As President Obama gears up for reelection, his administration has begun actively courting the LGBT vote by touting his accomplishments for the community. And while Obama has started the process of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, stopped defending the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, and taken important steps to prevent discrimination of LGBT people in the federal government, he has fallen short of full equality. In fact, Obama’s cautious and hesitant political manner has — at times — left LGBT advocates to push him toward advancing important legislative initiatives.

This afternoon, the Washington Blade published “A Pride Wish List For Obama,” in which LGBT leaders spell out what the administration could and should be doing better to support the community. The list includes the following:

- END JOB DISCRIMINATION: The president could issue an executive order prohibiting the federal government from contracting with companies that don’t have LGBT-inclusive non-discrimination policies.

- CERTIFY REPEAL OF DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL: It’s been six months since Obama signed the repeal of DADT became law, but the repeal has not yet been certified.

- SUPPORT MARRIAGE EQUALITY: Though he supported full marriage equality in 1996, the president has been “wrestling” with the issue in recent years. Speaking out in favor of full equality as president would be a big boost of support for the many states still struggling to resist oppression.

- PROTECT BI-NATIONAL COUPLES: A moratorium on deportations of foreign nationals in same-sex marriages would protect those couples from being separated.

- SUPPORT ANTI-BULLYING LEGISLATION: Though the White House has taken steps to support anti-bullying initiatives, Obama has been mum on the Safe Schools Improvement Act and Student Non-Discrimination Act that have been introduced in Congress.

This list is just a small sampling of the many changes the president could make without approval from Congress. Act On Principles documents the New Beginning Initiative Redux, a list of about 90 policy recommendations that the administration could have started enacting on its very first day of office to support the LGBT community. Most of the list remains incomplete.

Focus on the Family (FOTF) President Jim Daly is having trouble making up his mind on the conservative fight for same-sex marriage. Last month he conceded that opponents of equality had lost, then reversed his concession in two columns that same week. Now, he has conceded again. Follow the flips and flops as Daly tries to balance being rational and appeasing the anti-gay FOTF members he serves:

- 5/23 – “We Probably Lost”: “We’re losing on that one, especially among the 20- and 30-somethings: 65 to 70 percent of them favor same-sex marriage. I don’t know if that’s going to change with a little more age — demographers would say probably not. We’ve probably lost that.”

- 5/25 – “No White Flag”: “So, let me be clear: I am not waving a white flag. I’m not even contemplating picking one up. There is still much work to be done by those of us in the faith community to advocate for marriage as it has been defined, and practiced, by every civilized society for millennia.”

- 6/9 – “Yeah, It’s Over”: “What I was trying to say in that interview, when the question was asked about the younger generation, is you can’t deny the stats. So when you’re looking at that and they’re saying 65 to 70 percent of those under 40 or 35 – I can’t remember exactly – support same-sex marriage, if that does not change within that community as they become 50 or 60, yeah it’s over.”

It looks like Daly finally settled back on the most sensible answer. As we reported earlier today, younger people support marriage equality at strikingly higher rates than their elders. Still, it’s unlikely Focus is going to stop bullying the LGBT community, even if their leader has the focus to see how out of touch such beliefs are.

Yesterday, Massachusetts’ Judiciary Committee considered legislation “outlawing transgender discrimination in employment, housing, education, credit, and access to public accommodations. The bills also would add offenses involving gender identity and expression to the state’s list of hate crimes.”

While some opponents warned that the bills would lead to sexual assaults in bathrooms, undermine morality, harm children, and overburden state residents, others demonstrated their unfamiliarity with transgender issues entirely. In the clip below, Massachusetts Rep. Sheila Harrington (R) asks two transgender witnesses if transgender people are able to change their genders on a “day-to-day basis”:

HARRINGTON: “I’m not sure if this means that on a day-to-day basis you could be appearing as a woman or appearing as a man, but in your own identity and your own feeling of self you would be the other gender….”

GUNNER SCOTT (Dir. of the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition): “I think one thing to understand is that transgender people, first many of us struggle with this for many years and at the end of the day we want to blend in and not stand out. As somebody who identifies as a man, presents as a man, according to my birth certificate it still says I’m female. And so what the opponents would say is that someone like me who looks male should be going into the women’s room. And I know that that’s wrong because I would make women uncomfortable.”

Watch it:

Four Massachusetts cities have already passed protections on the basis of gender identity or expression. If the legislature approves the measures, the Bay State will join “15 other states, including every other New England state except New Hampshire, in outlawing transgender discrimination.” Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), “Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, U.S. Sen. John Kerry, and Gov. Deval Patrick all submitted written testimony in support of the bill.” Attorney General Martha Coakley testified in favor of the legislation.

The Toronto Police have no problems supporting the pride parade there. This photo is from 2005.

