Pam Spaulding's Blog, page 122
December 15, 2010
My Congresswoman, Susan A. Davis, Speech On The Floor Of The House
My congresswoman,
M. Speaker, I rise in support of repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'Conditions for repeal have been met, due diligence has been done, and the time to act is here.
Regardless of what critics say, the issue before us has been debated in Congress and reviewed by the Department of Defense.
In fact, Members of the House have debated repeal for some time. My subcommittee held hearings on the issue, the first on July 23, 2008, and the second on March 3, 2010.
Every Member of this body was welcome to attend, though few Republicans made the effort to be there.
For those of you who weren't available, the takeaway from these hearings was that the current policy is bad for our Armed Forces and inconsistent with American values.
Next, this House approved language identical to what is before us today, as part of the National Defense Authorization Act.
Finally, the DOD completed its study on implementing repeal, which confirms our troops are ready.
70 percent of the force and 74 percent of their spouses said that repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' will have a positive, mixed or no effect on our military.
And over 80 percent of our warriors on the front lines who believe they've served with a gay service member in the past said their unit's ability to work together was "very good"...
In short, service members and their spouses have essentially the same view as the American public - men and women in uniform who are gay should be allowed to serve openly.
And our top civilian and military officials agree.
Secretary of Defense Gates says that with careful preparation, repeal poses low risk to the readiness and effectiveness of our forces. Admiral Mullen shares that view.
Now, it's true that the military service chiefs have reservations about the timing of repeal...
...but they ultimately acknowledge that leadership at all levels will be key.
I have great confidence in the leaders who are serving in our military and in their professionalism.
After all, we trust them with decisions about our nation's safety, we can trust them to put this transition into practice.
However, they cannot begin to meet this new challenge until we repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'
Madam Speaker, change is never easy, but it is rarely as necessary as it is today.
There's more to this issue than statistics and surveys...at the heart of it is the right of all Americans to serve their country without having to hide who they are.
In the words of one gay service member, repeal would simply "Take a knife out of my back....you have no idea what it is like to have to serve in silence."
Gay men and women want to serve and have a right to serve.
It's time to stop all the 'don'ts' about repeal and just do it...
Because what we've known all along is that gay and lesbian personnel have the same values toward their service as service members at large - love of their country, honor, respect, integrity, and service over self.
If we miss this opportunity to repeal this law, history will judge us poorly for the damage we have done to our nation and our military.
I urge Members of this House to be on the right side of history and help end 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'
LIVEBLOG: House of Representatives General Debate on DADT Repeal Standalone Bill
This is a liveblog of the General Debate in the House on the DADT repeal standalone bill. Text below the fold.
Rep. Chellie Pingree this morning in the House.
1520: General debate has begun. Rep Susan Davis has the floor. She points out that the conditions for repeal are ripe. The House has conducted several hearings, which most Republicans did not bother to attend. She cites the positive outcomes of the "study" and the desire of the SECDEF and CJCS to see this done. The service chiefs, despite reservations, are ready to implement. LGB servicemembers have the same values as straight ones - honor, integrity, service to others over self. "If we miss this opportunity to repeal this law, history will judge us poorly, for the damage we have done."
1528: Rep. Buck McKeon is angry at Speaker Pelosi. He is angry that Republicans filibustered the NDAA, but somehow manages to blame it on the Democrats liberal agenda. We shouldn't be changing anything in the middle of a war. Negative impact, blah blah blah. The service chiefs are "closer to the pulses of the troops" than the SECDEF and CJCS, and Gen. Amos is right about the Marines being little wussies.
1535: Rep Davis rebuts: this bill does not implement repeal immediately, but when the Pentagon says they can.
1536: Speaker Pelosi - It's been a long time coming, but now is the time to act on this. She commends Rep. Murphy, citing his military leadership. "Today we have an opportunity to correct a fundamental unfairness in our nation." Repeal will honor the service and sacrifice of all.
1541: Rep. Joe Wilson once again blames Senate Dems for failling to pass NDAA even though the Rs were the ones who blocked it. The services are overtaxed, etc. The House should take the time to look at the entire Pentagon report, and should hold hearing next year.
1544: Rep. Vic Snyder speaks of the tremendous impact of LGB people all over America, and that repeal allows the military to catch up with the rest of America, and that his children will be the better for it.
1545: Rep Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) wonders at our priorities. He says that the 50-55% who didn't bother answering the survey should be taken. "I may not endorse the prejudices that are out there, but I can't ignore that they're out there."
1547: Rep. Adam Smith - "We have studied this to death and it is time to ACT." How does it make our military safer to drive out thousands who are serving and serving well? It doesn't. It is WAY past time to repeal this law, strengthen our military, and all gays and lesbians to serve our country.
1549: Rep. Todd Akin - this is a total eclipse of reason. For the first time we haven't passed a defense bill and instead are debating a social agenda. But no, we're going to impose something when we're fighting two wars. I have two sons currently in the Marines, they said this is a lousy idea.
1551: Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ) - Look at the past. Look at racial integration. Our military has thrived since racial integration. Colin Powell, retired CJCS, someone who experienced all of the unit leadership we're talking about, supports this repeal. But I urge you all to listen to the silent voices, those of the LGB servicemembers lying maimed in hospitals, who cannot receive visits from the person they love. I urge you all to listen to the voices of the fallen whose service has not been honored. This should have been done a long time ago.
1554: Rep Doug Lanborn (R-CO) - I am concerned about our front-line Marines, our combat troops. It is irresponsible of Congress to fail to pass NDAA, but at the last minute attempt to placate the Democrat liberal base by pushing repeal.
1556: Rep. John Lewis - VOTE YES. I want to see his speech on YouTube later.
1558: Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) - Our military needs more time to study and deal with this and not force this policy on our troops.
1559: Rep. James Langeven (D-RI) - At no time should we be discharging qualified troops who want to serve. At a time when our military needs every qualified person to serve, it is time to repeal this policy.
1601: Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) - This is a distraction, and we need to focus on winning in Iraq and Afghanistan.
1604: Rep. Patrick Murphy - Today we have a chance to do what is right. We have heard every excuse under the sun. First it was, "We need to study." Well, the Pentagon studied it, and said they'd be fine. Then it was, "We need to hear from our leaders." Our troops and leadership have spoken. ENOUGH OF THE GAMES. Our troops are the best of the best, and they need a Congress who will put their safety and wellbeing about partisan games. ADM Mullen testified that this is about integrity in the military. This is also about the integrity of THIS institution. "This vote is about whether we're going to continue telling those willing to die for our freedoms that they need to lie in order to do so. I urge my colleageus to vote yes on repeal."
