Discrimination by Condi forced gay ambassador to quit

darkcrowdarkcrow Posts: 1,102
edited December 2007 in A Moving Train
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/04/michael-guest/

Gay Ambassador Resigns Over State Department’s Discrimination Against Gay And Lesbian Employees
Appointed by President Bush in 2001 to be Ambassador to Romania, Michael Guest was the first publicly gay man to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate to serve as a U.S. Ambassador. Then-Secretary of State Colin Powell explicitly noted the presence of and positively recognized Guest’s same-sex partner, Alex Nevarez, during the swearing-in ceremony. The Human Rights Campaign called Powell’s acknowledgement of Nevarez a “small gesture that spoke volumes.”

But serving as an openly-gay ambassador under the Bush administration proved not to be as pleasant as his swearing-in. Guest retired recently, and at his retirement ceremony, “he did what few people do — displayed uncommon courage and threw a rhetorical hand-grenade into his own party.” The New York Times reports, “Guest took Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (who was not present) to task for failing to treat the partners of gay and lesbian foreign service officers the same as the spouses of heterosexual officers.” Guest said that was the reason for his departure:

“Most departing ambassadors use these events to talk about their successes . . . But I want to talk about my signal failure, the failure that in fact is causing me to leave the career that I love,” said Mr. Guest, 50, whose most recent assignment was dean of the leadership and management school at the Foreign Service Institute, the government’s school for diplomats.

“For the past three years, I’ve urged the Secretary and her senior management team to redress policies that discriminate against gay and lesbian employees. Absolutely nothing has resulted from this. And so I’ve felt compelled to choose between obligations to my partner — who is my family — and service to my country. That anyone should have to make that choice is a stain on the Secretary’s leadership and a shame for this institution and our country,” he said.

“Unlike heterosexual spouses, gay partners are not entitled to State Department-provided security training, free medical care at overseas posts, guaranteed evacuation in case of a medical emergency, transportation to overseas posts, or special living allowances when foreign service officers are assigned to places like Iraq, where diplomatic families are not permitted.”

“This is not about gay rights. … It’s about equal treatment of all employees, all of whom have the same service requirements, the same contractual requirements,” said Guest.

While the Bush administration has previously indicated an unwillingness to outlaw employment discrimination, Guest courageously highlights the fact that the administration is also practicing it.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • 810wmb810wmb Posts: 849
    marriage by law is between a man and a woman

    the guy is a goofball and cut his own throat
    i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    810wmb wrote:
    marriage by law is between a man and a woman

    That's true. The law currently discriminates. Hopefully liberty will prevail at some point, and either the state can get out of the marriage business, or can at least apply it equally to all committed unions. The government should leave the notion of "marriage" to the religionists who can define it any way they and their gods desire. Civil unions should be all that is necessary to establish domestic partnership rights for issues of medical coverage, probate, etc...
    810wmb wrote:
    the guy is a goofball and cut his own throat

    Not sure how someone who is looking for equal treatment under the law qualifies as a goofball, but I wish him good luck. He's got a tough battle no matter which party is in office.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • NMyTreeNMyTree Posts: 2,374
    jeffbr wrote:
    That's true. The law currently discriminates. Hopefully liberty will prevail at some point, and either the state can get out of the marriage business, or can at least apply it equally to all committed unions. The government should leave the notion of "marriage" to the religionists who can define it any way they and their gods desire. Civil unions should be all that is necessary to establish domestic partnership rights for issues of medical coverage, probate, etc...

    Not sure how someone who is looking for equal treatment under the law qualifies as a goofball, but I wish him good luck. He's got a tough battle no matter which party is in office.

    Well said, jeff!!! I agree completely!
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    jeffbr wrote:
    That's true. The law currently discriminates. Hopefully liberty will prevail at some point, and either the state can get out of the marriage business, or can at least apply it equally to all committed unions. The government should leave the notion of "marriage" to the religionists who can define it any way they and their gods desire. Civil unions should be all that is necessary to establish domestic partnership rights for issues of medical coverage, probate, etc...

    Very well said.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • 810wmb810wmb Posts: 849
    jeffbr wrote:
    That's true. The law currently discriminates. Hopefully liberty will prevail at some point, and either the state can get out of the marriage business, or can at least apply it equally to all committed unions. The government should leave the notion of "marriage" to the religionists who can define it any way they and their gods desire. Civil unions should be all that is necessary to establish domestic partnership rights for issues of medical coverage, probate, etc...