As evidenced by the accidentally printed AP article yesterday, news media often attempt to write  ”balanced” pieces about LGBT issues that ultimately become platforms for homophobic sentiment. Bil Browning calls out the latest example from Indiana, where the local Fox affiliate is trying to create a controversy out of nothing.

Yesterday, Fox 59 ran a story about the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department’s decision to participate in the city’s LGBT pride parade this weekend. Reporter Heather MacWilliams noted that it’s the first time the police department has taken part in the celebration and quoted a police spokesperson who told her she did not anticipate any controversy. The police might very well have been right, except that MacWilliams went out of her way to include a comment from Ryan McCann, head of Indiana’s most prominent anti-gay organization, the Indiana Family Institute:

But the fact that the officers will be participating while on the clock is troubling some.  ”The majority of Hoosiers and probably the majority of folks in Indianapolis if they actually went to the Gay Pride Parade and see the activities that goes on there would be shocked to see our taxpayer dollars going to have our men and women in uniform through the police and fire department march in that kind of a parade,” says Ryan McCann of The Indiana Family Institute.

McCann says our officers are hired to protect and serve, not to endorse an alternative lifestyle.”They don’t sign up for gay pride parades and all that entails with men in police uniforms being howled at by homosexuals.”

Is McCann the only person they could find to represent the “some” who find this non-story “troubling?” Does the top opponent of equality really represent “the majority of Hoosiers?” McCann surely didn’t hesitate to use the opportunity to demonize the LGBT community (“shocked” by the “activities” in “that kind of a parade”) and victimize the police officers.

Still, the LGBT Hoosiers could use the good news, considering a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage got its first legislative approval earlier this year. Now, a simple show of support against violence has been twisted into an unnecessary controversy — not exactly balanced reporting.

The Public Religion Research Institute has released new poll showing that a majority of Americans support abortion rights and same-sex marriage, but the two “values” are no longer linked in voters’ minds and are not part of a larger “values” agenda:

– Roughly the same percentage of Americans said abortion should be legal in all or most cases in 1999 (57 percent) as say this today (56 percent).

– In contrast, the percentage of Americans who said marriages between same-sex couples should be recognized by the law as valid has grown 18 points over this same period, from 35 percent in 1999 to 53 percent in 2011.

Look:

The poll also reported a “dramatic difference” in how different generations of Americans viewed same-sex marriage, even though no such distinction existed on the abortion issue. Young people are much less likely to see gay behavior as morally wrong and are much more likely to support same-sex unions:

Strong majorities of Americans also “believe it is possible to disagree with the teachings of their religion on the issue of abortion (72 percent) or homosexuality (63 percent) and still be considered a person of good standing in their faith.”

Jim Domen celebrating the passage of Prop 8 (i.e. victory at enforcing his own oppression).

Pastor Jim Domen, a self-avowed “ex-gay” (or, as the American Family Association describes him, a pastor “rescued from the homosexual lifestyle), is upset that cities are celebrating LGBT Pride month:

DOMEN: I’m ex-gay. And so when I hear people celebrating, ‘Oh, we’re doing the LGBT month,’ and those types of celebrations, I want to ask the question: ‘Well, when does the state, when does the county of Los Angeles respect those who are ex-gay? When do we celebrate ex-gay month?’ We’ve gone down this road — it’s not good — and we’ve changed our lives. When does the state recognize that?

Rather than just leave the absurdity of his comment to speak for itself, here are a few distinctions between celebrating LGBT Pride and celebrating the ex-gay agenda:

- AFFIRMATION vs. REPRESSION: Trite as it may sound, the quote “We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it” speaks to self-empowerment. LGBT pride is a celebration of identity in spite of stigma, an affirmation of who people really are. An ex-gay identity is the complete opposite! Why should dangerous and unfounded psychological repression be celebrated, particularly when it reinforces the very stigma LGBT Pride stands against?

- SCIENCE vs. DELUSION: More to the point, decades of psychological research have shown that sexual orientation is natural and enduring. Pride is about authenticity and breaking barriers of expression. The ex-gay agenda is founded in junk science with religious bias and has been found to be ineffective and harmful. The two could not be any different.

- FREEDOM vs. SHACKLES: Ex-gay therapy is designed around conformity to gender norms and a very conservative Christian morality. It exerts control over body, mind, and relationships in severely limiting ways. It is a violent form of oppression that becomes repression when people like Domen buy into it. LGBT Pride evolved from a history of standing up against oppression — against police raids and religious condemnation — to celebrate individual uniqueness and liberation.

Domen may have bought into the complex that he is the victim, but his mistake is that he is the willing victim of oppression by conservatives, not of the gay agenda condemning his ex-gay identity. If anything, the LGBT community would offer him sympathy — if, of course, he weren’t standing alongside opponents of equality.

Other pride celebrations not being considered: Foot-Binding Pride Month, Heaven’s Gate Awareness Month, and Latinos for English-Only Pride Month.