Gay

Darren Manzella, a homosexual Army Sergeant, was discharged from duty due to his sexual orientation/lifestlye. Last December, “60 Minutes” featured Manzella in one of their stories pertaining the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

This Army medic was deployed to Iraq twice and earned a combat medal for rendering treatment under fire. He was open about his sexual orientation and introduced his partner to his Army  friend. He did not hide his lifestyle when his battalion commander initiated an investigation into Manzella’s private life. The investigation’s report claimed that there was no evidence of homosexuality and he was sent back to work. This happened even after Manzella provided photographs and testimony of his relationship with his boyfriend.

Cholene Espinoza, an Air Force Captain who flew combat missions, explained, “Darren is in a critical field. He’s a medic. His commander needs him. He’s a known quantity. He gets along with others. He does what he’s supposed to. He goes above and beyond. Why do I want to lose Darren?”
John McCain recently said gay people in the military represent an “intolerable risk” to unit morale, cohesion, and discipline.

As Steve Benen notes, “Which poses the great risk, Manzella being deployed and serving honorably, or Manzella not being deployed? Which is better for the troops? Which does more to help those in uniform? Which leaves the military stronger, and which leaves it weaker?”

I agree with Benen. This policy is flawed but more importantly it inherently undermines the military. If a qualified individual that is willing to scarify their life in order to defend this country . . . isn’t the bare minimum for the military leave these troops’s personal life alone. Do we discharge individuals for their religious views or their infidelities in their marriage? Is it really supporting the troops when you take away talented services members due to their sexual orientation? No, it weakens our military and sends the wrong message about the “freedom” we promote.

The California Supreme Court struck down a same-sex marriage ban with 4-3 decision claiming, "limiting the designation of marriage to a 'union between a man and a woman' is unconstitutional," and that so-called "domestic partnerships" for same-sex couples are discriminatory and not "constitutionally valid" in place of marriage. The California Supreme Court had a lot to say about the issue, in fact here are three examples of arguments included in the 30,000 worded decision as documented by John Cloud of TIME Magazine.

What gays really want is a wholly new right, the right to "gay marriage." The court answered by citing Perez v. Sharp, its own 1948 decision legalizing interracial marriage: "The court did not characterize the constitutional right that the plaintiffs in that case sought to obtain as 'a right to interracial marriage,' and did not dismiss the plaintiffs' constitutional challenge on the ground that such marriages never had been permitted in California. Instead, the Perez decision focused on... the importance to an individual of the freedom to join in marriage with the person of one's choice... It is a fundamental right of free men."

Marriage exists mainly for the purpose of protecting society by encouraging stable homes for children. The obvious retort to this position is that plenty of straight couples don't have children, and yet they can still marry. Those opposed to gay marriage answer this objection by saying that the state can't go around inquiring which straight couples are fertile and which are infertile; they do know, though, that no gay couple can have kids on its own. The California court's wonderfully dismissive response: "If that were an accurate and adequate explanation for the absence of such a limitation, it would follow that in instances in which the state is able to make a determination of an individual's fertility without such an inquiry, it would be constitutionally permissible for the state to preclude an individual who is incapable of bearing children from entering into marriage." Not even the most hard-core opponent of marriage equality takes that position.

If gays are allowed to marry, it will send a message to straight people not only that having children isn't important, but that it doesn't really matter whether kids are raised by their biological parents. The court's response: "Although we appreciate the genuine concern for the well-being of children underlying that position, we conclude this claim lacks merit... Our recognition that the core substantive rights encompassed by the constitutional right to marry apply to same-sex as well as opposite-sex couples does not imply in any way that it is unimportant or immaterial to the state whether a child is raised by his or her biological mother and father. We do not alter or diminish either the legal responsibilities that biological parents owe to their children or the substantial incentives that the state provides to a child's biological parents to enter into and raise their child in a stable, long-term committed relationship."

This decision may become a hot button again as it was played out by the GOP two years ago. The issue is at times attributed to helping President Bush receive the support from his Christian base to edge out John Kerry in 2004. Whether this topic becomes an issue will truly be up to McCain. If they decide to take such route, it may just be enough to rally the troops to support him over one issue.

But, is that really likely? I do not think so. In fact, I believe it would be foolhardy for the GOP to make this an issue again. Cultural norms have changed enough to alienate young voters from the party but more importantly this issue has no federal relevancy. In 2004 and 2006, many states including, Texas, passed bans of same-sex marriages approved by voters. Thus, it does not make sense how one state can make this a national issue again. Nonetheless, it ill be intresting to see how this plays out.

Obama wins Mississippi primary - Barack Obama will win the Mississippi Democratic primary. The state has 33 Democratic delegates up for grabs. Meanwhile, CNN estimates show that Obama won last week's Texas Democratic caucuses and will get more delegates out of the state than rival Hillary Clinton, who won the state's primary.

Dow soars 417 on Fed move - Stocks rallied Tuesday on news that the Federal Reserve, in coordination with central banks worldwide, will lend up to $200 billion to banks in an effort to loosen up tight credit markets. The Dow Jones industrial average (INDU) jumped almost 417 points, its fourth-biggest one-day point gain ever and the biggest one-day point gain since July 2002.

Gasoline: Painful, and getting worse - So gasoline prices are at an all-time high. But after adjusting for inflation, rising incomes and better fuel efficiency, how bad are they really? The experts' answer: Bad. Nearly as bad as they've ever been, and not likely to get better anytime soon. Americans are spending about 6% of their total disposable income on energy, down from about 8% in 1982. In 2002, when many people may have bought a vehicle they are still driving today, Americans spent just 4% of their income on energy.

Iraq Attacks Lower, but Steady, New Figures Show - Newly declassified statistics on the frequency of insurgent attacks in Iraq suggest that after major security gains last fall in the wake of an American troop increase, the conflict has drifted into a stalemate, with levels of violence remaining stubbornly constant from November 2007 through early 2008.

Gay Iranian man loses asylum plea - Mehdi Kazemi has said his life is in danger if he is returned to Iran, where he says his boyfriend named him as a partner before being executed. Homosexual acts are illegal in the Islamic republic. Kazemi, 19, said he had travelled to Britain in 2005 to study English, and learned that his lover in Iran had been executed for sodomy.

Upon hearing that Heath Ledger expired earlier this week I was saddened to see such a good actor depart so early in life. No matter what caused his demise whether it be natural or due to substance abuse it does not take away from the fact that he was a great actor. I still remember seeing him for the first time back in 1999 in 10 Things I Hate About You and most recenly for his superb acting in Brokeback Mountain.

I was shocked to find out the next day that some right wing conservative people were applauding his death because of his role in Brokeback Mountain. To put the icing on the cake though, FOX News' John Gibson mocked the death in bigot fashion by playing clips from the movie and somehow relating them to the death. I have uploaded a YouTube video of the audio as well as MSNBC Dan Abrams reaction-- I think I have found a new progressive, free thinking, open minded journalist.