1607: Rep. John Fleming - The Pentagon study was flawed because it didn't ask whether, but how. Think of the logistical headaches this will cause. And then there's a question of Constitutionality. SCOTUS says that the military is a special institution. Marines and Army combat troops do not want this.
1610: Rep. Steny Hoyer - "It is never too late to do the right thing, and that is the proposition that is before this House." The ultimate litmus test is whether people are qualified and committed to the job. The NDAA, which we passed in May, is still in the Senate because the minority party has refused to allow it to move. By a vote of 234-194 this body voted to repeal this outdated policy pending a comprehensive report. That study was undertaken, has ben reported, and showed that some 70% of the members survey said, "No problem." Again, I'm worried about somebody who can shoot straight, who has the courage and willingness to serve our country. The views of over 115,000 people were taken into that study. "The risk of repeal to overall military readiness is low." Our troops stand with our military leaders and the vast majority of Americans, who would be baffled at the fear which my Republican colleagues have shown regarding this issue. You serve with gays and lesbians here in this body every day, whether they are members, staff, or visitors, and you have no problem. Disabuse yourself of the notion that you do. We can do it in this body, or have the courts do it. I talked to SECDEF earlier this week, and he said "pass this bill, because we need a legislative, not a court-imposed solution." Mullen wants it through the same process through which the law was enacted. I told my friends, the SECDEF and CJCS, that we would. It's a hard choice to reject a considered, thoughtful planned approach that SECDEF and CJCS believe will happen. It is time to end the policy of discrimination, which ended the careers of some 13,500 people. They were not discharged for any misconduct, but simply because they were gay. A young man named Ian Golden wrote to me. "I joined the ROTC after the SOTU address. I always wanted to serve, but never did because I'm gay. I joined after the SOTU because I didn't think I'd have to hide. I was in the top of my class of cadet privates, but it became increasingly difficult to hide. The policy asks people to lie. Honor, duty, country. Lying is not a component point of that philosophy, but that's what we expect. After learning about the continuing delays in Congress, I quit ROTC. I will be studying abroad in Cairo. I am an Arabic speaker and an A student. When this ban is lifted, I will gladly serve. There are many more like me." We have an opportunity to accept those who are willing, able, and ready to serve their country. Mr. McKeon, when I ended my debate in May, you mentioned Colin Powell. I did not respond at that time. But Colin Powell has changed his perspective in the 17 years since, because he believes the time has come for us to do the right thing.
1625: Rep. Louie Gohmert is going apes**t. "The military is inconsistent with American values - it does not have the freedom of speech, the freeom of assembly. It doesn't work. This is one of those issues that is so central to the military that we need to take another, more comprehensive poll."
1628: Rep. Silvester Reyes (D-TX) - We all know that there are gays and lesbian serving in the military. This is not about that. This is about the fact that we ask them to lie. I represent a large military facility in my district, so I get an opportunity to ask the troops. Their opinions track with the study. They don't care. They care that he or she performs in combat. It's that simple. I urge for repeal.
1630: Rep. Judy Chu wishes to submit her statement for the record, but will not expound on the floor.
1630: REP JOE SESTAK HAS THE FLOOR. As a commander of an aircraft carrier, I always wondered how I could ask those gay and lesbian sailors under me to serve, and go home to a place where they had no rights. The average age of the sailor is 19 1/2. They don't care. We don't do this just for equality. We do this because we want the best of the best, and that's why I support repeal.
1632: Rep. Barney Frank - Let's get over the b.s. that Dems are holding up the NDAA. It is the Republicans who have blocked it twice in the Senate. And let's talk about distractions. Rep. Gohmert talked about distraction. You don't think having DADT hanging over someone's head is a distraction? And we keep hearing about Colin Powell. I asked Colin Powell 20 years ago if he meant that LGB people are not good at their jobs. He said no. It is that there are bigots in the Armed Forces, and on the other side of the aisle. That is the problem
1635: Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) - Let me state the obvious - we are a nation at war. This is about recruitment, unit cohesiveness, and retention. We need to listen to our troops, and not put them at further risk. DADT is successful, and should remain.
1639: Rep. Tim Walz (D-MN) a career enlisted soldier (24 years) is offended by the notion that our troops can't handle a chance in policy. Asking these brave soldiers to lie goes against everything they stand for. In a few moments
1640: Rep. Steve Buyer (R-IN) - the SCOTUS allows the military to discriminate. Why do we do that? Because we want the very best. Tolerance does not require a moral equivalency. Repeal is a bad idea.
1642: Rep. John Buccieri (D-OH), a Major in the U.S. Air Force Reserve. The issue before us is that our military, which is supposed to spread freedom, is being asked to deny freedom within themselves. When you take an oath to die for our freedom, it matters not who you love at home.
1644: Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) - I do not believe that our military men and women are so fragile that having a gay person next to them will kill them. The mission of our armed forces is to deter war and to protect the security of our country. If a soldier is willing and capable to fight for this country, but our government denies him or her because that soldier is gay, then it is not the soldier, but the government who is damaging our country.
1646: Rep Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) -- I want to talk about the cost to the men and women who have been kicked out under this policy. Why has this body not talked about the cost of this policy.
1647: Rep Tammy Baldwin: I rise to urge my colleagues to do the right thing and vote to repeal. We know after 17 years that this policy is unjust, discriminatory, and unAmerican. The Pentagon study has shown that our troops are overwhelmingly ready for this change. It is long past time to end this policy.
1648: Rep Duncan Hunter: This is about our combat troops and repeal will cost lives.
1649: Rep. Laura Richardson - We took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and it is time we started doing it.
1650: Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) We need the best fighters right now, the best soldiers.
1651: Rep Al Green: I will not ask people willing to die for my country to lie. As a black man, my life has prepared me for this vote, a lifetime of sitting in the back of the bus, the balcony at the movie theaters, and standing in lines for "coloreds only."
1652: Rep. Buck McKeon finishing up. I don't where he's getting this 67% think there will be a negative impact number from.
1654: Rep. Susan Davis - No more excuses. It is time to take away the barriers from people who put service above self, and want to serve our country.
Contribute a 'get well soon' message to Dan Choi on our GroupCard
The card will be delivered to Dan directly via email (and to his local contact, who can give him a hard copy as well).
Note to trolls and Dan Choi critics - negative comments on the card can and will be deleted. It's sad that I even have to say that, but such is the state of netiquette and common decency these days.
Wednesday DADT Repeal Open Thread
1:45pm Update: Chellie Pingree has just started off the 1 hour long debate in the House for DADT repeal.
Kerry Eleveld tweeted earlier today that the vote itself will be between 3-4 pm.
Watch C-SPAN livestream online for DADT repeal.
Watch C-SPAN 2 livestream online for tax bill and later START treaty.
