Outing

I'm not in favor of it.

Yesterday, DC gay activist Phil Attey suggested on Facebook that a prominent Bush official had a gay relationship with Jeff Gannon. Chris Crain commented:

"I don't think it serves our cause to traffic in rumor and innuendo, especially about the private sex lives of other people. We ought to be better than that."

To which a chorus of people responded angrily that the enemies of gay people don't deserve to have private sex lives.

Sigh.

First -- we have no need for this tactic. We have the better arguments and the tide of history on our side. We need to be better about applying political pressure, but that pressure does not need to take the form of blackmail.

Second -- who decides who should be outed and for what reason? In other words, if a closeted gay politician votes against gay inclusion in hate crimes, does that justify dragging him out of the closet? Not everyone in the gay community agrees that passing hate crimes was needed. There are those in the community who think fighting for same sex marriage is a waste of time. We are not of one mind about everything, so who plays God and decides whose lives are to be messed with?

Finally -- what good will it do? Attey doesn't say how outing the Bush official or insinusating he is gay will move us closer to passing ENDA or repealing DOMA or DADT. Because it doesn't. Because outing is not about advancing politically. It's about revenge.

Crain is right. We are better than that.

Immigration Reform for Gays

Chris Crain provides a concrete way for Democratic presidential candidates to show they mean it when they call for full equality for gays. Support the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA), which would allow citizens and legal residents in same-sex relationships to sponsor their partners for immigration purposes.

Crain reports only Dodd and Kucinich have signalled support for the bill. Hillary and Barak do not support it. As Crain says:

In her speeches on gay issues, Clinton talks about "equal rights" for gay couples, but support for UAFA would be a concrete way to put some leadership where her rhetoric is.

Ditto Obama.

But of course I don't expect much. Democrats will take our money and take our votes but they won't take a stand on our behalf. Not on things that really count. Not on legislation that treat gay relationships as equal to straight ones.

DC gay activist Rick Rosendall wrote in a recent Metroweekly column that we shouldn't expect leadership from politicians on controversial issues. Hmm...the Voting Rights Act of 1965 notwithstanding? I'm not quite so ready to throw in the towel...and if a politician tells me they support full gay equality, I expect them to mean it. I can accept a candidate who I may disagree with, but I won't tolerate hypocrisy.