Taking the Federal Defense of Marriage Act Down a Notch

Choosing between one's partner and one's home country is a problem that many same-sex couples face every day. There are nineteen nations that have immigration laws that allow the sponsorship of same-sex partners. Included on this list are Brazil, Israel, and South Africa (for a full list see below). So why is it that the United States, a country that is suppose to be a leader in equality, is not on that list? The answer lies in the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage as a legal partnership between a man and a women. This act was signed into federal law by President Clinton in 1996.

According to the Immigration and Nationality Act there are five major ways to attain legal residency in the United States, none of which include same-sex permanent partnerships. In terms of obtaining residency based on a couple's relationship, one must be a spouse of a US citizen to be eligible to apply. I want to emphasize the word spouse, because it is the definition of this word in the Federal Defense of Marriage Act that destroys any possibility of binational same-sex couples to enjoy the same immigration eligibility rights as binational heterosexual couples. According to DOMA, "the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife". A binational heterosexual couple can legally marry and therefore be defined as spouses. A binational same-sex couple cannot.

So what is being done to drag our country into today's world where there are a growing number of people who openly define themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender? The list is continuously growing, but let's focus on taking DOMA down.

We are fighting the Federal Defense of Marriage Act in two major ways. First, we are fighting it head on with supporting state mandated legalized same-sex marriage. If we can succeed in overturning laws prohibiting same-sex marriage in a majority of states we will have the momentum needed to convince our senators and representatives to introduce and adopt a federal amendment that redefines marriage as the legal union between two consenting adults no matter the sex of either spouse. As of today there are five states, plus the District of Columbia, that legally recognize same-sex marriage.

Second, we are chipping away at the Federal Defense of Marriage Act with the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA). UAFA is a United States bill, first introduced in 2000 by New York state Representative Jerrold Nadler, that would extend the rights of residency sponsorship to same-sex couples, defining them as permanent partners. With repeated failure to be adopted, the bill was introduced again in 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2007.  Unrelenting in his pursuit to see the bill signed into law, in Representative Nadler's latest attempt to get UAFA passed, he co-sponsored the bill with Senator Patrick Leahy in 2009. Unfortunately, as of yet UAFA remains a stand alone and seems to be as close to getting signed into law as it was ten years ago.

In order for UAFA to have a chance to be signed into law it needs to be attached to a larger bill. Some debated that it should have been attached to the National Authorization Act, but I disagree. In my opinion not only would UAFA be defeated, but it would take Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal down with it. One highly controversial LGBT rights amendment is going to be hard enough to see passed but adding two to the mix is only a recipe for disaster in the form of filibusters and failure. Both UAFA and DADT repeal need to be adopted as soon as possible so that the LGBT community can begin to share the same rights as the rest of society, but we are fighting an uphill battle and need to be wise when choosing which ammunition to use and when to use it. Let's win DADT repeal first, which will weaken our opponent and then we can move forward with our next tactical move. The LGBT community deserves the same rights as everyone else and we will win this war against discrimination.

You can support the Uniting American Families Act by calling your senator or house representative.  Also voice your support by signing the ImmigrationEquality.com petition in support of UAFA.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nineteen countries with immigration laws allowing same-sex partner sponsorship:

Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom

One Step Forward, One Step Back Towards Eliminating "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"?

2:15 pm on Tuesday, September 21, 2010 may prove to be a time stamp in history that our children and grandchildren will be learning about in school. It is the official time that voting begins to determine if the Senate will proceed with consideration of the National Authorization Act, the defense bill containing the amendment to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT). To proceed 60 Senate votes in favor must be obtained. For those in support of eliminating the DADT policy this news may incite a sense of excitement, but one must be wary.

The decision was made after Senator John McCain, the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, objected to "non-national defense" debate by democratic senators. This maneuver resulted in Senator Harry Reid, a leader in the fight to repeal DADT, to file cloture. This brought the debate to an abrupt end. Although Senator John McCain recently stated he has no position on DADT, it is apparent that this was a sly maneuver to silence the voices of those trying to reinstate and uphold the rights of LGBTs in the United States. Let's not forget that earlier this year in the Republican primary, Senator McCain seemed steadfast in his opposition to DADT repeal, but now his tune has changed. Could this "change of heart" be a ploy to win votes in the general election against his democratic opponent? I'll let you be the judge. That being said, all Senators in favor of repeal should step lightly and not give the opposition any ammunition they can use to destroy DADT repeal. By speaking to amendments that don't fall under national defense, Senator Reid practically handed Senator McCain the special invitation to force early filing of cloture.

