Dateline: 1/30/98
First of all, I would be remiss if I didn't mention that today is my mother's birthday. I'm 38 years old (don't shudder, please) and still, my first reaction, whenever I'm hit with bad news is, "I want my mommy." So, happy birthday, Mom! :)
We spent the last two weeks looking at the navy, McVeigh and AOL then a closer look at AOL's history of treatment of its GLBT Members, along with its history of security/privacy problems.
This last week a judge made permanent his injunction against the Navy. McVeigh is in the Navy to stay, at least for the time being. However, it's possible that the Navy ended up with enough egg on its face that it will quietly let McVeigh serve out until his retirement. However, they're already being petty, and trying to push him out. We're with you, McVeigh, keep on sailing with pride.
While the McVeigh incident heightened awareness of the military ban in a way that focused attention on the military's abuse of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" battles continued on other fronts.
Remember that even if one were allowed to be openly gay/lesbian in the military, there's still a little matter of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which amongst other things, forbids an act called "sodomy." Now, sodomy is defined in many ways - and many of those ways include the ways in which many of us express our love for our partners (permanent and/or passing in the night). The last U.S. Supreme Court decision on sodomy allowed the State of Georgia to continue its ban. However, there are two new challenges underway to sodomy statutes, one in Georgia, and the other in Arkansas.
The Georgia challenge includes an Action Alert, so scroll back up, click, and say your piece! (Then come on back here, I'll wait.) Remember, even if you don't live in a state (or country) that has laws limiting your freedom, the fact that it is allowed anywhere is a danger to you - your state or country could be next, using the "acceptable" legislation as a model for themselves. Sodomy statutes can impact on a wide variety of our rights - how can we be allowed to marry, if our "marriage act" is otherwise against the law? (Ludicrous I know, but it's a valid legal argument - look at the Shahar case.)
Speaking of Arkansas, home to our President, I've yet to hear him actually state that "oral sex is not actually adultery" but that's certainly getting a chuckle around this house. "So, T.... so long as I don't have intercourse I'm not committing adultery, right?" Fortunately she knew I was making a point, so I didn't have to sleep on the couch.
Also interesting were the hypotheticals by Dick Morris that the First Lady might not like "regular sex with men." Hmmmmmmmm. So she likes kinky sex? Somehow I don't think that's what he meant. Perhaps I should drop Hillary a note suggesting she check out my other half's site, Lesbian Worlds. Eleanor Roosevelt would have been proud.
(Yes, that was a hint, take a look at what my sweetie has to say - but don't forget to come on back here.)
Actually, the thrust (pardon the expression) of Morris' hypotheticals was that President Clinton (am I the only one who takes umbrage when people fail to respect the Office of the Presidency by referring to him as "Mr. Clinton?"), as a "normal" man, has sexual urges, and if he can't/doesn't get it at home, he might engage in alternate means to fulfill his urges, "Phone Sex" was one of the suggestions. Heck, Mr. President, get a modem. Unless you're on AOL you can remain totally anonymous.
In Pride,
Deborah