Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Repeal DADT Now! Ethan Geto says.
To the Editor:
Dear Sir,
Thanks to Gay City News for your consistently excellent news coverage and exceptionally insightful editorials. However, as an LGBT activist since 1971 and a public policy consultant who has provided pro bono public relations services for the past decade to the Palm Center/Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military at the University of California/Santa Barbara, I must strongly disagree with your editorial of July 29th, 2009, "Some Perspective on Washington" in which you criticize some LGBT activists for pushing for immediate suspension of Don't Ask, Don't Tell by executive order of the President/Commander-in-Chief, arguing "Without a clear buy-in from the military and decisive support in Congress, Obama would be walking into the same firing squad that doomed Bill Clinton’s effort to integrate the Armed Forces."
Your logic in recommending that President Obama NOT act to immediately suspend Don't Ask, Don't Tell is literally fatally flawed. How many soldiers' lives – straight or gay – should continue to be sacrificed because services of an Arab-language interrogator, a medic or a highly-trained and decorated combat hero is unavailable because they were dismissed on a totally irrational premise? Your central argument that President Obama would be walking into a political firing squad akin to Bill Clinton's experience when he sought to open military service to openly gay personnel in 1993 fails to take into account that public support for repeal of this policy since 1993 has grown to overwhelming proportions. Every major national poll shows not only that a vast majority of Democratic voters support immediate repeal, but so do clear majorities of Republican voters and self-described conservatives; there is simply no political "trap" for President Obama in immediately suspending Don't Ask, Don't Tell. It's astonishing to me that even some of our own organizational leaders don't grasp what 16 years in contemporary culture means. Think of the political, cultural and social differences between 1940 and 1956, or 1956 and 1972. Tremendous shifts occur during 16-year periods in our fast-transitioning global and national cultures, but at the risk of mixing metaphors, some people want to fight the last war over again.
While you argue that President Obama should spend time getting "buy-in" from Congress and the Pentagon, gay men and women are daily being drummed out of the service, including many mission-critical personnel. Also, and critically, the tens of thousands of closeted gay and lesbian personnel in the armed forces will continue to live in fear – not fear of the Taliban or Al Qaeda, but because their careers may be destroyed. This high anxiety among gay service members is what contributes to any possible breach of unit cohesion – no one functions at their best while living a lie. President Obama has said that repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a matter of national security, and he's right. If the President truly believes that ending this harmful policy is a matter of national security, then the only rational response is for the President to suspend Don't Ask, Don't Tell immediately and stop the hemorrhaging of expensively-trained and urgently-needed troops.
The GCN editorial spoke of the need to gain "buy-in" from the military. The Palm Center has held dozens of meetings with high-level strategists and planners in the Pentagon – and almost every one of these senior officers is eager for repeal. They know that commanders in theatres of combat are typically distraught when they are about to lose their gay soldiers because so many of them are invaluable to the mission. And recent studies have shown that a majority of new recruits are perfectly comfortable serving alongside openly gay troops and that a large number of returning combat veterans say they knew gay personnel in their units and were not troubled by their presence. So this supposedly difficult transition will be relatively smooth. Why wait until the antediluvian block in Congress relents?
Rep. Patrick Murphy, Democrat of Pennsylvania, a terrific young Congressman and Iraq combat veteran who is leading the effort to gather support in Congress for repeal – and with whom I had an opportunity to talk this week – should keep on aggressively gathering votes for full repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. But that effort would be not at all inconsistent with an order by the Commander-in-Chief immediately suspending this appalling policy while Congressman Murphy continues to round up votes for repeal. But because Rep. Murphy knows that the President doesn't want to administratively suspend Don't Ask, Don't Tell, as a good soldier he is cooperating with the President's misconceived political assessment.
This is a rare instance when our community can rightfully claim the mantle of national security to support a key plank of our policy agenda. We should do – and aggressively press the President to do the right thing, and do it now.
