I really would have expected to see somebody on my LJ friends list crowing about the Iowa decision by now. Mark? Regis? Surely Tom would
( Read more... )
On DADT, I think its days are numbered. It's pretty clear that the President would announce its end today were his political capital not so heavily occupied elsewhere. Once we have gay couples in Iowa married for years, it's going to be harder for political candidates (especially in the Iowa Presidential caucuses!) to pander in the same way.
regarding DADT, i'm skeptical, just because we've dropped into the somewhat familiar pattern of "oh, we're going to give you your rights! ... oh, wait, um, we'll do that later. yeah. later."
but yeah, having marriage equality in iowa will change the tone of the caucuses, i think.
I suspect DADT will fade from a new generation being in charge. Keep in maind that the military is run by 60yo men. Give it 20-30 years? Even conservatives in that age bracket are much less homophobic. Unfortunately there is the run into the fundy influence in the military, so who really knows. I'm wondering about commanders just ignoring it when their incredibly important interpreter,tech guy or engineer doesn't hide it
Sorry! Work has been kicking my ass up and down the block lately. (several days in a row of off-hours work starting at 0500 kind of kicking plus extra fun) so I've been pleased but haven't had a chance to make a thoughtful post about it.
I've seen a few folks shocked that Iowa managed it while CA got repealed. I think of Iowa as more uniformly moderately liberal, while CA is just all kinds of polarized. But between Iowa and Vermont, I'm getting pleased. I don't think it's time to make a challenge based on federal full faith and credit yet, but that day will come. As it is, I'm pleased that there's more than one state I could live in, now, without having to give up the right to marry.
No, full faith and credit right now would be premature. Right now, it would appear to be a small minority of states forcing change upon all of the other states... which would be much easier to oppose, FF&C wasn't intended to do that so much as to keep the states pointed in the same direction.
But once we have 1/3rd, or 1/2, of the states on the right side of this issue, full faith and credit becomes a much more real issue.
Work has been crazy so I only managed to herald it on Facebook this week. I'm hopeful and encouraged - probably will find time to say a lot more about it this weekend.
I've seen so many people mention it in LJ and Facebook that I just figured it would be redundant of me to post, and instead have just been quietly cheering over here in my living room. :)
Comments 9
(The comment has been removed)
On DADT, I think its days are numbered. It's pretty clear that the President would announce its end today were his political capital not so heavily occupied elsewhere. Once we have gay couples in Iowa married for years, it's going to be harder for political candidates (especially in the Iowa Presidential caucuses!) to pander in the same way.
Reply
but yeah, having marriage equality in iowa will change the tone of the caucuses, i think.
Reply
Reply
I've seen a few folks shocked that Iowa managed it while CA got repealed. I think of Iowa as more uniformly moderately liberal, while CA is just all kinds of polarized. But between Iowa and Vermont, I'm getting pleased. I don't think it's time to make a challenge based on federal full faith and credit yet, but that day will come. As it is, I'm pleased that there's more than one state I could live in, now, without having to give up the right to marry.
Reply
But once we have 1/3rd, or 1/2, of the states on the right side of this issue, full faith and credit becomes a much more real issue.
Reply
Reply
I'm hopeful and encouraged - probably will find time to say a lot more about it this weekend.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment