What a very ... INteresting day it's been.
The time has come to change a policy that imposes a lifetime ban on donating blood for any man who has had gay sex since 1977, 18 senators said Thursday. "Not a single piece of scientific evidence supports the ban," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who joined 16 other Democrats and independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont in writing Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Margaret Hamburg.
The lawmakers stressed that the science has changed dramatically since the ban was established in 1983 at the advent of the HIV-AIDS crisis. Today donated blood must undergo two different, highly accurate tests that make the risk of tainted blood entering the blood supply virtually zero, they said. The senators said that while hospitals and emergency rooms are in urgent need of blood products, "healthy blood donors are turned away every day due to an antiquated policy and our blood supply is not necessarily any safer for it."
Brian Moulton, chief legislative counsel for the Human Rights Campaign,the nation's largest gay rights group, said they are hopeful that the policy, last reviewed in 2006, will change under President Barack Obama, "who is interested in looking at all the policies that have a discriminatory effect." The goal, he said, is "to have policies in place that are based on the science" rather than "any discriminatory idea about our community." [...]
DC Begins licensing same-sex marriages
By Keith L. Alexander and Ann E. Marimow
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, March 4, 2010; A01
Just sitting down at a desk at the marriage bureau at D.C. Superior Court on Wednesday was too much for Angelisa Young. She cried so hard that she eventually had to bury her face in her fiancee's chest. About a half-hour later, Young and her partner, Sinjoyla Townsend, who met 13 years ago in a Constitutional Law class at the University of the District of Columbia, became the first same-sex couple to apply to be married in the District as the city officially joined five states in allowing gay marriage. "I'm just so happy. We're whole now. We will actually be a true family like everyone else," Young, 47, said as Townsend, 41, used her thumb to wipe away her soon-to-be wife's tears. After the couple from Southeast Washington rose from the desk, couples in line behind them broke into spontaneous applause and cheers.
For Young, Townsend and the cheering masses, being there, in the tiny and usually sleepy marriage bureau, on the very first day meant everything. There was the history of it all, but mostly it was about having the nation's capital validate their relationships and their families.
For the couples in line Wednesday and those who follow, it was the culmination of a three-decade struggle for equality. Advocates had long known that the D.C. Council would approve same-sex marriage. But the timing had to be right. Congress and the White House could have killed the bill, which had to clear a congressional review period, so advocates waited for a president and legislature sympathetic to gay rights and home rule. In the meantime, the gay community picked up important rights in the District, including a domestic partnership law, before the council passed the same-sex marriage bill in December.
Still, there were no white wedding dresses or tuxedos among the gay couples Wednesday because they won't be able to marry until Tuesday, at the earliest. Gay or straight, the District requires a three-day waiting period from the day you get your license. Young and Townsend plan to marry that day at the Human Rights Campaign headquarters as part of a ceremony involving other same-sex couples.
The line to get into the marriage bureau was composed of racially diverse couples of all generations and appeared to include more women than men. By the end of the day, 151 couples had filed to be married, far surpassing the dozen or so applications the bureau typically collects on a single day. Some brought their children or spoke of the importance of their change in status to their sons and daughters. "It's a great source of pride for her and, deep down, a source of relief and stability," said Silver Spring resident Deborah Weiner, referring to her 15-year-old daughter. Weiner stood in line with her partner of 24 years, Janne Harrelson....
Democrats vow quick end to 'don't ask, don't tell' as Senate bill is introduced
By Ed O'Keefe
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Leading Senate Democrats pledged Wednesday to move quickly to repeal the ban on gays serving openly in the armed forces rather than wait, as the Pentagon has requested, for the military to complete a lengthy review.
Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) introduced the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, legislation that would lift the ban and prohibit discrimination against gay service members. Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) said he expects his panel to take up the measure in May as part of the annual defense authorization bill.
"Gays are serving successfully in our military right now -- this legislation would allow them to serve with integrity," Levin said.
Lieberman said: "If Americans want to serve, they ought to have the right to be considered for that service regardless of characteristics such as race, religion, gender or sexual orientation."
The Pentagon and congressional Republicans have urged Democrats to allow the military to first complete its study of the policy and the impact of a potential repeal. The study is expected to be completed by Dec. 1.
"We need to know more than we know now about what the potential impact would be," Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell told reporters Wednesday. "And we need to be armed with that information so that we could work with the Congress to help inform the process that they undertake, if they undertake it." [...]
Of course, the interesting part of all of this is that none of this is irrevocable, or even guaranteed that it will move forward. One can count on obstructionist conservative Democrats and pretty much each and every Republican to fight the blood-donation ban. Senator Levin, into whose committee DADT repeal must first go, is already on record as saying that he recommends merely that enforcement of the policy be suspended, rather than a full repeal. (And in a wonderfully entertaining aspect, the military officers assigned to do the research on the topic have stated that they plan to speak to currently-serving gay officers and enlisted about the ban and how they feel. Since identifying themselves as gay for the purpose of this study would be a direct violation of DADT and lead to their immediate dismissal from service, how the researchers plan to do this is entirely unclear. Moreover, there's more than a hint, in the comments floating around, that anyone surveyed on these issues will be, shall we say, Strongly Encouraged to say that they would be uncomfortable serving with openly gay personnel.
And as far as the DC marriages go, there's an attempt going forward to get the courts to overturn that section of the DC charter prohibiting votes on the Human Rights section as unconstitutional. Apparently, some people feel that the DC city council's position, that allowing majorities to vote on the rights of minorities is in and of itself unconstitutional, does not allow them to vote on their moral repugnance at the very idea of treating gays and lesbians as though they have the same human rights as anyone else, and they're trying to get that overturned. But all that said, for now, DC couples will be able to marry by Tuesday.
So, as I said, a very interesting day it's been.
Posted by iain at March 04, 2010 03:55 PM
