In his uplifting victory speech, President-elect Barack Obama told the story of 106-year-old Ann Nixon Cooper of Atlanta and the remarkable changes that have transpired during her lifetime.
Born just one generation after slavery, when people like her were barred from voting both because of the color of their skin and their gender, she saw America overcome the Depression, crush the Nazis, dismantle racial segregation, land on the moon and inspire freedom-seekers to knock down the Berlin Wall.
"And this year, in this election," Obama said, "she touched her finger to a screen and cast her vote, because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change. Yes, we can."
For those of us who're gay, Ann Nixon Cooper's story is a well of hope to draw from as we continue our own difficult journey to equality after a bittersweet election.
Gay, bisexual and transgender Americans still have no federal protection against job discrimination. Gays in the military still must worry that honesty will end much-loved careers.
Those of us who have legally wed — in Massachusetts or Canada, for example — still endure the indignity of having the federal government treat us as single. And we must still fear we'll be attacked for something as simple as holding hands.
This election made the work ahead both harder and easier.
Friends in high places: Voters elected the most gay-friendly presidential nominee in history. Obama does not support same-sex marriage, but endorses essentially all other rights.
Obama will likely get to appoint justices to a Supreme Court now just 5 to 4 in favor of basic gay rights.
And while Bill Clinton's tenure showed us the limits of presidential power, Obama possibly could in his first term sign laws against anti-gay and -transgender hate crimes and job discrimination, as well as enlist the Pentagon's help in charting a way for gay Americans to serve openly.
In congressional elections, gay Coloradoan Jared Polis was elected to the House, while Rep.
Marilyn Musgrave of Colorado — lead advocate of amending the U.S. Constitution to ban gay marriage — was defeated. Sadly, so was gay-friendly Republican Rep. Christopher Shays of Connecticut.
New Yorkers put Democrats in charge of the state Senate, increasing the chances that the chamber will join the Assembly and Gov. David Paterson in approving gay marriage.
Work ahead: Voters in Hamtramck, Mich., repealed a new gay-rights ordinance, while Arkansas forbid couples other than married heterosexuals to adopt, Arizona passed a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, and Florida approved a Michigan-like ban on recognizing unions other than heterosexual marriage.
But, of course, the most painful setback was in California, where voters passed a constitutional ban on gay marriage. That marks the first time voters have stripped gay couples of marriage rights that had already been won.
But, in a reminder that time always sides with those fighting for equality in America, 61 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds voted against the ban; 61 percent of those ages 65 or older voted for it.
I doubt I'll be blessed to live to 106 like Ann Nixon Cooper. But I am certain the day is not far ahead when gay equality will be part of America's remarkable story of change.
Deb Price of The Detroit News writes the first nationally syndicated column on gay issues. To find out more about Deb Price and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
|
 |
Comments
|
1 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
Ma'am;... If I may suggest, there is no form of relationship that is as satisfying of personal needs as the relationship without the form... If the law does not prevent people from actually enjoying their relationships, they should take pleasure in them... Now, I understand that sexually oriented people are right and entitled to demand of the form called citizenship an equality like any other... If they pay their taxes, their relationships should have some legal protection too, but if you think of these property protections and sanctions of relationships, they are very old forms... Now, you know that you challenge people to do what people find extremely difficult, and that is to examine their forms, forms which they are very seldom conscious of at all, unless pointed out, and so, they have no ready made vocabulary with which to discuss them... And people do not build their forms from scratch.. usually people get forms like government and morality already in place, and either accept them, or reject them... Now, you folks are hardly revolutionary... It is old forms you cling to at the very time you challenge forms for all others... I do not think it is smart, or fair, but it only shows what is obvious, that you folks are little different from anyone else, and not different out of choice, when choice would abandon all old forms at once, and form anew to serve your relationships... Which is something you should consider doing...We all need to look for a language of forms, because forms are our problem... When a form, whether it be marriage or government works, it is all but invisible, and it is fluid, like the relationship itself... When forms grow old or disfunctional, they cannot move, or adapt to serve the relationship... What every form does, when it works is to realise and recognize its members.. Primitives could easily tell their own by their dress, much as with a uni-form... Gays can usually recognize their own... I wear a wedding band... It sends a message that is recognized, and I am recognized as married, and naturally, I recognize my spouse with my action... The other purpose of the form of marriage is realization... I am real to only a few people, and through forms...Those we do not recognize we do not see as real, and so violence is more likely against them... But more importantly, we invest life in our forms, and expect to get life out of them... We all depend upon the form our economy for our food and housing, and we feed the economy and expect food from it... We are proved real today by being real tomorrow, and forms of relationship serve that end, when they work... Now, you are welcome to challenge the form to perform for you... You pay your taxes like everyone else and deserve equal protection from the form of law... You must remember that it is your community, another form, that defends your rights... Religious communities do the same for their members as the gay community does for them, and they are powerful enough in asserting their rights to deny yours... I don't think that is smart either... Simply, if you exclude people from your community you are weakened... The whole society has got to allow membership by all, and only equal rights and equal obligations -equal membership... Now, again, I know the church people do not have the language of forms, and most of us do not have eyes to see our relationships through forms... We all have many forms, and many communities; and in fact, the Christians are not more happy with the form of their society than you are with yours... Many basic needs are not being met be the government, and economy, and gay marriage is not seen as essential, and in fact it is not, since you have the best of the form in the relationship... But, The failure of the government, and the economy as forms is the fact driving many people back into religion, which is a very ancient and discredited form, supported mostly by hope, which is not much of a foundation... And because those people are living in faith, they are purely dangerous to the whole society... I would say you guys are doing a fine job of hardening them when you might serve yourselves better enjoying your lives in spite of inequality... Liberation of gay people will have to wait upon a liberation of humanity, and I hope you are willing to abandon your old forms to make that possible... Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Mon Nov 10, 2008 8:53 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
