More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Rep. Mike Honda

Rep. Mike Honda

Posted: December 9, 2010 06:41 PM

In blocking the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal, Senate Republicans continue to hide behind disingenuous national security claims. In the long run, Senate Republicans, who are keen to turn this into a political charade, can't stop reform.

When the top military brass, such as Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, favor a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," noting that a "solid majority" of service members say the repeal will have no negative impact, the deal is nearly done. They join the president and a majority of Americans who have rallied behind repeal and a federal judiciary that is likely to overturn the policy on its own.

Senate obstructionists have joined the wrong side of America's civil rights history. U.S. District Judge Virginia A. Philips declared the policy, and its deliberate exclusion of openly gay service members, a violation of the Constitution.

As an elected body, Congress has a great responsibility to move on a legislative repeal, without conditions. It is my hope that this discriminatory policy is ended soon. Whenever anyone serves our country, regardless of their race, sex, socioeconomic status, religion, or sexuality, we should honor and support their service, not force them to hide their identity in shame.

I am very disappointed that Senate Republicans failed to guarantee civil rights for those LGBT individuals who serve in our armed forces. As vice-chair of the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus, I have ardently supported legislation that advances the rights of LGBT individuals, and I will continue to do so in the future.

Rep Honda is the vice-chair of the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus.


 
In blocking the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal, Senate Republicans continue to hide behind disingenuous national security claims. In the long run, Senate Republicans, who are keen to turn this into a ...
In blocking the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal, Senate Republicans continue to hide behind disingenuous national security claims. In the long run, Senate Republicans, who are keen to turn this into a ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 83
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
11:05 AM on 12/10/2010
Speaking to the sentence concerning National Security; in 1988 when I was in the military and under investigation concerning my alleged homosexuality, (yes I am, but hey like I was going to admit it then,) my security clearance was taken away. I asked why, my commander cited security reasons, I could be blackmailed. I thought to myself, “Wait a minute here, you think that I would rather betray my country than have you find out that I’m Gay.” I was furious. However: The military by forcing these people to be quiet about who they really are, are putting soldiers in just that position every day. By forcing Homosexuals into secrecy creates a situation where they can be taken advantage of in order to try and save their careers. It is way past the time to let these people serve honorably.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jmcaninch68
Teacher, activist, animal rescuer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tinsldr2
Retired Army Officer
08:49 AM on 12/10/2010
Why did they vote on it now instead of waiting until the bill to stop the tax raises was completed?

I support Repeal of DADT (and same sex marriage) so don't get me wrong but there are priorities and right now that is to stop Every American who pays federal income Tax from having a tax raise.

Several senators that filibustered it said they would support it but couldnt because they pledged to take care of the more urgent requirement to stop the tax raise FIRST.

All focus should be on THAT and then other stuff can happen. To put it in a military analogy you shoot the "25 meter" targets first because they will hit you sooner.