    Not sure how someone who is looking for equal treatment under the law qualifies as a goofball, but I wish him good luck. He's got a tough battle no matter which party is in office.

    he's a goofball fighting what he knew he couldn't win...well, he didn't fight he quit.

    so he quits, blames it on condi..he's a chapwearing quitter
    i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
  • was he the ambassador to the Banana Republic?


    sorry, i couldnt resist.
  • 810wmb810wmb Posts: 849
    MrSmith wrote:
    was he the ambassador to the Banana Republic?


    sorry, i couldnt resist.


    BAWHAHAHAHAHAH!
    i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    810wmb wrote:
    marriage by law is between a man and a woman

    the guy is a goofball and cut his own throat

    marriage is a sacred religious ceremony and has no business being regulated or encoded in secular law.
  • 810wmb810wmb Posts: 849
    marriage is a sacred religious ceremony and has no business being regulated or encoded in secular law.

    i'm not arguing all that crap

    the guy knew what the deal was going in and coming out (not much of a pun intended)

    to say he quit because of that is just queen drama
    i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    810wmb wrote:
    i'm not arguing all that crap

    the guy knew what the deal was going in and coming out (not much of a pun intended)

    to say he quit because of that is just queen drama

    so when jim crow laws were still going in the south, the negroes should have "known what the deal was" and just left the south and not have stirred up so much drama about the unfairness of the system?
  • 810wmb810wmb Posts: 849
    so when jim crow laws were still going in the south, the negroes should have "known what the deal was" and just left the south and not have stirred up so much drama about the unfairness of the system?

    awww crap man, come on

    the dude knew - i'm not saying shit about what he should or should not do.

    he knew the law, how the system worked that he was employed under.

    so did he take the job to work as the ambassador or as a gay rights advocate?

    i don't care what the guy sticks in his ass, he should have known better than to stick this in his pipe
    i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    810wmb wrote:
    awww crap man, come on

    the dude knew - i'm not saying shit about what he should or should not do.

    he knew the law, how the system worked that he was employed under.

    so did he take the job to work as the ambassador or as a gay rights advocate?

    i don't care what the guy sticks in his ass, he should have known better than to stick this in his pipe

    why can't he do both? maybe he took the job thinking he could help make some changes, but realized it wasn't working with this admin so he walked and went public? what's so bad about that? seems perfectly reasonable to me.
  • 810wmb810wmb Posts: 849
    why can't he do both? maybe he took the job thinking he could help make some changes, but realized it wasn't working with this admin so he walked and went public? what's so bad about that? seems perfectly reasonable to me.

    nothing is wrong with it - he should have said that instead of blaming condi rice

    by the way, it wouldn't have worked for any admin

    oh yeah - on the going public - everyone knows this! there is nothing to go public about..just a little grandstanding to try to make a point or cast some shit bush's way
    i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    810wmb wrote:
    nothing is wrong with it - he should have said that instead of blaming condi rice

    by the way, it wouldn't have worked for any admin

    she's his boss. who else is he going to call on it? when something is wrong in the business, who do you blame if not management?
  • 810wmb810wmb Posts: 849
    she's his boss. who else is he going to call on it? when something is wrong in the business, who do you blame if not management?

    he can fucking complain all he wants - did he think he was gonna talk to condi rice and have all this gay marriage stuff turned around?

    if he's that fucking dumb he should have hung himself in front of everyone after his stupid speech
    i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
  • Kel VarnsenKel Varnsen Posts: 1,952
    Just curious, do same-sex partners of people working for any other part of the US federal government get spousal benefits? I don't have any problem with this guy speaking out about this issue, but I am not exactly sure why this guy thought his partner would get benefits when Joe Mailman's partner doesn't get any benefits either. I do commend him for feeling strong enough about the issue though to resign over it. Ambassadorship is a pretty good job, so willing to give it up over principles that you believe in (especially ones that aren't going to change any time soon) is pretty commendable.
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    810wmb wrote:
    he can fucking complain all he wants - did he think he was gonna talk to condi rice and have all this gay marriage stuff turned around?

    if he's that fucking dumb he should have hung himself in front of everyone after his stupid speech

    she has the power to do that, i believe.
Sign In or Register to comment.