On Wednesday President Obama signed his name to a defense bill that not only authorizes $680 billion in spending, yet cuts wasteful projects such as the cold-war era F-22 fighter jet program, but also makes it a federal crime to assault people based on sexual orientation. On the surface, the irony of tacking the hate crime provision on to a defense bill of all things is wholly evident. The military has been practicing their Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) policy since 1993, a policy that "prohibits any homosexual or bisexual person from disclosing his or her sexual orientation or from speaking about any homosexual relationships, including marriages or other familial attributes, while serving in the United States armed forces" and prohibits superiors from investigating service personnel based purely on the suspicion of homosexuality. This policy openly hinders the personal freedom of gays and bisexuals to (gasp!) be who they are! This is one of those stupid policies that creates an "elephant in the room" type scenario. We all know that there are gays and bisexuals serving in the military, but let's not acknowledge it in any way shape or form. That's like making a policy that prohibits people from acknowledging their nationality. "I know your ancestors are from Denmark, but for God's sake, man---don't say it!" Now, I know there's a large number of people who feel that homosexuality is a choice, and for some, maybe it is, but on the whole, it is an issue of biology determined in the womb. Basically, during a male fetus' development, the brain does not absorb enough testosterone for the future adult male to be attracted to females (I can't adequately explain it---watch the National Geographic video below).
This hate crimes bill was named for Matthew Shepard, a gay Wyoming man who was murdered more than a decade ago. This bill "expands current hate crimes law to include violence based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability." There is nothing negative about the passing of such a measure, but I just find it so odd that bills totally unrelated to each other are paired up in an effort to get the necessary votes to pass. What this says to me is that there wouldn't be enough people in our government who care enough about basic human rights to pass a bill that would ensure that those who victimize a certain segment of the American population based solely on an attribute would receive the proper punishment? Am I correct in this assessment?
Another thing at work here is the fact that President Obama and his administration has largely disappointed the gays and bisexuals who cast their hopeful votes for Obama, buoyed up on his campaign promise to abolish the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. Now, I am sure that they are thrilled that he fulfilled his campaign promise to pass the Matthew Shepard Act, but gays are still waiting for the repeal of both DADT and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), both unfulfilled, but highly publicized campaign promises.
In light of the economic crisis, coupled with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the health care debacle, the Obama administration has been stretched to the brink on an endless list of domestic and foreign issues, so it is understandable that the progression of social issues has been slow at best. All in all, it is a good thing that this hate crimes bill has been passed, no matter how they got it through. Hopefully Don't Ask, Don't Tell, which has led to the discharge of close to 13,000 servicemen and servicewomen, and cost our nation an estimated $363 million dollars (lost in training, recruiting, and other related costs) since 1993, will soon find itself square on Obama's chopping block. Until then, I guess "mum's the word".



Recent Comments