While any civil rights or prejudice is bad and an affront to ALL Americans the DADT bill DIRECTLY effects a few hundred people each year and the looming Tax raise DIRECTLY effects tens of millions. The Tax raise issue is time sensitive and while we cant wait for ever on DADT there is no time wall we are about to hit.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
springsm
09:59 AM on 12/10/2010
Do you think the sky would fall in, if these Thugs would vote on their own behalf instead of listening to the Party of No Leaders?  I think it would be a fine experiment...to try.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tinsldr2
Retired Army Officer
11:35 AM on 12/10/2010
It tried and failed when if they waited another week and did the important business of the day it had a chance of succeeding.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pennypii
Nice to be here. Hope you agree.
11:39 AM on 12/10/2010
We need to raise taxes. After 30 years of tax cuts, we now must raise them. I pay plenty, and I want to live in a civilized society, not this wild wild West where banks are taking all our money out of the country.
08:30 AM on 12/10/2010
Overturning DADT is easy. Just get the President to annouce he supports it staying in force. The Republics will stampede to repeal.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
woody7
Always a Dem, but..............
09:29 AM on 12/10/2010
lol
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
springsm
10:00 AM on 12/10/2010
Gosh reverse psychology worked on two year olds too....maybe this is the answer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
p c r
Compassionate and Conservative are polar opposites
07:06 AM on 12/10/2010
The majority of the military is overwhelmingly accepting of gays serving openly in the military. The majority of the people are overwhelmingly in favor of gays serving openly in the military. Gays currently serve in the military. Gays have always served in the military. The only result of DADT is that military personnel are open to blackmail by outside forces and are forced to daily lie about who and what they are. Telling the truth effectively takes good soldiers away from their task of serving this country.
I don't understand what the fuss is about. It comes down to the fact that a group of brainwashed old men and women in the Congress want to go against popular opinion in order to show their predjudice while pushing through Bush tax cuts for the rich (which 70% of the public is against). What folly hath the Tea party wrought?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
notlieutishia
02:10 AM on 12/10/2010
I don't understand why anyone would deny another person the right to serve this country. I taught children in the same school for 24 years. I saw children mature from third grade until eighth grade. You can see that many children display homosexual traits early in life. Not all children, of course, display the traits and some never do. The children who display these traits early, almost always become practicing homosexuals later in life. I've kept in touch with many of these kids because they seemed to sense that I was not a judgmental person and they would talk to me about their emerging feelings and their attraction to same sex people. My trust allowed them to be open. Some children were so distressed at the realization of their feelings that a few of the kids became anorexic. Other children can be cruel when they notice the characteristics. Being gay is obviously born into these children. We can't deny them rights for something that they are born to be. I even taught one child whose sex had to be determined at birth with a chromazone test. She took hormones her entire life to insure that she would develop into a female. You could see that she had many male characteristics, and puberty caused some confusion for her. I don't understand why DADT isn't done away with. People should be allowed to be who they were born to be and they need the same rights as others.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Velvetus
socialists & communists & marxists, oh my!
08:02 AM on 12/10/2010
Thank you for your spirited and well thought out defense. Fanned & faved.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
realitytrumpsbull
two 'alves of coconut!
12:51 AM on 12/10/2010
Maybe after they get this one figured out, they'll turn around and stop the gay rape of the taxpaying public to pay for runaway military spending?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RM Greer
09:19 PM on 12/09/2010
Mr. President. Regardless of the fact that I am not inclined to vote for you again, your response is being closely watched. I would rather have an enemy that I know then a "friend" who continues to diminish me as a person. I'm not saying that I will vote for a republican, I can not see that as a possibility, but, I can vote for everything and everyone on my ballot and not for president, something I have never in ten presidential elections even considered.
So, how much more indifference are you planning to pile on me in the next two years. Unlike you, I am a Veteran. I served as an open gay man from 1968 to 1974. I did my job and did it well. I received an honorable discharge. Make an executive order ending this embarrassment to our citizens and to our country. Thank you.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Dosadi
Political agnostic
10:12 PM on 12/09/2010
I too served in the military.  I fought alongside gay men in Nam. They never presented any problems. The homophobia is a sign of weakness. All those that oppose the repeal of a bad policy may be trying to hide their own insecurities. They may not want to face the truth; that gay men make good soldiers, good citizens and good friends.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Velvetus
socialists & communists & marxists, oh my!
08:05 AM on 12/10/2010
Thank you to both of you for your service to our country. This infringement of your civil rights can't end soon enough!
09:15 PM on 12/09/2010
I get the civil rights argument, but doesn't the military have final say about who gets in and who stays in for their own reasons that have to do with combat details?
HoosierInMaryland
HuffPo says my 'micro-bio is empty'
10:09 PM on 12/09/2010
No.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Dosadi
Political agnostic
10:15 PM on 12/09/2010
Yes they do but gay men have never presented a problem as far as combat readiness goes. All of the armies that fight alongside us have gay soldiers participating. The combat argument is not valid for gay men, it does not even make a strong case for having women on the front lines. i have seen plenty of tough women but that is besides the point.  Our military has a multitude of positions and testosterone levels are not used to decide who does what.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Orcas Island
Speak the truth and ride a fast horse.
08:45 PM on 12/09/2010
"Senate Republicans, who are keen to turn this into a political charade, can't stop reform."