“I want to make one thing very clear: I do not oppose or support the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ at this time, but I do oppose taking legislative action prior to the completion of a real and thorough review of the law,” McCain said. “A complete survey to evaluate the impact of repeal on the men and women serving in our military should be concluded before moving forward.” (Washington Blade)

I agree with Senator McCain on the point that before taking legislative action one must do their due diligence, but not when it is so obvious that the law in affect is ridiculous and denies citizens equal rights. After reading Senator McCain's statement of why he doesn't "oppose or support the repeal of 'Don't Ask Don't Tell'" I had to ask myself why is it that our government must  'evaluate the impact of repeal' on our military service men and women'? Let me set up a quick scenario in order to prove a point. Unfortunately in today's society many people still blame Islam for the horrible terrorist attacks that our country has suffered instead of blaming the very few radicals who use Islam as a shield to hide behind for their actions against humanity. I can guarantee that we can find military service men and women who hold this belief, but yet do we have to evaluate the impact of allowing Muslims to serve side by side with those who do not agree with their religion?  As far as I know, no we don't. Yes, their are Muslims "whose presence in the armed forces would create an unacceptable risk", just as there are Christians who pose unacceptable risk. Yes there are homosexuals "whose presence in the armed forces would create an unacceptable risk", just as there are heterosexuals who pose an unacceptable risk. It is not the religion nor the sexuality that make these people a risk. So how is it that we must 'evaluate the impact of repeal'? A homosexual or bisexual military service man or women is not a threat to those they serve with. Homosexuality and bisexuality is not a disease that is going to infect the military. Sexuality does not change trustworthiness in a combat zone. Sexuality does not make you who you are. The threat does not come from the homosexuals and bisexuals, but from the few ignorant military service men that are not accepting. If someone is to be discharged then it should be those suffering from this ignorance.

Only after a successful vote for cloture on Tuesday will opponents of  "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy have the opportunity to filibuster, strike repeal, or cripple the anti-DADT amendment. According to Senator Reid, debate over the defense bill and its attached amendments will likely continue until the Senate breaks for recess in early October. Whether this is a positive expectation or not is up for debate. It is all a game of balancing. On one hand this could give those in support of DADT repeal time to persuade swing senators to forgo support of filibusters, strikes to repeal, or actions to cripple the DADT repeal amendment. On the other hand, this could allow those in opposition to talk the amendment to death by stripping away any language that even resembles support for repeal. One way that we as citizens can help is to continue to contact our state Senators to let them know we support DADT repeal and to ask them to stand with Senator Harry Reid.

To find out more information on how to reach your senator visit the Human Rights Campaign website.

Standing Up To "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

Seeing as this is my first post for The Monster Movement blog I feel that one of the most pressing issues in need of discussion is the fight to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". State Senators will be voting the week of September 20, 2010 and it is up to us to express our thoughts on the issue so we can win the majority in the Senate in order to end the oppressive "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is an absurd and discriminating policy which prohibits lesbian, gay, and bisexual service members and applicants from disclosing their sexual orientation without suffering the consequences of discharge and denial of entrance into military service, respectively. This policy is mandated by Public Law 103-160 (Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II, Chapter 37, § 654), which was passed by Congress in 1993.

The most striking findings in support for the incorporation of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" into Public Law 103-160 are as follows:

- "Success in combat requires military units that are characterized by high morale, good, order and discipline, and unit cohesion."

- "One of the most critical elements in combat capability is unit cohesion, that is, the bonds of trust among individual service members that make the combat effectiveness of a military unit greater than the sum of the combat effectiveness of the individual unit members."

- "The armed forces must maintain personnel policies that exclude persons whose presence in the armed forces would create an unacceptable risk to the armed forces' high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

- "The presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

I completely agree with the first two findings, but am offended by the last. I can understand the concern that the military have with the possible problems that could arise from the fact that some service men and women do not understand or accept the lifestyles of homosexuals and bisexuals, but in my opinion this concern is rooted in ignorance and the belief that sexual orientation is a choice. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but their opinions should not result in the oppression of any one human being. I ask, instead of oppressing people for their sexuality, why not educate those that seem unwilling to accept the reality of the situation. This country likes to portray itself as a protector of not only its citizen's human rights, but also those of other countries. Is it not this excuse that many times is used for our presence in countries with oppressive governments? How can we justify having our military service personnel putting their lives in danger to protect the human rights of others when our own government blatantly denies the human rights of their own service men and women?

On May 27, 2010 the House of Representatives, in a vote of 234 to 194, adopted Murphy's amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, which could in turn lead to the repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. In order for consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act to proceed there must be at least 60 Senate votes in favor. Although this may prove to be a huge battle in the war against "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", if 60 votes are achieved then cunning Senators in support of the policy can still fight to attach damaging amendments to the defense bill that could render Murphy's amendment irrelevant.

The repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy would be a major accomplishment in the LGBT fight for equal rights. Today it has been estimated that 73 percent of military personnel are accepting of lesbian and gays in the military. Hopefully this finding will come into play when the Senate votes next week, but time and again our country has seen laws passed that the majority of the effected community were opposed to. Let's hope this is not one of those instances.

"Discrimination is an assault on the very notion of human rights. Discrimination is the systematic denial of certain peoples' or groups' full human rights because of who they are or what they believe. It is all too easy to deny a person's human rights if you consider them as 'less than human'." (Amnesty International)

Do your part by calling your state Senator and ask him/her to vote in opposition of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. The easiest way to reach your Senator is to call the 24 hour Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121. Ten minutes of your time can make a huge difference in the life of the men and women who serve and protect our country.