John Kerry outlines America's "moral obligation" to advance LGBT equality

[karynnj]

Source: Metro weekly

Secretary of State John Kerry declared Wednesday that the United States has a "moral obligation" to promote LGBT rights abroad.

During Kerry's first speech on LGBT issues as secretary of state, at an event marking the department's Pride month celebration, Kerry said "American leadership requires promoting universal values" in areas of the world that have been slower to embrace LGBT equality.

<snip>

We are planning for the expectation that DOMA will be struck down in some form and we’re laying the groundwork for all the things we need to adjust," Kerry said in response to a question regarding immigration laws for binational same-sex couples from a State Department employee stationed in Mexico. The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in the DOMA and Proposition 8 cases before the end of June.

<snip>

"When we see the abuse of those values, that are directed at the LGBT community, we have a moral obligation to stand in pride with LGBT individuals and advocates. We have a moral obligation to decry the marginalization and persecution of LGBT persons. And we have a moral obligation to promote societies that are more just, more fair and tolerant," Kerry stated, adding that doing so is not only right, but in the strategic interests of the U.S.

Read more: http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2013/06/john-kerry-outlines-americas-moral-obligation-to-a.html

---

The DOMA comments are interesting here.

[Fearless]

1. And the fundies stick their fingers in their ears

Shout socialism, and John Boehner doesn't let Congress do anything. Rinse and repeat.

People need to stand up and stand out for their rights and for the rights of all Americans. Clearly it's not just going to happen, as much as Kerry believes in the concept.

[karynnj]

4. Kerry's roots are as an activist - on the Vietnam War and the environment

He has NEVER expected that things will just happen. In fact, from 2005 until recently, many of us in the Kerry group loved to listen to his graduation speeches each year that were on line. The one part that was always there was a call foe the kids to stay or get involved and he used the 1970 earth day movement as a successful example.

[Fearless]

5. I didn't say he did

All I said is that if we want to see that change we need to be involved.

[karynnj]

6. All I was saying is that he would agree with you - in fact, that is much of what he says in the

full speech - http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/06/210910.htm

[Fearless]

7. I agree. n/t

[karynnj]

2. Here is the full speech from the State Department site

I remind everybody that it is amazing to think, but it has been nearly 15 years since we mourned the tragic murder of their son, Matthew. And I can remember very clearly meeting them previously and speaking to the crowd gathered on the National Mall in front of the Capitol building at a vigil that was held two nights after he was killed. Thousands of people came together to share their grief, but also to share their sense of outrage that such an act could be carried out, such a senseless, violent, terrible heartbreak. And we were all standing with Judy and Dennis on that dark night, and frankly, since then, they have helped to lead the way through darkness and into the light, and they’ve turned their pain and their loss into a remarkable global message of hope and of tolerance. So, Judy and Dennis, make no mistake: You really do inspire us and we are very honored to have you here with us today. Thank you.

<snip>
As Ken said, I have had the privilege of being involved in the struggle for rights, for LGBT rights, for a long period of time. And it is a privilege. Coming from Massachusetts, maybe we inherently know something about fighting for rights from the inception. But it wasn’t that long ago, as I recall, and many of you, I’m sure, do too, when things looked very different from the way they look today. If you want an amusing read before you go to sleep, go get the transcript of my testimony before Strom Thurmond on the Armed Services Committee 20 years ago, when we first pushed for an end on the ban on gays in the military. If you want to read a Senate hearing that is actually literally like a Saturday night skit – Saturday Night Live skit, that is it. And I won’t go into all the questions that Strom and his inimitable accent posed to me – (laughter) – but I walked out of there thinking that I was truly on a different planet, or he was; one or the other. (Laughter.)

But we ran into a wall of misunderstanding and of misperception. But as we are learning even today, as we look at various places in the world where homophobia raises its ugly and frightened head, we see that there is fear and that a lot is driven by fear – always has been – not always with respect to LGBT issues, but with respect to people generally, with respect to race and religion. And this is an ongoing battle for all of us, and believe me, not just for us; it is an ongoing battle in hidden parts of this planet, in dark corners where there is no light, where people are thrown into jail, or worse, beaten brutally, tortured and even murdered because of who they are or what they believe.

