After Stonewall

On June 28, 1969, New York City police raided a bar called the Stonewall Inn. They attempted to arrest the patrons there not for violence or illicit trafficking or even public drunkenness, but for their existence as gay people. Raids on gay bars and other establishments frequented by sexual minorities became increasingly common during the 1950’s and 60’s, as a conservative America being shaken to its foundations by the civil rights movement and other reforms sought to exert what control it could over a group that still appeared to be powerless. But “Stonewall”, as the event is now know, did not mark a continuation of the injustice and profound humiliation suffered by homosexuals, it marked the beginning of the movement determined to end it. The people at the bar that night resisted police actions, and as the officers began to escalate their use of force, an enraged mob began to riot and demand for them to leave. The situation worsened, and as the ostensible protesters began to chant “We Shall Overcome” and throw objects at the police, riot police were called in to crush the revolt. However, that act of defiance triggered others in New York City, most notably near Christopher Street Square and Greenwich Village, which in turn compelled movements for change in other cities. Within two years, there were gay rights organizations all over the United States, Canada, and Western Europe. In 1973, homosexuality was declassified as a psychological disorder by the American Psychiatric Association, a step toward humanizing people who for so many years were regarded as monsters. In 1978, Harvey Milk became the first openly gay public officeholder in the United States when he won a seat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, only to be martyred the same year by an assassin’s bullet. Just as it seemed the door was finally opening, forces who sought to keep the closet firmly shut began to re-assert themselves.

The history of the gay rights movement in the United States is one of bitter disappointment interrupted briefly by moments of hope. The hope of gays and lesbians around the nation in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s was fiercely tested by the emergence of the AIDS virus, which, in its indiscriminate cruelty, cut short the lives of so many who had fought vigorously for the right simply to live theirs. The rise of the Religious Right and its influence in the ascendant Republican Party cost proposals like AIDS research and hate crimes legislation years as they were defeated in Congress and thousands of people their lives as the federal government turned a blind eye to what at that time was considered a “gay cancer”. President Reagan neglected to mention AIDS, in any capacity, in any circumstance, until 1987, seven years after the crisis began, seven years too late for tens of thousands. The George H. W. Bush Administration offered little better during its brief interregnum, staffed as it was by many former Reagan appointees. But in 1992, with a Democratic victory heralding the end of twelve years of Republican intransigence, hopes began to rise again that America’s laws would reflect the society they governed. Unfortunately, the Clinton years could largely be categorized by the failure of its signature gay-rights initiative: the repeal of the military’s ban on openly gay soldiers. First, it appeared that there would be bold and decisive action (repealing the ban). Next, opposition mounts, and the president caves in (Congress objects). Finally, a compromise is reached that satisfies neither side and mostly delays the issue’s resolution (Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell). This pattern would repeat itself often, and Clinton’s eight years did little to undo the relentless onslaught of right-wing orthodoxy, and in fact set the cause of equality back with the passage of the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 (federal government defines marriage as between a man and a woman). And yet in 2001, the real fun would start.

President George W. Bush, in his proposals, appointments, and speeches, did more to demonize gay people than perhaps any other president in American history. During his tenure, it was the stated strategy of the Republican Party to support constitutional amendments to ban same-sex marriage in the states in order to increase conservative voter turnout, thus electing more Republicans (It is likely that such voters made the difference in Ohio in 2004, deciding the election). The president proposed a Federal Marriage Amendment to ban something on a national level that had been regulated by the states for 200 years, and appointed two Supreme Court justices, John Roberts and Samuel Alito, who are loath to have the federal government protect the rights of anyone besides corporations or torturers. As of 2009, more than forty states have restricted the rights of same-sex couples to legitimize their relationships. The Federal Marriage Amendment failed, but 45 years after the Civil Rights Act was passed, it is still legal to fire someone because they are gay; gay people are still denied access to their loved ones in hospitals because they do not have legally defined relationships; the same is true of joint tax returns, or social security benefits, and in determining fitness for adoption (illegal in five states). President Obama has only been in office for nine months, but it is appropriate to look at what should be done to ensure that a nation founded on the inherent value of every person strives to uphold that ideal. He certainly will not carry out all of his promises, but we should remember, at least, what they are.

The most important law that would benefit gays in this country is the proposed Employment Non-Discrimination Act. It would make it illegal to fire someone on the basis of sexual orientation, and be a federal protection for people who live in states that offer them none. Another law, currently waiting to be signed by the president, is the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Act, which would classify a murder that specifically targets a gay person as a “hate crime” (which carries additional penalties). The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” has been fifteen years in waiting, yet it seems for now that the president is willing to drag his feet while honorable military personnel are discharged because of who they are. And of course, there can never be real equality without legalizing same-sex marriage, and that can’t happen without the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (which actually defended nothing except political careers). More broadly, President Obama must foster an environment of tolerance and fairness, and not be afraid to fight the forces that have impeded progress for so long, so as to facilitate acceptance of people who are no stranger to us than an aunt, or a cousin, or a brother.

A person’s position on whether homosexuality is immoral and by extension their position on gay rights often comes down to whether or not they feel it is a choice. The American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the National Association of Social Workers would tell them it isn’t. Superstition and antiquated hatred would tell them it is. If they are a religious person, who opposes gay rights for religious reasons, it merits asking: Is a line in Leviticus more important than the Sermon on the Mount? Is exclusion the basis of Christianity? And how can our government, barred from making religious considerations and a bastion of secularism, base its decisions on your religious thinking? Surely every person deserves their opportunity to find their own measure of happiness. Surely our vision is not so clouded by fear of those who are different that we cannot see what is right. Surely our great country, whose history is marked by an ever-expanding definition of freedom, would not seek to corrupt that legacy. As the old civil rights axiom goes, “This will not be a good place for any of us to live until it is a good place for all of us to live.”

-Alexander Lyons

http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/relationships/index.html
http://www.hrc.org/issues/hate_crimes.asp
http://www.hrw.org/en/category/topic/lgbt-rights
http://www.amnesty.org/en/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity