ONE
YEAR
AGO,
I
would
have
opposed
“outing”
gay
congressional
staffers
who
work
for
anti-gay
members
of
Congress.
After
all,
I
was
once
one
of
those
staffers,
working
for
a
Republican,
no
less.
Today,
while
outing
still
gives
me
pause,
I
believe
recent
events
have
made
it
necessary.
When
President
Bush
and
anti-gay
members
of
Congress
teamed
up
with
the
radical
right
to
push
for
passage
of
the
anti-gay
Federal
Marriage
Amendment,
all
the
rules
changed.
The
FMA
is
the
legislative
equivalent
of
a
nuclear
bomb.
Its
passage
will
ban
same-sex
marriage
from
now
till
eternity,
ripping
apart
thousands
of
already-married
gay
couples.
Worse
yet,
the
amendment
is
so
broadly
written
that
it
could
overturn
every
pro-gay
federal,
state
and
local
law,
and
private
industry
policy
in
the
country.
Facing
such
an
unprecedented
threat,
it
is
time
we
considered
an
unprecedented
response.
We
once
laughed
off
the
gay
staffers
who
worked
for
Jesse
Helms
or
Pat
Buchanan.
We
loathed
their
self-loathing,
but
figured
that
for
the
most
part
they
were
hurting
themselves
more
than
us.
In
post-FMA
America,
we
no
longer
have
that
luxury.
President
Bush
and
anti-gay
members
of
Congress
have
declared
war
on
gay
people.
GAY
STAFFERS
WHO
work
for
such
politicians
are
hardly
innocent
bystanders
simply
exercising
their
right
to
free
speech.
They
are
hired
guns
defending
policies
intended
to
destroy
our
relationships.
Such
staffers
are,
at
best,
enemy
combatants;
and
at
worst,
war
criminals.
Those
who
would
choose
to
aid
and
abet
our
enemies
deserve
neither
our
pity
nor
our
protection.
Some
say
that
congressional
staff
members
are
hardly
responsible
for
the
anti-gay
positions
of
their
bosses.
That
is
simply
absurd.
We’re
not
talking
about
young
kids
who
simply
walk
the
dog
or
stuff
the
mail.
There
are
gay
men
and
lesbians
serving
anti-gay
members
in
the
most
senior
levels
of
Congress,
from
chiefs
of
staff
to
press
secretaries
to
lawyers
and
other
senior
advisers.
To
suggest
that
their
role
in
policy-making
is
negligible
is
naïve
or
disingenuous.
It’s
high
time
we
stopped
treating
grown
men
and
women
as
children
who
simply
need
a
hug.
These
people
don’t
need
a
hug;
they
need
a
swift
kick
in
the
ass.
They
are,
for
the
most
part,
well-educated,
highly
paid
adults
who
are
perfectly
aware
of
the
harm
they
are
causing.
Yet
still
they
choose
to
perform
their
roles.
To
suggest
that
all,
or
even
a
majority,
are
closet
cases
living
on
the
fringes
of
gay
life,
and
thus
deserving
of
our
pity,
is
a
fiction.
They
may
work
against
our
civil
rights
by
day,
but
they
surely
enjoy
its
benefits
by
night.
BUT
WHAT
IF
the
marriage
amendment
is
doomed,
as
some
say,
so
no
harm,
no
foul?
That’s
nice,
but
it’s
hardly
a
defense
to
admit
you
tried
to
kill
me,
but
failed.
And
in
any
case,
it’s
not
at
all
clear
that
the
amendment
is
dead.
Only
a
fool
crows
victory
before
the
votes
have
been
counted.
It
would
hardly
be
unprecedented
for
our
“allies”
in
Congress
to
cave
when
faced
with
a
hard-to-oppose
anti-gay
vote.
And
even
if
the
amendment
doesn’t
pass
this
year,
the
gay
marriage
debate
is
hardly
over.
The
debate
has
spurred
the
passage
of
dozens
of
new
anti-gay
laws
across
the
country.
It’s
only
a
matter
of
time
before
the
Defense
of
Marriage
Act
is
declared
unconstitutional,
and
the
issue
is
again
ripe
for
future
congressional
consideration.
When
that
day
comes,
who’s
to
say
the
House
and
Senate
won’t
be
composed
of
a
super-majority
of
anti-gay
Democrats
and
Republicans
—
aided
to
victory
by
their
LGBT
staff
—
willing
to
endorse
what
now
seems
unthinkable?
What
will
outing
really
achieve?
An
outing
campaign
takes
troops
away
from
the
enemy,
teaches
members
of
Congress
and
their
staff
that
there
is
a
price
to
be
paid
for
legislating
“family
values,”
and
ultimately
helps
create
an
environment
in
which
legislative
gay-bashing
and
working
for
the
enemy
is
less
and
less
acceptable.
In
the
end,
LGBT
staffers
working
for
anti-gay
members
of
Congress
ask
of
us
what
they
are
unwilling
to
give
in
return.
They
condemn
the
use
of
their
sexual
orientation
as
a
weapon
while
brandishing
our
own
against
us.
They
demand
their
private
lives
be
protected
and
kept
off
limits
while
helping
their
bosses
turn
our
private
lives
into
criminal
acts.
And
they
ask
us
to
ignore
our
own
self-interest
and
defend
them
with
our
silence,
while
they
refuse
to
consider
anyone’s
well
being
but
their
own.
These
staffers
are
complicit
in
destroying
the
very
people
whose
protection
they
now
demand
as
a
birthright.
I,
for
one,
have
had
enough.
