We make a particular effort to select a mixture of individuals from within the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender rubric. As I looked over the final list, however—from heroic New York firefighter Tom Ryan to Ellen and Melissa—I realized that there were no individuals from the latest group to seek shelter under our umbrella: the questioning. The main reason for this is that the category seems so newly affixed to the banner that the ranks of the openly questioning are not sufficient from which to cull honorees.

But there are also deeper reasons for the absence: I’m not sure that the questioning, a category that has been added to a growing number of gay-related student groups and a few nonprofit organizations as well, belongs there.

As I say that, I can just hear the proponents of the questioning label reply, Here we go again. Just as bisexuals and the transgendered were granted inclusion at the table only after some initial resistance, so now we are giving the exclusionary cold shoulder to another worthy category. But resistance to the addition of the questioning, I would argue, isn’t about excluding anyone from the discussion. I’d wager that almost no group devoted to gays would physically or psychologically shut out anyone who attends a meeting or who needs support—as long as these individuals show up with open minds and hearts.

The debate over the questioning should involve more pressing questions. By making our collective definition so capacious, are we in danger of diluting the image we present to the world when we ask to be considered a bloc in debates about civil, legal, and economic rights? Isn’t the very word questioning antithetical to the basis of our movement: the proud assertion of an affirmed and accepted identity—even when the identity itself, in the case of being bisexual or transgendered, may include the idea of fluidity within it?

While I think arguments against the questioning are pretty persuasive, I also understand those who applaud this new move for expansion. These supporters tend to be what a philosopher would call “nonessentialists.” They align themselves with anyone who looks at sexuality from a nonbinary, impermanent perspective. They would not object if the questioning turned out to be the straw that broke the GLBT back. They see no contradiction between the view of sexual identity as fluid and the fight against homophobia.

As Out pays tribute to 100 individuals who have embraced a GLBT identity, though, I would like to salute the new-category proponents in at least one unequivocal way: They remind us that asking questions is crucial to the spirit of liberation—and of liberty. This is a particularly useful reminder this year. It takes a continually questioning spirit to realize that, however many liberties we enjoy, America remains a country whose actions have sometimes done damage to civilian lives abroad and which, by legally continuing to treat gay people and many other groups as second-class citizens, is a country that deserves deep affection but not blinkered devotion. In that respect, we are all questioning and should remain so.