The day before I left for the Republican National Convention, I advised the GOP to avoid gay issues in St. Paul. Once there, my impression was that they heeded my advice. (Maybe folks at the RNC read this blog. 🙂 ) Or merely that I had a similar notion to that of some sage political strategist advising the RNC.
Seems I’m not the only one who noticed this. In a column today in the Wall Street Journal, Jamie Kirchick writes that gay-bashing was “absent from last week’s Republican gabfest.” Kudos to Jamie for taking the time to do the research to confirm my observation that “that gays were not part of the agenda this year:”
Indeed, the only speaker to make mention of them was the former Arkansas governor and Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee, and he did so only tangentially, stating that Mr. McCain “doesn’t want to change the very definition of marriage from what it has always meant throughout recorded human history.” (The same, of course, could be said of the supposedly gay-friendly Barack Obama, who also opposes marriage equality for gay couples).
I’m delighted that at least four readers e-mailed me alerting me to this excellent article, with one commenting, “Looks like you got your wish…”
I did indeed. 🙂
Peg Kaplan linked the article on her own blog, saying, “About time.”
My friend Rick Sincere, linking the post on his own blog, attributes the Republican silence to a generational shift:
One would hope, given the polling data cited above and other public opinion surveys of recent years — as well as considerable anecdotal evidence — that as a younger generation of Republicans, who grew up with gay friends and who look toward Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan as the historical figures who best exemplify Republican principles, begin to gain control of the party’s resources and its future platforms, this live-and-let-live philosophy will reassert itself in the Grand Old Party.
Live and let live, exactly. That means Christians should be free to practice their faith and gay people should be free to define our own relationships free of state interference.
I have long believed that the Republican Party is better for gay people than the Democratic provided it stay true to its principles. The Democrats (and others on the left) would have us believe we need the state to promote social change. We believe that the state should just get out of the way so as not to prevent social change from happening organically.