ABC News is reporting broad support and strong numbers for DADT repeal this morning:
Seventy-seven percent of Americans support allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the U.S. military, the most in polling back 17 years, capping a dramatic long-term shift in public attitudes on the issue.That result in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll comes as the House prepares to vote on legislation that would repeal the current "don't ask, don't tell" policy, a measure previously approved in the House as part of a larger bill, but stalled in the Senate.
When first asked in an ABC/Post poll in 1993, 63 percent of Americans favored allowing service by homosexuals who don't reveal their sexual orientation - the "don't tell" policy; far fewer, 44 percent, supported service by gays who do reveal their sexual orientation.
Both views have changed, the latter most sharply. Today 83 percent favor allowing service by gays who don't tell, up 20 points - and, as noted, almost as many also favor service by gays and lesbians who do disclose their sexual orientation, up 33 points from its 1993 level.
Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME) released the following to Maine media this morning:
ADVISORY
TODAY: Congresswoman Chellie Pingree to lead the fight to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
Vote in House may come as early as todayWhat:
Congresswoman Chellie Pingree will manage debate this morning on a bill that would put an end to the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. Pingree will speak in favor of repeal. A vote on the bill could come as early as today.Where:
U.S. House of Representatives and broadcast on CSPAN1 (channel 16 on Time Warner in the Greater Portland area)When:
The debate may start as early as 11:00 this morning, but the actual start time is still to be determined.Background:
Pingree is a co-sponsor of a bill in the House that would end the policy of banning openly gay men and women from serving in the military. She will be the first to speak on the bill this morning and manage the debate on the floor of the House.Here is how the AP reported on the bill:
The move would put pressure on the Senate to delay its holiday adjournment plans and take up a [standalone repeal bill] sponsored last week by Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and Connecticut's independent senator, Joseph Lieberman. That bill's fate has been in doubt because of other pressing issues facing the Senate with only days to go before it planned to conclude its lame-duck session.
Repeal advocates see this week as their last best shot at overturning "don't ask, don't tell," which bars gay troops from acknowledging their sexual orientation. Next year, Republicans take back control of the House and additional Senate seats, severely undercutting the chances that any Democratic priority will advance come January.
The House opened up at 10 am and is going through their usual morning routine of 1 minute speeches. Listening to Joe Wilson and Mike Pence seems a small price to pay, to witness what may be the final chances of DADT repeal in Congress today!
DADT repeal expected to be brought up in the House some time late this morning. (10:25 am- Ca Rep. Joe Garamendi was the first to mention today's potential vote and just used his 1 minute speech to discuss a soldier discharged under DADT, making a strong case for repeal)
More below the fold, including press releases as they come in.
There's a certain Democratic Senator from West Virginia who is getting an idea of how his constituents feel about his recent vote:
West Virginia Veteran Discharged Under DADT to Deliver Petition Signatures to Sen. Manchin's Office Today at 11 a.m.
Charleston, W.V.-- Fairness WV, the Mountain's State's leading LGBT rights organization, and Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) will deliver more than 800 petitions to Sen. Joe Manchin's (D-W.Va.) Charleston and Washington, D.C. offices urging him to vote to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT)." In Charleston, Pepe Johnson, a veteran who was discharged under DADT, will be delivering the petitions.
What: Petition delivery to Sen. Joe Manchin
Where:
1.) Sen. Joe Manchin's Office, 300 Virginia Street, East, Suite 2630, Charleston, W.Va.
2.) Sen. Manchin's Capitol Hill Office, 311 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.When:
11:00 a.m., December 15, 2010
BACKGROUND:
Sen. Manchin originally voted against cloture on the National Defense Authorization Act, legislation that includes repeal of DADT. His vote is counter to the Secretary of Defense, the late Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) a majority of military families, and an even wider majority of the American people.
1pm Update: Aadding a press release from House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer
DADT Message Alert:
Outside Groups Continue to Express Support for Legislation to Allow for Repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
Today the House will vote on Rep. Patrick Murphy's bill that enables repeal of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, on which Majority Leader Hoyer is lead co-sponsor. This standalone bill is identical to the Murphy amendment to the FY11 Defense Authorization bill, which passed 234-194. Wanted to make sure your boss saw the following quotes of support from outside organizations for this legislation:
From Paul Rieckhoff, Founder and Executive Director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA):
"IAVA thanks Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Congressman Patrick Murphy for their leadership on the landmark legislation to repeal DADT. We share Secretary Gates, Admiral Mullen and both Congressmen's views that a prolonged court battle resulting from failure to repeal DADT legislatively would be extremely damaging and disruptive to our armed forces. Our military needs clear leadership and guidance on this policy to maintain the highest level of cohesion, effectiveness and readiness. That clarity can only come with legislative action now.
"On behalf of our hundreds of thousands of members nationwide, we appreciate Majority Leader Hoyer and Congressman Murphy's dedication and commitment to getting this bill passed. We strongly urge the House to approve this legislation swiftly so it can move to the Senate for consideration without further delay."
From Alexander Nicholson, Executive Director of Servicemembers United and a former U.S. Army Human Intelligence Collector who was discharged under DADT:"Support for repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is at an all-time high, with an overwhelming majority of Americans and servicemembers now wanting this policy to just go away. Furthermore, there are currently more than 60 votes in the Senate for repealing this law, so all members of the House of Representatives should feel confident that a vote for repeal today will likely spell the end of this outdated law once and for all."
Winnie Stachelberg, Senior Vice President for External Affairs, Center for American Progress
Action Fund:
"The Center for American Progress Action Fund urges all House members to vote in favor of H.R. 6520, the Hoyer-Murphy bill which will repeal the costly and discriminatory DADT law and place implementation of repeal firmly in the hands of our nation's military leaders. Our troops, their leaders, and the American public all agree that it is time for the DADT law to be repealed."
Third Way:
"Our military leaders have spent the past year studying this issue and, after a lengthy and careful assessment, have found that there is minimal risk to repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell. They have laid out a plan to implement this change and to carry out an orderly transition to a new policy. It is now incumbent upon Congress to untie the hands of our military leaders and allow them to put their well-considered plan into action, by passing repeal before the end of the 111th Congress. If they fail to act, it will leave the military at risk of a unilateral, court-mandated end to the policy-an outcome that no one thinks is best for our troops."
Human Rights Campaign:
"The path to enact civil and human rights laws always has twists and turns and is never easy. The Human Rights Campaign is grateful to the US House of Representatives for continuing to push for equality in our country. This is an historic moment and members of the House are ready to advance the arc of justice."
"Later today members of the U.S. House of Representatives have the opportunity to send a message to our troops that their service is valued. This is a matter of integrity - that of our servicemembers and that of our country. 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' has forced patriotic Americans to make the choice between the truth and serving the country they love. Let's put national security and the integrity of our troops first today."
