Asterisk

There are always unforeseen effects of broad policies, and DOMA is certainly no exception. Today Genia at Sisters Talk discovered one of those effects.

As a sidenote, I asked the clerk, “Does the Y allow same-sex domestic partners to take advantage of the family membership?” The clerk responded with, “No. We only allow a mom-and-dad household to use the family membership because that’s what a family is: a mom, a dad, and their children.”

Since Genia is a fabulous lesbian, she took the initiative and called YMCA headquarters and talked to Mike Ace, the Executive Director.

Mr. Ace apologized profusely and stated that he was sure the clerk never intended to offend me and that she was most likely only doing her job. Since the YMCA is federally funded 501(c)(3) organization, they are obligated to define family the way the federal government defines a family. Any federal funds the YMCA receives cannot be used to provide funding to non-traditional families not officially recognized by the federal government.

…at which point we return to DOMA. You guessed it, YMCA policy is governed by the definition found in DOMA. And since DOMA defines the word “marriage” as opposite gendered, the word “family”, as defined by the YMCA, necessarily excludes same gender families. (Note that there is a separate designation for single-parent families as well.)

I did a little math based on the monthly rates published by the YMCA, and the LGBT Penalty is a bit larger than I expected.

A family (mother, father, kids under 21) costs $62/month. For a same-gender family to get the same plan, they would have to apply for Single Parent Family ($50.75/month) and one adult ($41.75/month), totaling $92.50/month with a difference of $30.50 every month.

The LGBT Penalty comes to $366 every year. Just because the parents are of the same gender.

The good news is that Mr. Ace seems to be aware of the issue and working to correct it.

Mr. Ace informed me that even though the federal government does not allow their organization to use federal funds to provide discounted membership rates to same-sex couples, the organization has been discussing various ways to address the issue. One possible solution (and Mr. Ace did not make any promises about this) was to push some of the organization’s private funds over so they can be used to help same-sex couples offset the cost of their membership. Other non-traditional families (like unmarried couples living with children, grandparents raising children, and divorced couples still living together) will also be allowed to use private funds to help offset the cost of their membership.

Mr. Ace made it very clear that this has been an issue the YMCA has been addressing for a little while now. He also stated that all the Executive Directors for Wisconsin YMCAs will be meeting soon and the topic of non-traditional families is on the agenda. His final comment was, “How the YMCA views families is changing, but that change is coming slowly.”

YMCA, that sounds like a good plan until DOMA is repealed. Seriously, haven’t The Gays saved you a FORTUNE in publicity costs?

"It's expensive to stay at the Y-M-C-A!"

h/t to Thomas Waters

Yesterday we looked at the case of Todd Belok, the gay George Washington University freshman who was removed from the Navy ROTC just months after joining. Today, we’ll head westward to Topeka, Kansas where Iraq war veteran Amy Brian was removed not because anyone in the military had a problem with her, but because a civilian did.

"My close friends knew I was gay."

Amy was a member of the Kansas National Guard Reserve for a total of nine years, first from 1991-1994, then re-enlisting in 2003. In 2004 she shipped out to Iraq.

Brian worked 12-hour shifts on a vehicle maintenance crew. Later, she was assigned to narrate award ceremonies, write evaluations and perform office work. She did not see combat, but she did see Iraqi children in the camp hospital being treated for injuries that included missing limbs from roadside bombs.

According to Amy, everyone knew she was a lesbian when she was in Iraq. It was an open secret, one that nobody seemed to have a problem with. Nobody, that is, until three years after she returned home in 2005.

“I’d never really tried to hide my homosexuality to the close people I worked with,” she said. “And they didn’t really seem to care or think any different of it.”

But in August 2008, a Kansas Army National Guard lieutenant informed Brian she was being investigated for homosexual conduct after a female civilian co-worker at the U.S. Property and Fiscal Office said she had seen Brian kissing a woman in the checkout line at a Wal-Mart store.

From the moment the co-worker made her statement, Brian’s performance record and the sacrifices she had made to serve her country in Iraq no longer mattered.

