Barack Obama and the Slow Pace of Gay Rights
December 1, 2009 · By Jonathan McLeod
Scott H. Payne is none too pleased with Barack Obama and the lack of activity on the gay rights front. He expresses despair that President Obama (and, I’m assuming, other Democratic legislators) are not pushing for the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and the Defense of Marriage Act:
It is true that one can argue for the delay of certain decisions with a certain well intentioned glibness. It’s not that you oppose the particular initiative or need for the decision, but rather that there is so much to do, so many decisions to make, isn’t it important to tackle each of them head on, one-by-one?
It is, I suppose, until one sees the run-off impacts of pushing the need to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell or the Defense of Marriage Act off to another day, or not having a President who believes in equal rights under the law speak loudly and clearly of the need to support marriage equality, or inviting Rick Warren to participate in the inauguration of that President in the harsh and unforgiving light of purely putative and explicitly discriminatory legislation elsewhere.
Though there is not a one-to-one relationship between one’s actions (or lack thereof) and the existence of such legislation, one wonders what degree of moral authority one possesses in order to address such issues having embraced the fierce urgency of whenever.
It is a humbling and, in some senses, chilling realization of tacit and unintended complicity.
I respond to Scott here. Scott seems to have a greater fondness for Mr. Obama than I, so he’s a little more disappointed than I am. I’d love to see DADT repealed, but I, generally, support DOMA (though perhaps with some minor tweaking).
However, putting aside the specific arguments for or against these policies, Scott’s post got me thinking about legacies – something that is so often discussed about presidents and legislators. So, my question is this, what would be the greater legacy for Barack Obama, the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell or the remake of the entire U.S. health care system?
It seems obvious to me that health care reform would be more memorable (look at Bill Clinton’s legacy regarding a failed attempt at reform compared to his legacy regarding DADT). But what would his supporters think?
I wonder if liberals might be inclined to think that the repeal of DADT would be a greater moral legacy than health care reform, even if not as memorable.
And I’m guessing that progressives would tend to consider health care reform to be a far greater prize than the repeal of DADT.
For me, it’s not even close. DADT should be repealed. The current proposals for health care reform seem like a giant mess waiting to happen. I know for which I’d rather be remembered.
I’d agree with you point as to why Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the Defense of Marriage Act are nothing in the eyes of what Obama’s legacy would be if he actually manages to change the face of US healthcare.
That being said I don’t see him doing much as far as DoMA or DADT unless he feels that the people wouldn’t crucify him. The US is still quite socially conservative, for the most part. If Obama goes too far and socons see him as trying to appease the gay and progressive voters, they’ll nail him to a cross.
Look at what happened in California recently when that state tried to make gay marriage legal. It’s a great example because a huge part of the opposition was black evangelicals – A lot of whom I’m sure voted for Obama in 08. If he wants to alienate a core demographic, bending to the social left is a great way to do it!
That’d be interesting: “New Polls Show: An Overwhelming Number of African American Voters Are Unhappy with First Black President.”
Not to mention the crap he’d unleash in Washington – Most Republicans, Southern Democrats, and Democrats with socially conservative views/constituents – they’d all be turning their backs on the man. Look at how hard it was to get that Healthcare stuff through, and that’s still not over with.
The US president in my opinion may be misguided, but I doubt he wants to commit electoral suicide. He’d be giving up a lot more then he’d be gaining.
Jonathan and David;
Good points both. Obama was elected by idealism, which is great for campaigning but lousy for running government. There aren’t wings strong enough to fly over the wall built by real-world pragmatic necessities. That repeated whumping sound from down south is Obama’s bird still slamming head first into an obstacle that wasn’t even on the horizon January 20. (What a lousy metaphor.)