Additional information is available on the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" group on DemCom.
Visit http://www.majorityleader.gov/ for more press, floor and member resources.
2pm addition of press release from Servicemembers United
DADT Repeal Advocates Storm Capitol Hill in Waning Days of Lame Duck
with Servicemembers United Action Fund Lobbying Blitz
"OPERATION RENEWED ENGAGEMENT" Targets 71 Senate Offices
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
12/15/2010WASHINGTON, D.C. - Servicemembers United, the nation's largest organization of gay and lesbian troops and veterans, announced today that teams of DADT repeal advocates will be fanning out across Capitol Hill on Wednesday to encourage Senators to support staying in session until the stand-alone "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal bill comes up for a vote. The initiative, termed "OPERATION RENEWED ENGAGEMENT," will continue throughout Thursday and Friday of this week as well.
"This lobbying blitz is intended to raise visibility for the issue on Capitol Hill, get the message across to Senate offices that we have more than 60 votes for repeal, and encourage Senators to agree to stay in session until the stand-alone repeal bill gets a vote," said Alexander Nicholson, Executive Director of Servicemembers United and the Servicemembers United Action Fund."Those who wish to join in the effort on Thursday and Friday should contact us immediately. This is it for 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' and we need all the help we can get to ensure final victory."
Repeal supporters interested in joining OPERATION RENEWED ENGAGEMENT on the afternoons of Thursday, December 16th and/or Friday, December 17th should contact Jarrod Chlapowski at jchlapowski@servicemembersunited.org.
###
Servicemembers United Action Fund, a non-profit and non-partisan organization, engages in lobbying, grassroots organizing, and advocacy on issues affecting the gay military, veteran, and defense community.
Newsweek poses the question about the African-American and lgbt civil rights movements
crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters
I hate talking about this comparison because it makes me feel like a piece of rope in a tug of war. But Newsweek is taking an interesting look at how the lgbt civil rights movement compares to the African-American civil rights movement:
Four months before Rosa Parks refused to vacate her bus seat to a white man in 1955, she attended a retreat at the Highlander center in Tennessee, where she took a workshop alongside blacks and whites on school desegregation. More than a half century later, the Highlander center is still training soldiers in the fight for equal rights. Only now the battleground has shifted. Last January, four dozen gay and lesbian activists gathered for a center retreat overlooking the Smoky Mountains to get inspiration on how they could show—not just tell—America that their rights are being violated.
But how? There are no “heterosexuals only” Woolworth counters where gays and lesbians can protest segregation; even Woolworth itself is long gone from the U.S. “We needed to create the urgency and critical mass to stop the injustice towards our community,” says Robin McGehee, a mother of two and cofounder of the civil-disobedience group that was formed during those five days in Tennessee, called GetEQUAL. “What are our lunch-counter images?”
More here
Before BOTH groups get defensive and start yanking and pulling me and the rest of mine (i.e. lgbts of color), allow me to throw out some thoughts You can either take or leave these thoughts, but they are MY observations.
To the African-American community - Yes the lgbt civil rights movement is the same as the African-American civil rights movement. Just because the conditions of injustices are different do not make the injustices more palatable. Remember before you throw out Bible verses against the lgbt community that Bible verses were used to justify slavery and segregation. You should be flattered that lgbts are copying the work done in the 50s and 60s just like African-Americans back then copied the work of Gandhi. You see, no one group has the patent when it comes to fighting for their rights.
To the lgbt community - Gay is NOT the new black. And don't ever say some dumb shit like that ever again. It's counterproductive and it keeps you from educating yourself on the nuances of the African-American struggle. Yes the struggle for lgbt equality is similar to the African-American civil rights movement, but that does not mean it excuses you from taking into account the different nuances between the two. And above all, stop making it sound so simplistic. Marching was only part of the story. Behind each march was a plan as to how said march would affect the movement as a whole, which proves that marching alone without a game plan will get you nowhere. And remember that you all don't have to get along. Goodness knows those working in the African-American civil rights movement didn't. But they learned to work together. Educate yourselves on how this was done.
To both communities - As an lgbt of color I have to say from the heart that BOTH of y'all are getting on my damn nerves. The irony is that lgbts and African-Americans are similar in terms of history. If you would stop fighting, you would learn this. Also don't ignore the ignore the needs of lgbts of color in your community. Don't assume to know who we are or what we want. Ask us. Lastly, as an lgbt of color, let me say that I will NOT make a choice between my racial heritage and my sexual identity. I embrace both. But when I feel that the lgbt community is wrong, I will say so. And that also goes for the black community.
I am not a commodity, I am person who is uncompromisingly black and unapologetically gay. Deal with it.
December 14, 2010
I've got your pastors right here, Senator McCain
In his latest email to supporters, Tony Perkins cited his "frequent conversations over the last several months" with Senator John McCain about DADT repeal and related this exchange:
Senator McCain...asked me several times: "Where are all the religious leaders, where are the pastors?".Tony Perkins heads up the anti-gay hate group Family Research Council.
Senator McCain, I've got your pastors right here. Back in September over 500 ordained clergy signed the Open Letter to Religious Leaders on Sexual and Gender Diversity and delivered a copy to every member of Congress, including Senator McCain.
The letter and the endorsements were sent to remind members of the Congress that millions of people of faith support the full inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons in society, including the right to serve in the military, marriage equality and banning employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Presidents and deans of leading seminaries and key officials at national denominations are among the Open Letter's endorsers."We ask the Senate to vote repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell this week, and pray that this Congress will repeal DOMA and pass ENDA before the end of the fall," said Rev. Debra W. Haffner, the Executive Director of the Religious Institute. "As religious leaders, we believe we have an obligation to create a world that embraces the diversity and dignity of God's creation. Members of Congress, can assure full inclusion."
What's more, over 3,500 clergy and other religious leaders from more than 50 faith traditions have signed the Religious Declaration on Sexaul Morality, Justice, and Healing which states:
Sexuality is God's life-giving and life-fulfilling gift. We come from diverse religious communities to recognize sexuality as central to our humanity and as integral to our spirituality. We are speaking out against the pain, brokenness, oppression and loss of meaning that many experience about their sexuality. [snip]The Declaration calls for "Religious leadership in movements to end sexual and social injustice."God hears the cries of those who suffer from the failure of religious communities to address sexuality. We are called today to see, hear and respond to the suffering caused by sexual abuse and violence against women and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) persons, the HIV pandemic, unsustainable population growth and over-consumption, and the commercial exploitation of sexuality.
According to Harry Knox, a member of The President's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships and director of Human Rights Campaign's Religion and Faith program:
"[Progressive] faith communities care about justice for everyone." Therefore, "thousands of faith leaders are using social networking, their teaching and preaching opportunities, and their voices as prophetic leaders in the public square to amplify God's call to remove the barriers to service for lesbian and gay people," he continued."[F]aith leaders have been making their own congregants aware of how DADT harms gay and lesbian service members and also harms our country at a time when skilled members of the military are needed more than ever," Knox said. However, advocacy on behalf of lesbian and gay servicemembers is not limited to the pulpit, he noted, adding that faith leaders: 'also have been advocating with members of Congress about the need for repeal through events like the Human Rights Campaign's Clergy Call lobby event and through clergy sign-on letters and letters to the editor. Retired chaplains have been speaking out to tell the truth about DADT and to tell their own powerful stories of pastoral ministry to lesbian and gay service members who were denied the freedom to serve their country simply because of who they are."
If the Senator is interested in what the laity thinks, he is directed to the poll "Most Continue to Favor Gays Serving Openly in Military" released on November 29th by Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.
The poll found that almost every religious group surveyed supports repeal of DADT. Only white evangelicals, a group making up about 23% of the American population, approached a majority opposing repeal (48%). White mainline Protestants (62%), Black Protestants (52%) and Catholics (63%) all favor repeal of the ban on military service by open gays, lesbians and bisexuals.
Among those who attend church weekly, an even 40% both supported and opposed repeal of DADT. At least 66% of less-frequent churchgoers support repeal.
Overall, a paltry 27% of Americans oppose the repeal of DADT.
Dan Choi Hospitalized; A Discussion About Our Community's Multi-Faceted Sacrifices
NOTE FROM PAM: Today brought news to our inbox that Autumn and I wanted to share with Blend readers in what we feel is an appropriate context. We learned that Dan Choi, who sacrificed his privacy to take on a high-profile role as one of the public faces of the impact of the discriminatory policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, has been hospitalized and is in the hands of professional mental health practitioners at a Veterans Administration facility. Dan explained in his email:
I did not initially want to publicize this but I now realize it is critical for our community to know several things: veterans gay or straight carry human burdens, Activists share similar burdens, no activist should be portrayed as super human, and the failures of government and national lobbying carry consequences far beyond the careers and reputations of corporate leaders, elected officials, High powered lobbyists, or political elites. They ruin lives. My breakdown was a result of a cumulative array of stressors but there is no doubt that the composite betrayals felt on Thursday, by elected leaders and gay organizations as well as many who have exploited my name for their marketing purposes have added to the result. I am certain my experience is not an isolated incident within the gay veteran community.At the same time, those who have been closest to me know that I truly appreciate their gracious help and mentorship. I am indebted to their hospitality and leadership.
If you could share the info and sentiment I'd be most grateful.
So yes, this is newsworthy, and Dan clearly wanted to share what he could have left private, or had to deal with had information about this leaked out. But this is another gift to the community -- to open up a multi-faceted discussion: 1) the mental health toll taken by gay and lesbian service members; 2) the stressors that arise when also thrown into the public eye as a matter of fate or circumstance, not as a job.
As a society we tend to bury mental health issues, always trying to pretend that everyone can just "suck it up" and bear all of life's maelstrom, and that there is inherent weakness in needing mental health services. Far from it, there are many people in desperate need of professional help in this vein who don't seek assistance because of the stigma still attached to mental health issues. A snippet of what I said in my response to Dan:
...Now you have a chance to actually rest, get off of the hamster wheel and take care of yourself. Sometimes this is what it takes for those who find it hard to ratchet down. Part of gaining perspective is to take care of your mental health as Dan Choi the person, the human being. "Activist" is an acquired label, worn by you in a very public manner - it's a difficult burden.And the closet is no place for mental illness, there is no need for euphemisms that skirt the issue of addressing a clinical matter. Doing so only makes it that much harder for those who suffer in silence from getting the help they need, and in the military, the stigma remains strong.This is private time to both heal and build up the skills you need to handle the anxiety that can be crippling and painful. That's a process, one that takes time, practice...I trust that you will cast the outside world out of your mind for a while. It will obviously be there when you're ready to engage, and the world will be just as screwed up as it ever was.
What matters is that you gain back your strength. Your health - mental, physical, spiritual - is more important than any of this.
Autumn recounts some of her own experiences as a veteran who has sought help in the VA system below.
POST FROM AUTUMN: As those who have been following Pam's House Blend for awhile, you know I retired from the military in 2000, and have a Veterans Administration (VA) Disability Rating of 100% -- my VA Disability Rating is Service Connected. 
The main reason I have that rating is a bipolar type II and a half condition, also known as cyclothymic disorder. I was hospitalized in at the San Diego VA Medical Center's Psychiatric Unit in 2004 because I'd been overmedicated on my then mood stabilizer, Gabapentin, in large part to help me deal with an extraordinary amount of stress I was under at the time. At the time of that hospitalization, I wasn't a public figure, but I was a public figure when my friend Christine Daniels died by suicide in November of 2009, and I then had a significant panic attack -- which is a kind of anxiety attack, and was associated for me with mania.
Significant stress is a trigger for me; I have hypomania, depression, and anxiety attacks when I feel stressed.
For others who aren't bipolar like me, though, significant stress still can result in anxiety attacks, depression, and mental breakdowns.
For example, as a military veteran I'm very aware that Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is a particular kind of anxiety disorder that can develop after exposure to a terrifying event or ordeal in which grave physical harm occurred or was threatened. Traumatic events that may trigger PTSD include violent personal assaults, natural or human-caused disasters, accidents, or military combat.
Personally, I've had to learn how to deal with my stressors in a way that doesn't harm my ability to function in society. I had to learn, through years of therapy, that I need to address my own needs even while attempting to deal with the needs of others. I have to limit certain kinds of stress I experience -- a reason why I don't work is because work stress is difficult for me. So, even though I work hard to address issues relating to the freedom, equality, and justice of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, I've had to learn what I can and can't do for the causes I believe in; I've had to learn that I have real limitations, and that trying to exceed my personal limitations leads to negative outcomes.
The therapy I've had has helped me figure out my limitations, as well as helping me figure out strategies for dealing with stressors to minimize debilitating mood swings and panic attacks. Without the mental health resources I have as a retired, disabled, Persian Gulf War veteran, I don't believe I would have broken thorough to the functionality that I currently enjoy most of the time.
Basically, I'm not Superwoman.
In the same vein, Dan Choi isn't Superman. I don't know all of the personal and public stressors Dan has recently experienced, nor do I know exactly what kind of anxiety Dan has recently experienced. He gets to have his health care related privacy, and he is free to share -- or not share -- about the medical conditions that find him hospitalized.
