Connect with us

National

Anti-gay military bill introduced in U.S. House

Reaffirms troops won’t be punished for beliefs concerning sexuality

Published

on

Republican Congressman Tim Huelskamp of Kansas
Republican Congressman Tim Huelskamp of Kansas

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) introduced an anti-gay military bill in the U.S. House. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

A Kansas Republican is leading an effort to protect anti-gay service members and to prohibit same-sex couples from marrying on military installations.

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas), who was elected during the Tea Party wave of 2010, introduced legislation known as the Military Religious Freedom Protection Act, or H.R. 914, on Thursday.

The legislation has two parts. The first states that the religious and moral beliefs of service members and military chaplains concerning human sexuality won’t be the basis of adverse personnel action or discrimination in the armed forces. The section section states chaplains may not be forced to perform a rite that is contradictory to their religious teachings, which would include same-sex marriages.

The second section states that a military base can’t be used for any marriage or marriage-like ceremony other than the union of one man, one woman.

Huelskamp is known for pushing anti-gay legislation in the House. Last year, on the same day that President Obama endorsed marriage equality, Huelskamp amended major funding legislation on the House floor to reaffirm the Defense of Marriage Act.

Just last month, Huelskamp criticized “employment rules” that would “specifically and selectively reward homosexual behavior” during an interview on an anti-gay radio show, identifying it as a “radical” idea that most Americans don’t support — despite polling showing the vast majority of people support such protections.

In addition to Huelskamp, the legislation has six co-sponsors who are a rogue’s gallery of anti-gay House members: Reps. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.), Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Steve King (R-Iowa), Doug LaMalfa (R-Calif.) and Tim Walberg (R-Mich.). King has previously amended legislation on the House floor to reaffirm DOMA with the intent of banning same-sex marriages on military bases.

The legislation is similar to the anti-gay language inserted to the Fiscal Year 2013 Defense Authorization Act by former congressman and U.S. Senate candidate W. Todd Akin, which includes a conscience provision that — while watered-down from its original language — stated no service member will be punished for his or her religious beliefs.

House Republicans also included in their version of the bill language that would have prohibited same-sex weddings on military bases, but that was removed in conference committee.

President Obama signed the bill into law, but called that conscience language “an unnecessary and ill-advised provision” and gave assurances it “will not alter” the rights of gay service members because it was in line with existing policy regarding the religious beliefs of troops.

It remains to be seen what action Hueslkamp is planning for the legislation, such as whether he’ll amend the upcoming defense authorization bill to include the measure. His office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

LGBT advocates dismissed the anti-gay legislation as an attempt to revisit the debate on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Michael Cole-Schwartz, spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, was among those rejecting the measure.

“This is yet another attempt by a handful of members fixated on revisiting a closed debate,” Cole-Schwartz said. “They lost on DADT repeal so now they have to cook up imaginary problems to play to a dwindling right-wing base.”

Zeke Stokes, a spokesperson for the LGBT military group OutServe-SLDN, had similar thoughts on the legislation.

“This is just more of the same from a dwindling number of folks on Capitol Hill who wish to cling to the discrimination of the past, rather than embrace the journey toward full equality and fairness that we have embarked upon as a nation,” Stokes said. “Simply put, this bill seeks to address a problem that doesn’t exist.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

New York

Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade

One of the victims remains in critical condition

Published

on

The Stonewall National Memorial in New York on June 19, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.

According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.

The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.

The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.

In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.

The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.

New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.

“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”

Continue Reading

New York

Zohran Mamdani participates in NYC Pride parade

Mayoral candidate has detailed LGBTQ rights platform

Published

on

NYC mayoral candidate and New York State Assembly member Zohran Mamdani (Screen capture: NBC News/YouTube)

Zohran Mamdani, the candidate for mayor of New York City who pulled a surprise victory in the primary contest last week, walked in the city’s Pride parade on Sunday.

The Democratic Socialist and New York State Assembly member published photos on social media with New York Attorney General Letitia James, telling followers it was “a joy to march in NYC Pride with the people’s champ” and to “see so many friends on this gorgeous day.”

“Happy Pride NYC,” he wrote, adding a rainbow emoji.

Mamdani’s platform includes a detailed plan for LGBTQ people who “across the United States are facing an increasingly hostile political environment.”

His campaign website explains: “New York City must be a refuge for LGBTQIA+ people, but private institutions in our own city have already started capitulating to Trump’s assault on trans rights.

“Meanwhile, the cost of living crisis confronting working class people across the city hits the LGBTQIA+ community particularly hard, with higher rates of unemployment and homelessness than the rest of the city.”

“The Mamdani administration will protect LGBTQIA+ New Yorkers by expanding and protecting gender-affirming care citywide, making NYC an LGBTQIA+ sanctuary city, and creating the Office of LGBTQIA+ Affairs.”

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court upholds ACA rule that makes PrEP, other preventative care free

Liberal justices joined three conservatives in majority opinion

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court as composed June 30, 2022, to present. Front row, left to right: Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Back row, left to right: Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Photo Credit: Fred Schilling, the U.S. Supreme Court)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday upheld a portion of the Affordable Care Act requiring private health insurers to cover the cost of preventative care including PrEP, which significantly reduces the risk of transmitting HIV.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion in the case, Kennedy v. Braidwood Management. He was joined by two conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, along with the three liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown-Jackson.

The court’s decision rejected the plaintiffs’ challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s reliance on the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force to “unilaterally” determine which types of care and services must be covered by payors without cost-sharing.

An independent all-volunteer panel of nationally recognized experts in prevention and primary care, the 16 task force members are selected by the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to serve four-year terms.

They are responsible for evaluating the efficacy of counseling, screenings for diseases like cancer and diabetes, and preventative medicines — like Truvada for PrEP, drugs to reduce heart disease and strokes, and eye ointment for newborns to prevent infections.

Parties bringing the challenge objected especially to the mandatory coverage of PrEP, with some arguing the drugs would “encourage and facilitate homosexual behavior” against their religious beliefs.

Continue Reading

Popular