I'm reluctant to write about the Defense of Marriage Act because, to be perfectly honest, I don't fully understand it.
I never did understand it really, it always seemed to me to run directly against the Full Faith and Credit Clause.
According to some sources, DOMA may be unconstitutional but irrelevant.
Apparently there is a long standing precedent of public policy exceptions that states are not required to recognize out of state marriages that would not be permitted in their state.
It may have served simply to codify a precedent that was already in place.
If that's the case, then DOMA was nothing more than a publicity stunt to mollify the conservatives without directly outlawing gay marriage.
In any case its probably a moot point now.
DOMA isn't going to be repealed any time soon, certainly not until more states recognize gay marriages.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell I feel much more comfortable working with.
I don't question it on constitutional or legal grounds, I think it stands pretty solidly there.
I do however question the wisdom of DADT on the grounds of it being monumentally stupid.
At the time it was made it was a weak, if arguably necessary, compromise between the extremes on either side.
Now it's become a ridiculous joke that costs the country money and troops that could potentially make a difference with the war going on.
The whole premise is that if soldiers knew their comrade was gay, it would hurt morale and they wouldn't be able to trust him any more.
They'd be too afraid that the scary gay man might look at them in the showers to do their jobs properly.
Am I honestly supposed to believe that the army is full of people who would have a nervous breakdown in a typical high school gym class?
Let's face it, in an average sized high school of let's say, 1000 students, between 10 and 100 of them are likely to be gay.
The odds are most of those students know at least one of them and many know at least one that is openly gay.
If a 14 year old walked into gym class or a sports team and refused to play with the gay kid, it wouldn't be the gay kid who gets in trouble.
If we can expect 14 year olds to suck it up and work with gay guys their own age, why can't we expect it of grown men?
If our armed forces are less mature than 14 year olds, we really need to rethink the quality of recruits we look for.
So the book about the gay penguins got banned in
Virginia last week.
It's a picture book about two male penguins in the Central Park Zoo who were given an egg that they hatched together and raised.
The story is true but that doesn't stop people from screaming 'gay agenda' whenever it comes up.
I'm not sure why they feel so compelled to hide the book, but I suspect it's a deep seated fear of gay adoptions.
If penguins can do it the argument against people doing it feels a little weak.
I don't really know what to say about gay adoptions.
The argument is that it'll be bad for the children, but there's no particular evidence to that effect.
It seems to just be a visceral reaction to gay people in general.
I've never liked the argument that children can only be brought up properly by a mother and a father.
I think it's probably the most ideal situation in today's society, but I don't think gay parents or single parents are worse than having no parents at all and I do think that there are too many children waiting for adoption and foster parents.
No comments:
Post a Comment