What I do know is that Dan did the responsible thing, and decided to seek professional help through the Veterans Administration when he felt he needed help. He is no doubt resting and receiving the help of professionals that he needs. And, he chose to inform people publicly that he is hospitalized, and he is receiving treatment.
It's too easy to forget that Dan Choi is not just a brave and strong combat veteran, but he's a human being too. I know that from time I've spent with him before engaging in the White House direct actions he truly is brave and strong. He's lived through combat; he's taken upon himself a fight against Don't Ask, Don't Tell for what he hopes will be the benefit of the broad LGBT community. Those are some big stressors Dan has taken upon himself.
I've watched as politicians treat lesbian, gay, and bisexual veterans as if they are political footballs instead of qualified, honorable servicemembers who are prepared to die for their country. I'm sure Dan personally feels treated as less than fully human by many politicians in Washington. Dan's bravery and strength have limitations, and it now appears that he's ran into some of those limits.
Dan isn't alone. There are many, many servicemembers who have seen combat -- enduring stresses most of us can't imagine -- and yet are still valuable members of society. Dan has been, and still is, a valuable member of his veterans and LGBT communities. Hopefully, when Dan has engaged for awhile in the treatment he knows he needs, he'll again be productive -- but hopefully while taking better care of his own needs in the process, and hopefully while better functioning within his own limitations.
As Dan Choi talks now about what combat veterans go through, and now begins a discussion within his communities on the stigma that veterans -- especially LGBT veterans -- who reach out for help face, he will create space for positive change.
Sue Fulton, the chair of Knight's Out and a board member of OutServe, had this to say about Dan:
Dan Choi is both a hero AND a human being, who has exhausted himself in the pursuit of justice. Our prayers are with him, and we hope for his speedy recovery.
I have similar thoughts to Sue's thoughts; my warmest thoughts are for Dan's well-being.
JD Smith, chair of OutServe, added this:
Dan brought our movement to a whole new level. We all have our roles to play in this movement and he played one of the most important: making us challenge and evaluate how exactly we are challenging the status quo to get equal.
Dan Choi is brave, strong, and needing mental health assistance now -- and all of those things are true all at the same time. That, as well as the sacrifices he has made for his country and LGBT community, have contributed towards his need of assistance. Those are issues that are worth discussing.
My hope for LGBT community is that we won't stigmatize or minimize Dan Choi for reaching out for the mental health assistance he needs now. Our LGBT veterans deserve to be treated with honor, respect, and with dignity; Dan Choi is among the bravest and strongest LGBT veterans I've ever met, and he deserves honor, respect, and dignity. I'm proud to know him, and proud to continue to stand by him as he receives the assistance he needs now.
Servicemembers United reminded us in a Veterans Day email blast of this:
Of the approximately 21.8 million veterans in the United States today, over 1 million are LGBT. And of the 1.2 million active servicemembers, over 66,000 are LGB. While the discrimination we face as a minority under DADT has been very real to all of us, Servicemembers United wants to take this Veterans Day to focus on an issue that affects the entire wider military community, regardless of orientation, color, religion, gender, or age.Post Traumatic Stress (PTS) remains a serious issue for servicemembers and veterans. While PTS can affect anyone, its impact can be exacerbated with gay and lesbian troops and vets because of our frequent unwillingness to trust military doctors and sometimes even VA healthcare providers. For those who are skeptical about seeking evaluation and treatment for PTS because of the cloud of DADT, Servicemembers United has been featuring two civilian resources as alternatives on its homepage.
Give An Hour and The Soldiers Project are two civilian mental health provider networks that can hook up servicemembers, vets, and even their families (including LGBT families) with free counseling and other mental health services, and many of these providers specialize in treating PTS. Several of our members have used these networks to get the care they needed but were hesitant to seek elsewhere, and both organizations have confirmed to Servicemembers United that they are very welcoming of gay and lesbian troops, vets, and partners.
General Amos admits that his Marines are an undisciplined basket of lust kittens
Has Marine Commandant Gen. James Amos just come out for the whole Marine Corps? Why else would he be wiling to imply that the soldiers under his command are so inept and undisciplined that they'd become distracted by the outness of gay fellow soldiers unless he believes they harbor uncontrollable homolust? Or is this more about the General's alleged BDSM fantasies? Maybe he wants to see how bad he has to be before his Commander in Chief disciplines him. (Don't hold your breath on that one General, unless holding your breath is part of what gets you off.) Here is what Amos said earlier today about the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell":"When your life hangs on a line, on the intuitive behavior of the young man... who sits to your right and your left, you don't want anything distracting you," Amos told reporters at the Pentagon.Just what does basic training in the USMC consist of under Gen. Amos's guidance, insubordination drills and aphrodisiac injections? Maybe we should send in Peter LaBarbera to investigate."I don't want to lose any Marines to distraction. I don't want to have any Marines that I'm visiting at Bethesda (hospital) with no legs," he said.
He added that "mistakes and inattention or distractions cost Marines' lives. That's the currency of this fight."
All kidding aside, I have friends and family who have been or are currently in the Marines, and to say that this insubordinate bigot dishonors their service is a mammoth understatement. Here is the response of Aubrey Sarvis, Army veteran and executive director for Servicemembers Legal Defense Network:
General Amos needs to fall in line and salute or resign now. He implied that repeal will lead to Marines losing their legs in combat. Those fear tactics are not in the interest of any service member. The General's goal is to kill repeal no matter the consequences, perhaps at the dereliction of his other duties. He had his say before the Senate and House. General Amos needs to stop lobbying against his Commander-in-Chief, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. If he cannot do that, the President should ask for his resignation.
Update: President Obama keeps bottoming for the General according to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs (H/T Wonk Room):
Pressed by the Advocate's Kerry Eleveld on whether Obama was worried about having his own appointee "constantly raising opposition to his own stated belief the the policy needed to be changed," Gibbs simply reiterated the administration's talking point on the issue:GIBBS: I think the President's views and the Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff's views and the Secretary of Defense's views are fairly well known. I think the President as Commander in Chief has a strong viewpoint. I think backed up by the survey conducted by the Pentagon as to the attitude of the men and women in our military that this can be done in a way that strengthens our national security, preserves the best fighting force in the world, and most importantly, does away with a policy that he doesn't think is just.ELEVELD: I mean, the Commandant is continually challenging the assumptions of the Commander in Chief...
GIBBS: No, I mean, look, I think their views are very well known, just as the Commander in Chief's views are very well known. I think if you look at the Commander in Chief, the head of the Pentagon, and the head of the Joint Chiefs, you'll find unanimity in the belief that it's time to do away with this policy and that's exactly what the President is working to do.
