The results in Wisconsin are particularly significant. At the same time as electing the nation’s first LGBT senator, Wisconsin voters elected a solid Republican majority in the state House and state Senate. The outcome testifies to significant bi-partisan support for LGBT equality. It also suggests that Republican Party is out of step with its supporters on this issue.

This incident should make two points clear.

First, most people, even academics who should know better, are eager to suppress freedom of expression when it makes them uncomfortable. Gallaudet University’s action in seeking to deny Dr. Angela McCaskill the free expression of her backward beliefs is not surprising, but it is sad.  Second, Dr. McCaskill signed the anti-gay petition in church. The LGBT community should understand that organized religion is their worst enemy. Religion is most often a simply a rationalization for self righteousness and a pretext for hatred and cruelty.

It seems to me that Clement’s argument that “gays and lesbians have a proven ability to get the attention of [some] legislators” does not seem relevant to the factors that should prompt heightened scrutiny, as you have defined it. First being gay is, in fact, “unchangeable and unrelated to a person’s ability to perform or contribute to society.” Second, on the face of it, gays have “a level of political powerlessness,” because it is the majority party in the House that is arguing the case advocating DOMA. Finally, gays, like blacks, have “a history of discrimination.” Blacks also do not have trouble getting the attention of some legislators, but I assume the discrimination cases are still subject to strict scrutiny. That makes Clement’s argument sound either willfully deceptive or delusional.  Thanks for your cogent account of this issue.

Oh my, today must be a reactionary day. What color is a chameleon, really?

Chief Justice Roberts appears to have matured into someone who is more concerned about the historical reputation of his court than he is about loyalty to his former masters. He seems keen to avoid the charge that the Court is just a servant of the right wing. Postponing the “marriage” cases until after the election is a welcome move in that direction. However, unless all the Catholic justices recuse themselves, I do not think we can expect any thoughtful, objective decisions from the Court’s activist, reactionary majority.

Unlike Mitt Romney, it seems that the President knows that the basic principle of public discourse is the same as the most basic principle of medical treatment: “First, do no harm.”

Religious fanaticism, even the LGBT type is creepy to watch.

Romney wants to campaign on the economy. The problem with appealing to the Family Research Council is that even if they had their way and all homosexuals were hanged and women were forced to bear even rapists’ children, it would not at all benefit the economy.

Let us be clear. These people died because of religious fanaticism, of which Muslim countries have more than their share. Fanaticism is endemic in these countries, not because the Koran promotes violence more fervently than does the Bible, but because these Muslim countries are just emerging from the Middle Ages.
Islam has no tradition of the separation of church and state. Furthermore, Muslims hold that the Koran was not merely inspired by God, but was dictated word-for-word to the Prophet. Thus there can be no modern interpretation of Islam.
It follows that Muslim countries can have no tradition of civil liberties. The mass of people in Muslim states cannot imagine that the U.S. has no government censorship apparatus to prevent its citizens from free expression. Islam is not incompatible with democracy, but it is incompatible with civil liberties. It is therefore a regrettable fact that supporting pro-democracy movements in Muslim countries is misguided and tantamount to nurturing extremism.

The DNC did not have its conversion experience until the poll numbers reached the tipping point where supporting gay marriage would to more good than harm.