests.

    What we need to do Bill, is hang out with conservatives. Hell, maybe we should even join the Republican party and dilute their extremism.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think you're right about working within the system, though a liberal Republican can be a very strange animal indeed. I've seen interviews with liberal Republicans that say they are trying to change things from the inside, but it just seems like an impossible fight. Ron Paul seems to be the only one that has been able to do it.

    As far as Gay rights, I just want to go on the record that I'm all for it.

    I think the churches can believe whatever they want. If they don't want to marry gays that's their prerogative.

    But the State has a responsibility to guarantee all its citizen's equal rights.

    I don't think I've ever mentioned it, but I have an openly gay brother that lives in Manhattan and also an openly gay sister that lives in Boston and I love both of them very much.

    The idea that we have to fight for their rights is completely ludicrous to me. They've both been citizens of America since before I was born. They can't be denied the same rights I have because of who they date or marry.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jim, I've always hung out with conservatives, by necessity. But you're probably more persuasive than I am. At any rate, I find that right-wingers just believe what they want to believe. And when that belief is continuously reinforced by Fox "News" (and by a steady stream of forwarded emails that are complete lies), it's pretty well invulnerable to reason.

    John, I wouldn't call Rand Paul a "liberal Republican." He's a libertarian, which is quite a different thing. Now, libertarians can make some good points occasionally, especially about social issues, but I've never known a one who didn't go completely off the deep end in following his philosophy to ludicrous extremes.

    As I noted above, most people, decent people, change their minds when they realize they have a friend or family member who's gay. And as more and more people come out of the closet, it becomes easier for others to do the same. I won't claim that civil rights for homosexuals is inevitable, because these things still take effort. But in the long-term, I'd certainly bet on it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bill,
    Jim wasn't talking about Rand Paul, But his Father Ron. The two are very different animals.

    ReplyDelete
  5. yeah, I was talking about Ron, who I find to be fairly sensible most of the time. I don't agree with his politics, but I consider him one of the few non-crazy Republican. But maybe you've seen or read things I haven't, Bill? what do you think of Ron Paul?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oops! Sorry, I just misread it, John. I guess Rand Paul has just been in the news more frequently this year.

    I've disagreed with Ron Paul often enough, but yes, I've heard him say some sensible things, too - things I wasn't hearing from any other Republican. I can't say that I'm a fan, but I tend to respect the guy.

    I do think that he's one of the few Republicans who believes what he says.

    ReplyDelete