Agreed. And the Senate Republicans are a political charade as well.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cydRN
08:33 PM on 12/09/2010
This is a non-issue for most of us. Anyone willing to put their life of the line, and their families through the hell of having a service member fighting over-seas, deserves the full support of every American. Washington needs to get out of the way on this one.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Vincent Gormley
Artist, activist, volunteer, compassion lives
08:25 PM on 12/09/2010
I would think that as Commander-in-Chief and a constitutional lawyer, the President could order all military branches not to enforce a law that we already know is unconstitutional. But we know he has failed to recognize the reality of his role and his obligation to these brave men and women.
HoosierInMaryland
HuffPo says my 'micro-bio is empty'
10:08 PM on 12/09/2010
The President's role and obligation is to uphold ALL laws that are law. Unless and until a court rules a law UNConsititutional, it is the President's role and obligation to uphold that law.

As to the appeal of the District Court's ruling, if the appeal had been to another Circuit Court, I wonder if the ruling would have been appealed. Even then, it would have been difficult to use a District Court's ruling as precedent, and thus I can intellectually understand the appeal.
10:47 PM on 12/09/2010
"The President'­s role and obligation is to uphold ALL laws that are law. Unless and until a court rules a law UNConsitit­utional, it is the President'­s role and obligation to uphold that law."

The law has been ruled unconstitutional. Filing an appeal to uphold a law that both he and the courts agree is wrong, goes WAY beyond the scope of his duty. If he's against DADT, he should have agreed with the court and let the ruling stand. It would then have been up to a Democratic majority in Congress to decide whether to file an appeal themselves.

And is anyone else outraged that, rather then being defeated in an actual vote, we are being defeated by preventing the vote in the first place?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Dosadi
Political agnostic
10:16 PM on 12/09/2010
That is exactly what the GOP wants him to do.  That would enable them to attack the decision an a myriad of points.  No, congress has to make it law, then and only then can it be valid.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
purplet
12:46 AM on 12/10/2010
exactly- If you use the courts ruling DADT can be reinstated-
08:14 PM on 12/09/2010
It will probably be declared unconstitutional by the courts pretty soon, now.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RM Greer
09:07 PM on 12/09/2010
I can't be sure of that. I'm actually hoping it never makes it to the SCOTUS. Some very vindictive old men (I should talk) on that body.
HoosierInMaryland
HuffPo says my 'micro-bio is empty'
10:04 PM on 12/09/2010
The case needs to:
1. Be heard by the 9th Circuit;
2. The 9th has to issue its ruling;
3. The losing party has to appeal to SCOTUS;
4. SCOTUS needs to accept the case.

At THAT time, the DADT case makes it to SCOTUS, but NOT before.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Dosadi
Political agnostic
10:17 PM on 12/09/2010
This is a congressional issue.  Only congress can make the laws not the courts.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Flip75
What's wrong with my micro-bio?
11:49 AM on 12/10/2010
Checks and balances - Congress has made an unconstitutional law, so it is the court's obligation to correct that mistake.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Chucktheman
08:10 PM on 12/09/2010
Im still waiting for the New Republican Party to be on the right side of any issue.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DarianSentient
Omnium Bonum Est
11:41 PM on 12/09/2010
Indeed, instead of simply perpetrating caustic indifference under the guise of law. Honestly, how (supposedly) Christian people can vote for politicians who would rather be CORRECT than do GOOD is beyond my ability to conceive rationally.

...Without invoking one HELL of a lot of cynicism regarding the practitioners of religion.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
purplet
12:48 AM on 12/10/2010
If President Obama said he was in favor of DADT maybe the Repubs would overturn it- When it is overturned they will take credit for it-
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeff Rosenbury
07:54 PM on 12/09/2010
Is this a rejection of DADT? It looked like a party line vote with the Republicans voting against it like they did everything else for the past two years.

Perhaps there will be an opportunity next year when the congress starts compromising. Since DADT proponents vote nearly straight Democratic concessions will need to be made in other areas. I can almost smell the pork.
09:40 PM on 12/09/2010
I wouldn't worry. Democrats would never actually trade off anything for gay civil rights. They'll only act if it's convenient, and it won't be.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
purplet
12:49 AM on 12/10/2010
not true- That added this to a major bill- and were allowing the Republicans 10 amendments-
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MrsGreebers
09:09 AM on 12/10/2010
I think this vote is about holding it hostage over the tax deal.