Just so we’re clear: Amy Brian was not outed during her 12+ month stretch in Iraq. She was not outed by military personnel, many of whom already knew that she was a lesbian. She was outed after she returned to Kansas by a co-worker who has a problem with The Homosexuals kissing.

Brian said the effort to remove her from the Guard started with a barrage of anonymous e-mails referencing her sexual orientation and a networking Web site where her photo was posted. The e-mails were sent to her chain of command, including the Kansas Adjutant General’s Office.

According to the Kansas City Star, the person sending the emails was not Amy’s coworker. This was another person whose identity she still doesn’t know.

Watson said the separation process began when Brian waived her right to a board hearing. Maj. Gen. Tod Bunting, the Kansas adjutant general, signed off on the separation in December, and the separation became effective Jan. 13.

Brian received a “general under honorable conditions” discharge, Watson said. As a result, she lost all of her benefits, including educational assistance and discounts.

Maag said Brian was given a low re-entry code, which would make it easier for her to re-enlist in the military if the “don’t ask-don’t tell” policy is changed.

Several things to point out here. First, Amy waived her right to a board hearing, according to the Kansas City Star, to remove the possibility of a dishonorable discharge. Because she was given a general discharge, her master’s degree had to be put on hold.

Again, this had nothing to do with Amy Brian’s service record during her nine years in the Guard. No one has impugned her service, nor have any service personnel objected to her presence in their unit. This has happened wholly and solely because Amy Brian is a lesbian, and an uninvolved anonymous person outside the US Military complained.

I’ll close this post with one more point from Amy Brian, one that proponents of DADT should give some thought.

Most of all, she has had a difficult time rectifying the discharge in her mind. She said she served with heterosexual soldiers who were found guilty of adultery, sexual harassment, and credit card fraud and received disciplinary actions instead of discharges.

She worked with civilians — including her accuser — whose jobs were protected by laws guaranteeing they couldn’t be fired because of their sexual orientation.

Two new victims of the US military’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” law have surfaced recently. I’ll have a post about Lieutenant Amy Brian tomorrow, but today let’s look at the case of 18-year-old Todd Belok.

"I have known I wanted to serve since early high school."

Todd Belok, student at George Washington University and former member of the school’s Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps (NROTC) program, knew that DADT meant he’d have to be officially in the closet while he was at University, but he didn’t count on informants from a frat party where he kissed his boyfriend, who had come to visit GWU for the weekend. Senior Nick Trimis and Freshman Dave Perry decided that they’d rather not have homos in their unit and reported the kiss, ending Belok’s career in the NROTC.

Both Trimis and Perry commented to the school’s newspaper.

“I am not homophobic, I do not dislike gays,” Perry said. “It was just an uncomfortable situation for other midshipmen.”

“I was hoping he would just leave so he could go to OTS (Officer Training School) later,” Perry said. “I wish I had just let it go so Belok would not have gotten kicked out.”

Rough translation: “I’m okay with fags as long as they don’t act like fags. Fuckin’ fags with their fag germs.”

“It was drilled into me for a good 13 weeks that if someone does something wrong you are supposed to say something,” said Trimis, who enlisted in the Marines before coming to GW to finish his education. “There are certain rules in the military and when you tell, this is the way it plays out, but it is unfortunate.”

One wonders whether Mr. Trimis reported the underage drinking occurring at this frat party. Even though it may not have been hurting anybody, rules are rules, you know. And that’s without even getting to the hooking up that was no doubt occurring. Mr. Trimis is a Mormon, so one would assume that he took umbrage to the straight couples getting it on.

Interesting wrinkle in the case of Todd Belok: Though the US Navy and NROTC actively discriminate against gay men and women, George Washington University has a policy that clearly bars such discrimination.

The University’s policy, however, states any group using its trademarks will not “discriminate against any persons or groups based on age, ancestry, belief, color, creed, disability, national origin, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, veteran status or other illegal basis, or in any other way that would be a violation of University antidiscrimination policies.”

University spokeswoman Tracy Schario said, although the policies clash, the University supports and has upheld the federal law.

“These are very, very sensitive, delicate issues,” Schario said. “Unfortunately the military can discriminate based on sexual orientation.”

Federal law says that any federal money a university receives, for anything from financial aid to research grants, can be withdrawn if the school does not comply with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” or denies ROTC the right to recruit on campus.

Another translation from Matt: “The leadership at George Washington University, including Chairman of the Board W. Russell Ramsey and President Steven Knapp endorse discrimination as long as we get money for it.”

Pathetic.

Todd Belok, meanwhile, continues to hope for a career in the US Navy after DADT is overturned. Until then, he’s decided to work with the SLDN help the cause to repeal the US Government’s active discrimination.

Milk screenwriter Dustin Lance Black was awarded with an Academy Award last night. His acceptance speech was both touching and sincere. I almost cried.

I’m a little late and everybody else has already posted this, but I’m going to do it anyway. So there.

When I was 13 years old, my beautiful mother and my father moved me from a conservative Mormon home in San Antonio, Texas to California and I heard the story of Harvey Milk. And it gave me hope. It gave me the hope to live my life, it gave me the hope to one day live my life openly as who I am and that maybe even I could fall in love and one day get married.

I want to thank my mom who has always loved me for who I am, even when there was pressure not to. But most of all, if Harvey had not been taken from us 30 years ago, I think he’d want me to say to all of the gay and lesbian kids out there tonight who have been told that they are less than by their churches or by the government or by their families that you are beautiful, wonderful creatures of value and that no matter what anyone tells you, God does love you and that very soon, I promise you, you will have equal rights, federally, across this great nation of ours. Thank you, thank you, and thank you God for giving us Harvey Milk.

In a news conference Friday, Utah State Senate President Michael Waddoups (R) announced that State Senator Chris Buttars would be removed from the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Judicial Confirmation Committee, both of which he had formerly chaired. The move was in response to Sen. Buttars anti-gay screed released last week, and was in part intended to be a “freeing mechanism that will allow Sen. Buttars to more fully function…express his freedom of speech rights.” Waddoups went on to say, “We [Utah State Senate Republicans] agree with many of the things that he said.”

Here’s audio of the Sen. Buttars’ comments, followed by Sen. Waddoups’ press conference:

[mp3=http://blog.mattalgren.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/butters_on_gays.mp3]

[mp3=http://blog.mattalgren.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/waddoups-buttars-news-conference.mp3]

I’ve been trying all weekend to figure out how to add anything to the analysis of Jim Burroway and Timothy Kincaid over at the Box Turtle Bulletin. This morning, I decided that I can’t, so I’m going to post a few bits from their articles.

First from Timothy Kincaid:

The Mormons and the Republicans were sure upset that the tape of Buttars was released. But it wasn’t because they find the attitude behind his anti-gay rants to be offensive. They just didn’t like how Buttars’ raw hatred reflected on them.

There was no indication that the leadership of the Mormon Church or the Republican delegation have anything but complete agreement that gays are mean buggers, without morals, looking for superiority, similar to Islamic terrorists, and the greatest threat to America. Which makes me wonder, just what could Buttars have possibly said in his most irrational and ranting moment that would have caused them to say, “I disagree”?

Michael Waddoups cherishes an opportunity to wear lip gloss.

And from Jim Burroway:

So let’s put all this together, shall we?

• The Utah GOP “agree(s) with many of the things he said,” and,
• Now that Waddoups did Buttars the favor of removing him from the committees, it “frees Senator Buttars to feel more at ease in saying how he personally feels.”

So, when the Senate decided to remove Buttars, a former LDS bishop, from two committees, was it a sanction for saying the wrong thing? Or was it a reward that gives Buttars free reign so that he can now tell us what he really thinks? Because I have to tell you, the way Waddoups frames his actions it really sounds more like the latter.

I’m of two minds on this. On the one hand, I’d rather people who harbor such hate and prejudice not be entrusted with so much power, so I think Buttars should step down. On the other, he does have a right to say whatever he wants, just as we have a right to point it out when he’s saying something hateful and prejudiced.