<snip>
And I think under Pat and Linda’s and other people’s stewardship, we are already doing an outstanding job. Same-sex partners and spouses at overseas missions enjoy the same benefits allowed by law as all of our employees’ families. And we’ve included a category for same-sex partners in our personnel system. It’s now easier for transgender Americans to change the gender on their passport. It may seem like a small thing, but it’s a big deal. And we’ve stated unequivocally that this Department does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity..

http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/06/210910.htm

[DonCoquixote]

3. This man could have been president

With a resume that Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, nor Obama could touch, the literal "winter solider" that earned medals, than had the good sense to toss them.

But no, people liked Dr. Dean, and made fun of Kerry, right until dean yeeeeeee3ee-haaawwwed himself out of the Oval Office.

[totodeinhere]

9. Yes, he should have succeeded President Gore. n/t

[karynnj]

11. He might have had Gore not been influenced to take Lieberman over Kerry

With Kerry, not Lieberman, debating Cheney - the race would not have been close enough to steal.

[totodeinhere]

17. Of course he can't say so but I suspect that Gore regrets that decision to

tap Lieberman. Yes Gore made some mistakes but I'm sure you can agree that by comparison with Bush there absolutely is no comparison.

[karynnj]

18. That goes without saying

My guess is that when an election is predicted by classic models (which assume nothing of the nominee) says that it will be close (2000) or that the expectation is that you will lose (2004), it is very hard to ignore the "professional" campaign strategy people who argue that one VP nominee could "cure" what the strategist thinks is a liability for the perspective nominee. Add in that the strategists convene easily influenced focus groups that generally confirm their wisdom.

If I were Gore, and my team were telling me that adding Lieberman would be both historic (first Jew on a major ticket) and would, with Gore's own Eagle Scout character (which was part of why Clinton picked him), it might be tough to see the liabilities. Gore and Lieberman were together on climate change and both, while in the Senate, were relatively conservative Democrats on trade and foreign policy. (In fact, overall, I would be willing to bet that if you estimated the % of times that Kerry and Gore voted the same way and the % of time Lieberman and Gore voted the same for the years all three were in the Senate (1989 - 1992), the Lieberman estimate would be higher. Lieberman is now a pariah in Democratic circles, but that was not the case in 2000.

In 2004, Edwards' media fueled positive favorability numbers and focus groups suggested that he could help the ticket more than others tested. Kerry's own gut feeling on Edwards was that he didn't like him, but Kerry's main goal was correctly getting elected. (This per Shrum) This case is actually a bit harder to defend than the choice of Lieberman. However, there are two observations here. If Edwards had been a team player rather than a primadonna and worked as energetically and as enthusiastically for the general election as he did in the primary, this might have been a good decision because it could have made the difference. (Everything that happened 2005 on would be different and a VP can be marginalized if he became a problem.) The second observation is the media was already lobbying for Edwards and writing articles that he was the obvious choice unless Kerry was too vain to pick someone who could outshine him out of jealousy - ignoring that Kerry easily beat him in all but SC and OK (and the NC caucus after JK was the defacto nominee). Their reaction had he picked anyone else - like Durbin, who in later years was rumored to have been JK's first choice, you can imagine that rather than the small gain (with Edwards), Kerry would have been trashed.

The really bad - self inflicted - choice was Palin.

[DonCoquixote]

12. I raise a toast to that

Even though some Dems act like GOP, I hope it is along time before i ever see a GOP in the oval office. They already stole 8 years.

[Initech]

20. But nope, we had to give another term to the fake Yale Cowboy.

Despite the fact that W's presidency was a disaster from day one and continued well into term #2.

[Bluenorthwest]

8. Senator Kerry, who should have been President of the United States

He has long been trying to bring immigration equality into law, John is tenacious and sincere in his advocacy, never patronizing and often very well timed. May the road rise to meet him.

[Major Hogwash]

10. Kerry is a good man.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in the DOMA and Proposition 8 cases before the end of June.

Now, I'm starting to get a little anxious.

[JI7]

13. looks like there is some hope DOMA will be overturned

[Omaha Steve]

14. Where would we be if Ohio had had an honest vote?

K&R!

[politicasista]

23. +1

Blackwell belongs in prison.

[David__77]

15. What a load of manure.

Posturing for credulous liberals. What nonsense...

