Gay Rights March on Washington, October 11

Photo courtesy of
‘Marriage Is a Civil Right’
courtesy of ‘M.V. Jantzen’

Harvey Milk-protege Cleve Jones is planning a march on Washington for gay rights on October 11th, National Coming Out Day.

While I wish Jones well, and suppose that a national day of protest in DC would be a good rallying point/photo op for gay rights supporters, I’m also kind of shrugging my shoulders. I mean, look how successful the ANSWER, Code PINK, and March for Life protests have been. (That was sarcasm, in case you couldn’t tell.)

But in any case, I’m confident that the home of the Dupont Circle drag races and Mid-Atlantic Leather Weekend will give our protesting guests a warm welcome, no matter how ministers from Maryland feel about them.

Tiffany Baxendell Bridge is an Internet enthusiast and an incurable smartass. When not heckling the neighborhood political scene on Twitter, she can be found goofing off with her ukulele, Bollywood dancing, or obsessing about cult TV. She is That Woman With the Baby In the Bar.

Tiffany lives in Brookland with her husband Tom, son Charlie, and two high-maintenance cats. Read why Tiffany loves DC.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Flickr 

7 thoughts on “Gay Rights March on Washington, October 11

  1. I think that ‘shoulder shrugging’ proves that many Americans are indifferent to what equality and civil rights really mean. I guess it is easy to be indifferent when one’s race, gender or sexual orientation is not been discriminated against to…

  2. I think you misunderstand. I’m not shoulder-shrugging at the cause, movement, etc. I’m shoulder-shrugging because it seems like the only people who think marching on Washington accomplishes anything are people who have not actually spent any time in Washington.

  3. Oh I don’t know. Publicity is good. Getting 250,000 or 500,000 people to jam the mall might send a small message. It could energize the movement, give us all a rallying point. The fight has been fragmented…this state, that state…a win here a loss there, a win overturned somewhere else.

    It might be nice to shake things up a little.

    We nationalize everything else these days, how about we nationalize the discussion. Why is one state required to accept another state’s driver’s license but not their wedding license? I like to hear the feds address that little dichotomy.

    2 cents in, no change required. :)

  4. It’s called the “Full Faith and Credit” clause, and there’s plenty of reason to think it applies to gay marriage, and that the Federal Defense of Marriage Act is therefore unconstitutional, as well as various state mini-DOMAs, but no one has managed to get a challenge all the way to SCOTUS about it yet.

    Publicity is good. Lawyers are better.

  5. I was recently discussing this with a colleague, and after our conversation, I would argue that lawyers are good, but legislation is better. A judicial ruling can be a quick fix to problems like this, but they don’t address society and public opinion. I don’t in any way believe in the tyranny of the majority, but at least if something is legislated into law instead of forced through the judicial system, people seem to be less hostile. Roe v. Wade was over 35 years ago, yet the debate about abortion is still going on.

    Don’t get me wrong, as a gay man in a long-term relationship who very much wants the ability to get married some day, full marriage rights can’t come quickly enough. However, we’re going to continue to have painful, divisive battles until public opinion sways further in our favor. It will happen…time is on our side. Having our rights recognized and legislated by our elected officials will, ultimately, set an example that can go a long way toward swaying public opinion.

    That said, I intend to be out there on the Mall on October 11.

  6. I completely agree with Kirk and Adam. After all, change is created through social movement-like processes by creating awareness and influencing. It provokes lawyers and politicians to take actions with subsequent changes in legislation. Therefore, to underestimate the power of a group of people committed to change the nation is not acceptable in my book.