Heh. I’m rather impressed with you, Withers. You usually strike me as one who resists making such controversial statements in an effort to not blame victims for being victims. Not that I think you’ve made such a statement in this column; I don’t. I think you’ve demonstrated that lobbying knows no bounds. Perhaps this is the lesson we as GLBT people need to learn… Also, as long as there are groups, there will be external prejudices and internal fighting. Humanity is a weird bunch!

For those who wonder about the ability to multi-task: it ain’t all about us, whoever we happen to be. No matter who the president is, no matter who won the election last November, the reality is that the US is facing massive financial meltdown which in turn affects the rest of the world’s financial institutions, we are STILL engaged in two wars in foreign nations, health care is at the point where it can no longer be ignored, and there are countless other issues that are too big to even think of right now. Frankly, as much as I want hate-crimes legislation and a repeal of anti-GLBT measures, I want universal health care, I want the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to end responsibly, and I want the members of the government to pass measures that will help alleviate the world’s financial burdens. I do not want these things to come at the expense of GLBT people, but how is it feasible for the federal government to focus on everything at once and fix everything in one fell swoop? Especially when the government is comprised of tens of thousands of people, all of whom have their own agendas and ideals of what the most important measures are that need to be dealt with. Additionally, there is and always has been a conflict between federal legislation and states’ rights to choose for themselves. No matter what measures the federal government passes to protect GLBT people, we should all prepare for smaller battles inside our own states, for it is inevitable.

But what we need is a national coming out day for gay military. And on that day, faced with the likely demand by 50,000 troops to be discharged under the law, that will be its end.

And the religious wrong will be faced with shutting up, or admitting their hatreds are more important then our nations security.

Or they will be faced with supporting gays in the military. Talk about a bunch of religious freaks nuts in a tightening vise.

Do it. It is the law, and nothing says you can’t come out.

While DADT is important I would ask how important? DADT *IS BAD* do NOT get me wrong, but it effects a small number of people in relation to anti discrimination bills or possibly DOMA. If anyone asked me to assign an importance level to each issue, *I* would do it this way.

1. Anti discrimination
2. DOMA
3. DADT

To me that is a reasonable importance level although 1 and 2 could be the same importance level as they are tightly intertwined.

Somebody has to make a decision as to what one fights for. We are not powerful enough to make all 3 a priority. Yes I know we got sh** on by one president but trying to change all three simultaneously is not realistic.
I am not sure who said what to who as to priorities, I would suggest DADT should be low (but still important). Myself I would *NEVER* opt for a military life but I guess some of us do. Again it would seem to be a low number. So why waste our effort on something that hurts so few? I hate to say this as I am sure I will be stepping on someone but I look at it like something similar to the blacks in the 1950′s. They did a divide and conquer first there was education then voting then equal opportunity. The probably wanted everything at once but realistically it was not feasible. They did the next best thing and they did it correctly.

With the Congress being anti gay as it is we have to pick and choose carefully our fights and yes it will be a fight. The Republicans and some of the Democrats are virulently against us.

Before getting upset sit back and think which item is more important (not just for you) but for all gay people.

Who told you life was fair? I know how harsh that last statement sounds, but this is NOT about fairness. It’s about understanding how a system works so that you can work the system. You prioritize your legislative agenda, often trying to figure out which items will build support for future items. Then, you build support for the items one at a time. Then, you knock them off. That’s a time tested, reasonable approach to working an agenda through the federal government.

Absolutely.

Plus, in this age of Internet information, it’s vital to ask yourself who is reporting the information and how trustworthy is it? For example, who is The Palm Center? I’ve never heard of them. Who are the principals? What is their agenda?

Remember the initial salvos in the “Obama compared our love to incest and pedophilia!” war? When I read the most cited article, I couldn’t figure out who the author was and how he got his information (as best I could tell, he was a blogger…but isn’t it fishy that it was hard for me to tell?!). When I finally read the actual law brief, I found that he grossly misrepresented what was said in the brief. But it was too late. A non-reputable news source set the tone for the conversation, and the Obama bashing hasn’t stopped since.

We here in MA are undergoing a huge lesson in checking assumptions, patiently teasing out the details of a story, and questioning sources in our exploration of the “Crowley arrested Gates just outside his own home, was it racial profiling?” event. Things are not always as they appear to be…be patient, read multiple news sources, check their trustworthy quotient, check to see if they’re working an agenda, and be sure to read original documents (like the police report) instead of journalists slanted summaries of the documents.