That issue factors with a weight of zero when it comes to the sick geostrategic games they play, he included.

[karynnj]

16. So, there is no substance to any of the changes that have actually happened under Obama

or the work being done in case DOMA is overturned. Kerry helped a MA married gay couple - one from Brazil - have the ability to reunite in MA after the Brazilian spouse had to leave when he was Senator? Obviously he cared about this - and obviously every such couple can not have a powerful Senator get them a special exception to stay for a period of time.

[FreeState]

19. Kerry has sent mixed messages in the past

As a gay person its hard to not remember that Kerry ran on an anti-gay marriage platform in 2004. Thats less than 10 years ago.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28118-2004May14.html

The presumptive Democratic nominee has long opposed gay marriage, favoring instead state-sanctioned civil unions that extend legal protections to gay couples.

Yet Kerry has taken several positions on the issue: He voted against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as a union only of a man and woman, saying it amounted to gay-bashing. Kerry has opposed President Bush's call for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage but said in February that he favors such a ban in Massachusetts.

"If the Massachusetts legislature crafts an appropriate amendment that provides for partnership and civil unions, then I would support it, and it would advance the goal of equal protection," he told the Boston Globe.

When it comes to EDNA he also did not want Transgender persons included.

Yes, he's doing many things right today, but for some of us we with good reason a little cautious.

[karynnj]

21. In 2004, Kerry's position was more gay friendly than any previous platform

and Obama's 4 years later was the same. It was likely as far as one could go and have any chance to be elected.

Note all the Washington Post frames this - that he has taken several positions. In fact, none of these is in conflict. He did vote against DOMA and he said that he thought it unconstitutional -- and this year he may be proven right by the Supreme Court. In addition, he said it was gay bashing. He also was against a constitutional amendment.

The MA law was more complex - he was asked if he supported it and answered that if it did what he thought should be done - ie civil union with genuinely equal rights. (In 2004, he was speaking of backing legislation (as President) that would give the same rights to civil unions as are given to marriage.) The idea - which time has made completely obsolete - was that there could be a way to insure the rights by not insisting on the words. By 2008, he told a young man at Tufts who asked that he agreed that gay marriage was the correct solution. He pointed out that he had always been strongly in favor of giving all the rights of marriage.

Even in 2004, his position was at least equivalent to Dean's - Dean had no choice but to sign civil unions into law and he did it without ceremony. I don't recall Dean speaking of working for the federal legal rights of marriage to be given to civil unions.

What you do not say is that in 2004, he had a 100% record with HRC and that he had been one of the earliest people to fight for gays in the military - agreeing to testify before Strom Thurman's committee to give testimony from his own history of being in the military. How many Senators - especially ones thought to potentially be Presidential material - were willing to speak out like that in the 1980s?

I know nothing on his not wanting transgender to be included in EDNA - all I know is that he supported the bill whenever it was out there. Going to Wikipedia, it is clear that it was the HOUSE where adding transgender was a problem. Barney Frank initially included it in 2007 and the bill died in committee. Barney Frank then resurrected it without transgender included and it passed the House. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Non-Discrimination_Act

From the wikipedia link:

Some LGBT activist organizations refused to support H.R. 3685 because of its failure to cover gender identity.[26][27] An exception was the Human Rights Campaign, which received wide criticism from the LGBT community for supporting a non-inclusive ENDA.[28] The LGBT activist organizations that refused to support H.R. 3685 argued that not including transgender people undermined the underlying principle of ENDA.[29] They claimed that failure to include gender identity/expression weakened the protection for the portion of the gay population that most needed its protections: gender non-conforming gays, who they claimed are discriminated against in greater numbers than their gender-conforming compatriots[citation needed]. Others argued that this was ENDA's best chance of passing Congress in thirty years, that civil rights victories have historically been incremental, that concerns about the legislation's protections were unfounded, and that forgoing a chance to provide immediate workplace protections to millions of lesbians, gays and bisexuals was politically and morally wrong.[30

The bill never came to a vote in the Senate in this Congress (2007/2008). Are you also suggesting that Barney Frank has a problem on this? The best way to pass something would have been to pass Barney's bill and amend it later.

What I see is that somehow the bar seems to be put higher for Kerry than for others.

[politicasista]

22. Kick