POLITICO reports Retired Gen. John Shalikashvili's reaction to Gen. Amos's absurd statements:
Retired Gen. John Shalikashvili, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when the 1993 law was first implemented, said Amos's claims that repeal would risk the loss of life in combat is "grounded in a selective reading of the evidence."By the way, Speak of the House Nancy Pelsoi tweeted this a few hours ago:"General Amos has acknowledged that he is the only Service Chief who has not spoken to colleagues in foreign militaries about their experiences with gay and lesbian service members," Shalikashvili said in a statement to POLITICO. "Based on conversations with our overseas allies and openly gay U.S. Marines, as well my reading of the extensive research on the topic, I can say definitively that along with Admiral Mullen, I believe that repealing 'don't ask, don't tell' will improve the military rather than posing additional risk to the troops."
The House will vote on Rep. Patrick Murphy's standalone #DADT repeal bill tomorrow-Senate action on #DADT is long overdue.
Now or Never: Call Harry Reid and Demand DADT Repeal!
It is his decision, and his alone, to either bring S.4023, A bill to provide for the repeal of the Department of Defense policy concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", to the floor of the Senate and see it through to a final vote or not.
If I understand Senate procedures, it is his decision, and his alone, to decide whether to keep the Senate in session long enough to vote on this bill.
Call Harry Reid NOW and tell him, as a citizen of the United States, you demand that he see through S.0423 the bill that will repeal this disgusting, discriminatory, and unconstitutional law:
HARRY REID 202-224-3542
Now that the Senate has all but passed the
S.4023 currently has 41 sponsors, including Blanche Lincoln, who failed to vote on the National Defense Authorization Act last week, the bill that contained the DADT repeal provisions. That vote 'failed' 57-40 (insofar as the Senate fails to be a democratic body, demanding cloture -- 60 votes to allow consideration of any legislation). Assuming no aye would switch to nay, Lincoln's implied vote by virtue of her sponsorship would bring the total to 58.
Call Harry Reid NOW and tell him, as a citizen of the United States, you demand that he see through the bill that will repeal this disgusting, discriminatory, and unconstitutional law:
HARRY REID 202-224-3542
Where do the other two votes for cloture come from?
Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts, December 3, 2010:
"I pledged to keep an open mind about the present policy on Don't Ask Don't Tell. Having reviewed the Pentagon report, having spoken to active and retired military service members, and having discussed the matter privately with Defense Secretary Gates and others, I accept the findings of the report and support repeal based on the Secretary's recommendations that repeal will be implemented only when the battle effectiveness of the forces is assured and proper preparations have been completed."
Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, December 10, 2010:
Lugar said he supports "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal and his decision to vote "no" is unrelated to the repeal provision in the bill.
That's enough, if these Senators can be taken at their word, to push the bill through a cloture vote.
Call Harry Reid NOW and tell him, as a citizen of the United States, you demand that he see through the bill that will repeal this disgusting, discriminatory, and unconstitutional law:
HARRY REID 202-224-3542
And then there's Joe Manchin, a few days ago on Morning Joe:
"It's something that probably will be, it needs to be repealed, and it will be repealed."
Not that he stated he would vote to repeal it, mind you...
There are also other potential votes for the bill:
Senator Snowe of Maine
Senator Voinovitch of Ohio
Senator Murkowski of Alaska
Senator Kirk of Illinois
Taken all together, the chance to get Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal past a cloture vote seems very high, if Harry Reid has the will to see the bill through the Senate.
Call Harry Reid NOW and tell him, as a citizen of the United States, you demand that he see through the bill that will repeal this disgusting, discriminatory, and unconstitutional law:
HARRY REID 202-224-3542
For good measure, here is contact information for those key Senators whose votes will decide the matter, if Harry Reid allows them to:
OLYMPIA SNOWE
MAINE
202-224-5344
207-786-2451 207-622-8292 207-945-0432
3 Canal Plaza, Suite 601, Portland, ME 04101
SCOTT BROWN
MASSACHUSETTS
202-224-4543
617-565-3170
2400 JFK Federal Building, 55 New Sudbury Street, Boston, MA 02203
DICK LUGAR
INDIANA
202-224-4814
812-465-6313 317-226-5555
180 Market Tower, 10 West Market St., Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
JOE MANCHIN
WEST VIRGINIA
202-224-3954
email (governor's page)
304-205-5889 (senate campaign office phone)
GEORGE VOINOVICH
OHIO
202-224-3353
216-522-7095, 513-684-3265, 419-259-3895
1240 East 9th Street, Room 3061, Cleveland, OH 44199
LISA MURKOWSKI
ALASKA
202-224-6665
907-456-0233, 907-271-3735
101 12th Ave, Room 216, Fairbanks, AK 99701
MARK KIRK
ILLINOIS
202-224-2854
707 Skokie Boulevard, Suite 350, Northbrook, IL 60062
312-886-3506
KIT BOND
MISSOURI
202-224-5721
816-471-7141 314-725-4484
7700 Bonhomme, #615 St. Louis, MO 63105
JUDD GREGG
NEW HAMPSHIRE
202-224-3324
603-225-7115, 603-622-7979
125 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03301
=============================================================
Oh, did I mention:
Call Harry Reid NOW and tell him, as a citizen of the United States, you demand that he see through the bill that will repeal this disgusting, discriminatory, and unconstitutional law:
HARRY REID 202-224-3542
Thanks!
Peter LaBarbera freely admits to using Paul Cameron's discredited work, sees nothing wrong with it
crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters
If you want the quintessential fact why the Southern Poverty Law Center is correct in calling out certain religious right organizations for their anti-gay bias, check out this portion of an interview between members of two of these groups - Peter LaBarbera, head of Americans for Truth and Martha Kleder of the Concerned Women for America:
Transcript:
Kleder: One of the things I've also noticed is that the SPLC seems to be riled by the fact . . . uh . . . if they don't particularly like your source that you document then you must be a hate group.
LaBarbera: Paul Cameron
Kleder: Yeah.
LaBarbera: They say if you cite Paul Cameron, then you are a hater. I mean that's ridiculous. You know there is a researcher who just came out and found that Paul Cameron's work on the greater likelihood of homosexual adoptive parents to have . . . for the child to emerge as a homosexual. He confirmed Cameron's thesis. You don't have to agree with everything Paul Cameron ever did but how proposterous to say that citing a reseacher . . Paul Cameron's work has been published in peer-reviewed journals. What they've done, Martha is set up these criteria and then you violate them, they call you a hate group, and then they have their little echo chamber on the left which reports their charge. And of course the media, which really doesn't like us anyway. The media is very pro-gay, they cite us and so it begins to take a life of its own.
One of the main reasons why religious right groups (i.e. Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, The Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, etc.) have been profiled by the Southern Poverty Law Center as anti-gay hate groups is because of their repeated citings of the work of discredited researcher Paul Cameron. They use his work to spread propaganda about lgbts.