Respectfully, Ethan Geto
Dear Sir,
Thanks to Gay City News for your consistently excellent news coverage and exceptionally insightful editorials. However, as an LGBT activist since 1971 and a public policy consultant who has provided pro bono public relations services for the past decade to the Palm Center/Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military at the University of California/Santa Barbara, I must strongly disagree with your editorial of July 29th, 2009, "Some Perspective on Washington" in which you criticize some LGBT activists for pushing for immediate suspension of Don't Ask, Don't Tell by executive order of the President/Commander-in-Chief, arguing "Without a clear buy-in from the military and decisive support in Congress, Obama would be walking into the same firing squad that doomed Bill Clinton’s effort to integrate the Armed Forces."
Your logic in recommending that President Obama NOT act to immediately suspend Don't Ask, Don't Tell is literally fatally flawed. How many soldiers' lives – straight or gay – should continue to be sacrificed because services of an Arab-language interrogator, a medic or a highly-trained and decorated combat hero is unavailable because they were dismissed on a totally irrational premise? Your central argument that President Obama would be walking into a political firing squad akin to Bill Clinton's experience when he sought to open military service to openly gay personnel in 1993 fails to take into account that public support for repeal of this policy since 1993 has grown to overwhelming proportions. Every major national poll shows not only that a vast majority of Democratic voters support immediate repeal, but so do clear majorities of Republican voters and self-described conservatives; there is simply no political "trap" for President Obama in immediately suspending Don't Ask, Don't Tell. It's astonishing to me that even some of our own organizational leaders don't grasp what 16 years in contemporary culture means. Think of the political, cultural and social differences between 1940 and 1956, or 1956 and 1972. Tremendous shifts occur during 16-year periods in our fast-transitioning global and national cultures, but at the risk of mixing metaphors, some people want to fight the last war over again.
While you argue that President Obama should spend time getting "buy-in" from Congress and the Pentagon, gay men and women are daily being drummed out of the service, including many mission-critical personnel. Also, and critically, the tens of thousands of closeted gay and lesbian personnel in the armed forces will continue to live in fear – not fear of the Taliban or Al Qaeda, but because their careers may be destroyed. This high anxiety among gay service members is what contributes to any possible breach of unit cohesion – no one functions at their best while living a lie. President Obama has said that repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a matter of national security, and he's right. If the President truly believes that ending this harmful policy is a matter of national security, then the only rational response is for the President to suspend Don't Ask, Don't Tell immediately and stop the hemorrhaging of expensively-trained and urgently-needed troops.
The GCN editorial spoke of the need to gain "buy-in" from the military. The Palm Center has held dozens of meetings with high-level strategists and planners in the Pentagon – and almost every one of these senior officers is eager for repeal. They know that commanders in theatres of combat are typically distraught when they are about to lose their gay soldiers because so many of them are invaluable to the mission. And recent studies have shown that a majority of new recruits are perfectly comfortable serving alongside openly gay troops and that a large number of returning combat veterans say they knew gay personnel in their units and were not troubled by their presence. So this supposedly difficult transition will be relatively smooth. Why wait until the antediluvian block in Congress relents?
Rep. Patrick Murphy, Democrat of Pennsylvania, a terrific young Congressman and Iraq combat veteran who is leading the effort to gather support in Congress for repeal – and with whom I had an opportunity to talk this week – should keep on aggressively gathering votes for full repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. But that effort would be not at all inconsistent with an order by the Commander-in-Chief immediately suspending this appalling policy while Congressman Murphy continues to round up votes for repeal. But because Rep. Murphy knows that the President doesn't want to administratively suspend Don't Ask, Don't Tell, as a good soldier he is cooperating with the President's misconceived political assessment.
This is a rare instance when our community can rightfully claim the mantle of national security to support a key plank of our policy agenda. We should do – and aggressively press the President to do the right thing, and do it now.
Respectfully, Ethan Geto
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Summer Luvin'
Just finished helping my friend Bradford complete his first VBLOG entry for his very successful weekly commentary on Gay.com titled "Dating Bradford"...
Saturday, July 11, 2009
National Healthcare Now?
If not now, then when? The current "system" is not working and only a cooperative national system will work.
