Skip to content

New Orders


© Walt Handelsman

As someone noted, we now trust gays to defend our country, to kill and be killed, but we don’t trust them to be married. But it will happen.

Share

6 Comments

  1. Don wrote:

    This is a positive step in granting all citizens the same rights and privileges. I was disappointed when Clinton pushed DADT through. Short sighted and, as time has gone by, applied more strenuously than, I understand, it was originally intended.

    The California Prop 8 case is wending its way through the courts. If the judge decides that the appellants have no standing, it’s my understanding that the appeal will be denied, the lower court ruling will stand, and gay marriage in California will once again be legal.

    On the other hand, if the judges find that the appellants do have standing, the case will ultimately be headed for the Supreme Court and a decision that will be national in scope. Stay tuned.

    Monday, December 27, 2010 at 12:45 pm | Permalink
  2. patriotsgt wrote:

    Hey Don IMO a decision by the SC is whats needed. The patchwork of state laws on this topic gets tough to follow, enforce and write policy for. For instance, since the military specifically defines marriage a union between man and women, will it not recognize gay marriage? Also, will “partners” be granted the same rights as married couples when it comes to housing allowances and medical care? These questions and more are also waiting for the SC.

    Monday, December 27, 2010 at 2:58 pm | Permalink
  3. Dan wrote:

    Let me start by saying I was in the military between 1981 and 2001. I remember quite well the day Clinton was elected. I had to put up with a homophobic rant, to which I replied “I have a confession, I’m a lesbian trapped in a man’s body.” You can imagine the response.
    Most of us knew homosexuals in the unit, it didn’t really matter (well, Margaret did get drunk and try to pick-up my wife once- we had a little chat about that), so long as they pulled their own weight, most went above and beyond.
    The only difference I could see from DADT was that you could no longer be punished for fraudulent enlistment, which is why the number of discharges went up.

    Monday, December 27, 2010 at 8:44 pm | Permalink
  4. Iron Knee wrote:

    Dan, LOL about the lesbian trapped in a man’s body line. I’ve occasionally claimed that I am a male lesbian, but most people just look confused.

    Monday, December 27, 2010 at 11:05 pm | Permalink
  5. One of my dear friends was born in a woman’s body. She grew up, got married, and had a couple of kids.

    All the time knowing that she’s a homosexual male.

    A few years ago, she became a he. He lives in CA, and during that brief time when it was legal for two men to marry, he managed to marry his long term partner. He and his husband are still on great terms with his (her?) former husband, and the joint-custody of the kids is working out fine. He’s also successfully completing a PhD program.

    It took me a minute to realize that you meant it about a “male lesbian” being a confusing statement. I guess you all don’t have the same sorts of friends I have. ;-)

    Tuesday, December 28, 2010 at 1:46 pm | Permalink
  6. starluna wrote:

    One of the young people I worked with some years ago on a local environmental justice project now attends the private university I work at. He (she) recently decided that he (she) is not gay but was born into the wrong body. We were on the train the other day and talking about bureaucracy of changing names and sexes. After hearing how relatively easy it was, even at my university which can make correcting their mistake with your name a migraine inducing ordeal (I speak from personal experience), we both concluded that we are lucky to live in MA. I can’t even imagine what it would have been like for her if she lived somewhere else.

    Thursday, December 30, 2010 at 9:08 am | Permalink