As all of us, if the not the vast majority of us, knows, Cameron is a researcher who has made a name for himself by creating studies designed to demonize the lgbt community. These studies for the most part have been published in "vanity" or "pay-for-publish" journals and they are not "peer-reviewed" in the normal sense. No "peer" who objects to Cameron's work has the right to remove it from the journal.
He has also been discredited and censured by many group and individuals on the left, the right, and in the middle due to his bad research techniques. Several of his studies have been criticized for such errors as having small sample sizes, showing an anti-gay bias in interviews, and not having enough responses to establish a suitable analysis.
Let's take a quick look at his history:
"Right now, here in Lincoln, there is a 4-year-old boy who has had his genitals almost severed from his body at Gateway in the rest room with a homosexual act… It’s really awkward. I could see where Gateway would want to suppress this. I could see where the parents would want to suppress it. It could be just a rumor. But enough things have happened recently so that such a thing doesn’t have to be invented.” - Paul Cameron told this story to a group in 1982 in Lincoln, NB in an attempt to kill a human rights ordinance, Lincoln Star May 8, 1982
The story was discovered to be a hoax and Cameron was called out in the local newspaper- "A leading opponent of the proposed Lincoln Human Rights Amendment spreads rumors of an alleged vicious incident calculated to damage the proposal’s chances at the polls. When asked about it, he admits the rumor was without foundation. He refused to say from whom he heard the rumor. Nonetheless, he still insists it ‘could be true’, even though responsible authorities in the city say there was not a shred of evidence such an incident ever took place. The seed is planted, to the contrary." - Editorial. Lincoln Star (May 10, 1982), as quoted by Brown, Robert D.; Cole, James K. Letter to the Editor, Nebraska Medical Journal 70, no. 11 (November 1985)
. Cameron has also had numerous condemnations rained down on him by the medical community:
“(Cameron) misrepresents my findings and distorts them to advance his homophobic views. I make a very clear distinction in my writing between pedophilia and homosexuality, noting that adult males who sexually victimize young boys are either pedophilic or heterosexual, and that in my research I have not found homosexual men turning away from adult partners to children . . . I consider this totally unprofessional behavior on the part of Dr. Cameron and I want to bring this to your attention. He disgraces his profession.” - Dr. A. Nicholas Groth in letter written to the Nebraska Board of Examiners of Psychologists on August 21, 1984
"Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists - American Psychological Association, 1983
The science and profession of psychology in Nebraska as represented by the Nebraska Psychological Association, formally dissociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality. Further, the Nebraska Psychological Association would like it known that Dr. Cameron is not a member of the Association. Dr. Cameron was recently dropped from membership in the American Psychological Association for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists - Nebraska Psychological Association, 1984
Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism" - American Sociological Association, 1985
The Canadian Psychological Association takes the position that Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism and thus, it formally disassociates itself from the representation and interpretations of scientific literature in his writings and public statements on sexuality. - Canadian Psychological Association, 1996
And while we are at it, let's not forget those on the right who dismiss Cameron's work:
"Given what I now know, I believe there are flaws with Paul Cameron's study. One cannot extrapolate from his methodology and say that the average male homosexual life span is 43 years." - former Ronald Regan Cabinet member William Bennett criticizing Cameron's "gay lifespan study." - New Republic (1998, February 23, page 4)
This article has been removed due to the inaccuracies surrounding the research of Paul Cameron. - A posting on the webpage of Ex-gay group Exodus International
And if that's not enough to convince you of Cameron's lack of credibility, check out various comments he has made regarding the lgbt community:
“What homosexuals do is so incredibly stupid, so patently absurd and antibiological, that only a foolish society would take their whimpering about ‘equal rights with heterosexuality’ seriously . . . Are we supposed to feel so sorry for them that we join them in the march to the cemetery?” - Paul Cameron, The Advocate, October 29, 1985
“At the 1985 Conservative Political Action Conference, Cameron announced to the attendees, ‘Unless we get medically lucky, in three or four years, one of the options discussed will be the extermination of homosexuals.’ According to an interview with former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, Cameron was recommending the extermination option as early as 1983.” - Mark E. Pietrzyk, New Republic, October 3, 1994
“If you isolate sexuality as something solely for one’s own personal amusement, and all you want is the most satisfying orgasm you can get - and that is what homosexuality seems to be — then homosexuality seems too powerful to resist. The evidence is that men do a better job on men, and women on women if all you are looking for is an orgasm.” - Paul Cameron, Rolling Stone, March, 18, 1999
Cameron is the religious right's dirty little secret. Many of the organizations named as anti-gay hate groups by the SPLC have used Cameron's studies even though they are aware of his dubious history of condemnations.
However, many of them won't admit to this fact.That is except for Peter LaBarbera. And what makes it worse is that LaBarbera is trying to justify work he knows has credibility problems.
And by the way, LaBarbera's claim that another researcher proved Cameron's thesis about children in same-sex households is also incorrect. LaBarbera failed to mention that the researcher, Walter Schumm, used the same bad methodology Cameron used to come to his original thesis:
Schumm’s “meta-analysis” (and Cameron’s before him) doesn’t even have the benefit of being built off of random convenience samples. There were no convenience samples in any of the ten prior works that Schumm used for his meta-analysis. In fact, they weren’t even professional studies. They were popular books! That’s right, each of the ten sources that Schumm used to construct his “meta-analysis” were from general-audience books about LGBT parenting and families, most of which are available on Amazon.com. Schumm read the books, took notes on each parent and child described in the book, examined their histories, and counted up who was gay and who was straight among the kids.
But here is the important thing - with Cameron's credibility problem, if he were "publishing studies" about the African-American community, Jewish community, or women, then he and those who freely cite his work would be thought of as either racist, anti-Semitic, or gender biased.
So what's the difference between Cameron's work impugning any of these groups and what he is doing to the lgbt community? Why shouldn't be he and those who use his work be thought of as "haters" in spite of the fact that they can hide their lies behind the Biblical condemnation of homosexuality?
At any rate, the usage of Cameron's work certainly does put a monkeywrench into religious rights claims that they are being "targeted" by the SPLC because of their "Judeo-Christian" beliefs.
I never knew that freely citing research known to be sloppy and inaccurate was a tenet of "Judeo-Christian" beliefs.
Related posts:
Homophobic 'researcher' Paul Cameron in all of his repulsive glory
More homophobic lies from the Paul Cameron Poland tour
Hat tip to Kyle Mantyla of People for the American Way's Right Wing Watch , Box Turtle Bulletin, and Dr. Gregory Herek.
Pam Spaulding's Blog
- Pam Spaulding's profile
- 1 follower