"To pay for cancer care, Americans report they would take a variety of dire steps. Nearly seven out of ten (66%) report they would go on government assistance to pay the cost of cancer treatment. Four out of ten or more would sell their cars (48%) or their homes (38%), would borrow the money (44%) or declare bankruptcy (40%). Fully one third (33%) say they would simply stop the cancer treatment."
Anyone who defends the current for profit healthcare system is simply out of touch with reality.
Americans Fear Paying for Cancer Treatment As Much As Dying of the Disease
A recent survey commissioned by The Community Oncology Alliance (COA), a non-profit organization dedicated solely to community oncology, underscores concerns Americans have about the cost of cancer detection and treatment.
"To pay for cancer care, Americans report they would take a variety of dire steps. Nearly seven out of ten (66%) report they would go on government assistance to pay the cost of cancer treatment. Four out of ten or more would sell their cars (48%) or their homes (38%), would borrow the money (44%) or declare bankruptcy (40%). Fully one third (33%) say they would simply stop the cancer treatment."
Anyone who defends the current for profit healthcare system is simply out of touch with reality.
Americans Fear Paying for Cancer Treatment As Much As Dying of the Disease
A recent survey commissioned by The Community Oncology Alliance (COA), a non-profit organization dedicated solely to community oncology, underscores concerns Americans have about the cost of cancer detection and treatment.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Monday, June 1, 2009
New Vision - Bold plan - Moral Choice - Economic Freedom
Every so often an idea is launched that when you hear it you know deep inside of you that it will change the world. Meet Shai Agassi and listen to his plan that is already in action towards changing the world. Removing OIL BURNING cars from the road forever within 10 years.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Memorial Day Weekend and Pink Floyd.
Keith Brand of WXPN explains his bizarre shopping habits and Pink Floyd. Celebration of Matty Hart's birthday. Narration by Chris (Lady) Bartlett on Gay sensibilities. Shot and edited by: Peter Lien
Friday, March 27, 2009
Patient Clarity - Peter and Scott focus on healthcare
This video is about our new focus on low impact and low profile shooting for healthcare and pharma industry. Check out the video.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Call your Congressperson or Senator on this issue today!
06/05/2008
Human Rights Groups Demand Immediate Release
For Immediate Release
June 5, 2008
Media Contact:
Frank Mugisha, SMUG, +256 772 616 062
Victor Juliet Mukasa, IGLHRC, +27 762 544 951
Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) and the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) today condemned the arrests of three Ugandan LGBT activists and called for their immediate and unconditional release. The three -- Onziema Patience, (an FTM transgender, 28), Valentine Kalende (female, age 27) and Auf (male, age 26) -- were arrested yesterday morning by the Uganda Police Force at the 2008 HIV/AIDS Implementers’ Meeting currently taking place in Kampala, Uganda. Along with other LGBT and HIV and AIDS activists, they were peacefully protesting statements made by a Ugandan government official that no funds would be directed toward HIV programs targeting men who have sex with men. SMUG and IGLHRC have fears for the safety of the three activists.
On 2 May, 2008, Kihumuro Apuuli, Director General of the Uganda AIDS Commission, stated that, "gays are one of the drivers of HIV in Uganda, but because of meagre resources we cannot direct our programmes at them at this time." The SMUG activists staged a peaceful protest at the HIV Implementers meeting to protest the Minister’s statements and gross neglect on the part of the Ugandan government in responding to a growing HIV epidemic among the country’s LGBT community. They were arrested and detained at the Jinja Road Police Station immediately after taking the stage at the meeting, distributing leaflets and holding up small placards demanding attention to HIV vulnerability among LGBT.
"Today I realized how dangerous it is for us LGBTI people to express our constitutional rights,” said Frank Mugisha, Co-Chairperson of SMUG. “I am worried about my comrades who are in police custody.”
According to a recent report by the University of Nairobi and the Population Council, gay men in neighboring Kenya have a sero prevalence rate of 26%. Twenty-six years since the beginning of the epidemic, Uganda hasn’t implemented a single program to prevent transmission of HIV among men who have sex with men in the East African nation.
“The remarks made by the head of the AIDS Commission were very disturbing to members of the LGBT community,” said Kasha Jacqueline, Chairperson of Freedom and Roam Uganda, a lesbian organization in Uganda. “If they want us to die, let them ask themselves if they wish themselves the same. Excluding us is just going to make the situation worse.”
The HIV Implementer’s Meeting is an annual event described as an opportunity for HIV program implementers to share lessons learned and best practices in the scale-up of HIV/AIDS programs. It is co-sponsored by the President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), UNAIDS, the World Bank, the Global Fund, UNICEF, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Global Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS (GNP+). IGLHRC is also requesting that the co-sponsors of the Implementers’ Meeting contact the Ugandan Government to demand the release of these activists.
“Gay men and lesbians are not ‘drivers of disease’,” said Paula Ettelbrick, Executive Director of IGLHRC. “Homophobia drives HIV. Silence drives HIV.”
In November 2004, the Ugandan government fined a local broadcaster, Radio Simba for airing a program that discussed anti-gay discrimination and the need for HIV/AIDS services for lesbians and gay men. The government claimed that Radio Simba had violated federal law promoting broadcasting that is contrary to “public morality.”
Human Rights Groups Demand Immediate Release
For Immediate Release
June 5, 2008
Media Contact:
Frank Mugisha, SMUG, +256 772 616 062
Victor Juliet Mukasa, IGLHRC, +27 762 544 951
Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) and the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC) today condemned the arrests of three Ugandan LGBT activists and called for their immediate and unconditional release. The three -- Onziema Patience, (an FTM transgender, 28), Valentine Kalende (female, age 27) and Auf (male, age 26) -- were arrested yesterday morning by the Uganda Police Force at the 2008 HIV/AIDS Implementers’ Meeting currently taking place in Kampala, Uganda. Along with other LGBT and HIV and AIDS activists, they were peacefully protesting statements made by a Ugandan government official that no funds would be directed toward HIV programs targeting men who have sex with men. SMUG and IGLHRC have fears for the safety of the three activists.
On 2 May, 2008, Kihumuro Apuuli, Director General of the Uganda AIDS Commission, stated that, "gays are one of the drivers of HIV in Uganda, but because of meagre resources we cannot direct our programmes at them at this time." The SMUG activists staged a peaceful protest at the HIV Implementers meeting to protest the Minister’s statements and gross neglect on the part of the Ugandan government in responding to a growing HIV epidemic among the country’s LGBT community. They were arrested and detained at the Jinja Road Police Station immediately after taking the stage at the meeting, distributing leaflets and holding up small placards demanding attention to HIV vulnerability among LGBT.
"Today I realized how dangerous it is for us LGBTI people to express our constitutional rights,” said Frank Mugisha, Co-Chairperson of SMUG. “I am worried about my comrades who are in police custody.”
According to a recent report by the University of Nairobi and the Population Council, gay men in neighboring Kenya have a sero prevalence rate of 26%. Twenty-six years since the beginning of the epidemic, Uganda hasn’t implemented a single program to prevent transmission of HIV among men who have sex with men in the East African nation.
“The remarks made by the head of the AIDS Commission were very disturbing to members of the LGBT community,” said Kasha Jacqueline, Chairperson of Freedom and Roam Uganda, a lesbian organization in Uganda. “If they want us to die, let them ask themselves if they wish themselves the same. Excluding us is just going to make the situation worse.”
The HIV Implementer’s Meeting is an annual event described as an opportunity for HIV program implementers to share lessons learned and best practices in the scale-up of HIV/AIDS programs. It is co-sponsored by the President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), UNAIDS, the World Bank, the Global Fund, UNICEF, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Global Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS (GNP+). IGLHRC is also requesting that the co-sponsors of the Implementers’ Meeting contact the Ugandan Government to demand the release of these activists.
“Gay men and lesbians are not ‘drivers of disease’,” said Paula Ettelbrick, Executive Director of IGLHRC. “Homophobia drives HIV. Silence drives HIV.”
In November 2004, the Ugandan government fined a local broadcaster, Radio Simba for airing a program that discussed anti-gay discrimination and the need for HIV/AIDS services for lesbians and gay men. The government claimed that Radio Simba had violated federal law promoting broadcasting that is contrary to “public morality.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
