Prejudices Firmly Rooted in the Past:
False Assumption about Republican Attitudes Toward Gays
False Assumption about Republican Attitudes Toward Gays
Whenever we are linked on left-wing blogs, the comments generated by those who follow those links provide a window into the ignorance of all too many on the left (particularly the gay left) to the changing reality of the contemporary GOP. They make assumptions about the welcome we find on the right which could be easily dispelled if they just scanned our archives.
Commenting to a recent post, one reader repeated just such a refrain, “I don’t think republican conservatism is honestly open to gays.”
Hardly. Indeed, we — and many readers of this blog — have found a more ready welcome as openly gay Americans in conservative circles than we have as openly conservative gays in gay and lesbian circles.
Since this blog’s inception over five years ago, we, a blog which openly defines itself as gay, have been linked (always favorably as far as I can tell) by (nearly*) every major mainstream conservative blog. Bruce and I have met a good number of right-of-center bloggers and have always received favorable treatment. The McCain campaign even invited both of us to blog at the Republican National Convention last summer.
And yet all to many left-wingers (including some who should know better) act if the GOP hasn’t changed since 1992. To be sure, their ignorance of and prejudice against the Republican Party is not limited toward its attitude toward gays. The assumptions they make about Republican intolerance (of gays) is emblematic of how they see conservatives in general and Republicans in particular, defining us not by our reality, but by their prejudices. Their narrative trumps the facts.
To be sure, it was not always this way for gay Republicans. A handful state parties in the 1990s, particularly that in Texas, did attempt to exclude gay people. But, with improving social attitudes toward gays, the GOP has become more welcoming (though, in some places, it may be more correct to say less inhospitable). Last month, commenting on past statements both candidates for Virginia Governor had made on gay issues, Michael Barone cites those very changing attitudes to suggest that neither man is anti-gay:
A fairer interpretation, I think, is that both Deeds and McDonnell have changed their opinions on gay rights issues over the years, as indeed have a majority of the American people, and that neither man has any animus against gay people.
Exactly. As the American people, including many Republicans, have changed their attitude on gays, all too many readers of left-of-center blogs, particularly those who find their way over to this right-of-center one, hold a vision of the GOP firmly rooted in the past.
*I added this modifier as I edited the sentence because there may exist blogs which others identify as mainstream which I have yet to discover.
33 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
The GOP is embracing gay rights? Then why bother voting for the GOP? If you believe in gay rights you already have the Democrat party to vote for. I thought the GOP was to stand for traditional values, including normal marriage. Seeking to conserve those values is the heart of what being a conservative means. If the GOP is turning its back on conservatism then I’ll have to find a new party SOMEWHERE.
Comment by Seane-Anna — October 8, 2009 @ 9:09 pm - October 8, 2009
And wasn’t it a Conservative blogger you stayed with during the GOP Convention?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 8, 2009 @ 9:27 pm - October 8, 2009
Nothing’s more pathetic the defensive delusions of a happy house-gay.
Running with that analogy, Thomas Jefferson had sex with Sally Hemmings, he fathered children with her, and he may very well have loved her… but he still owned her.
You can burble all you want about conservatives who link to you, talk to you nicely at parties, maybe even befriend you (or, in the case of Charlie Crist or Larry Craig, have sex with you). And rest assured, they’re be burbling about you, too: “We’re not homophobic – look, I linked to GayPatriot!”
In the party that denies us our dignity, our human and our civil rights, the house-gay serves a very useful function indeed.
Comment by william — October 8, 2009 @ 9:27 pm - October 8, 2009
Except for those pesky abuses they’ve passed as national law.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 8, 2009 @ 9:28 pm - October 8, 2009
More accurately, regarding Republicans: “traditional values, including decency.”
Meanwhile, Democratics continue their honed and traditional Oppression of Gays:
1. Clinton Administration: Defense of Marriage Act
2. Clinton Administration: Don’t Ask Don’t Tell
3. B. Clinton while Campaigning for President, to Gay Groups: “I Have a vision…and you are a part of it.” Really Bill? Pretty scary vision….see items 1 and 2 above.
4. Obama Administration: Sits down at negotiating table with leaders of Iran, a country who takes teenage gay lovers, and hangs them in public while crowds watch.
5. Obama Administration: Fails to take any action at all to repeal don’t ask don’t tell, after campaign promises to do so.
6. Obama Administration urges a Federal court to dismiss a Massachusetts gay couples benefits lawsuit — September 2009.
It will be a great day indeed, when gay and lesbians who vote democrats into office will wake up and start discounting what elected leaders say, and instead pay attention to what they do.
Comment by Patrick — October 8, 2009 @ 9:32 pm - October 8, 2009
[Citation needed]
Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 8, 2009 @ 10:48 pm - October 8, 2009
3. It would appear that the thought police are alive and well in the democratic party. Thanks for helping to clarify any misperceptions!
Comment by Croft — October 8, 2009 @ 10:48 pm - October 8, 2009
um, william, please detail how the party denies us our human and civil rights. Are Republicans trying to prevent gay people from voting, from living freely, from associating publicly, from worshipping in the manner we choose?
Please provide examples of GOP efforts to prevent gay people from doing such things. Thanks.
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — October 9, 2009 @ 1:16 am - October 9, 2009
I am a straight Hispanic conservative Republican and I fully support equal rights for gays. Misguided assumptions about Republicans are aplenty in today’s political landscape and it is up to us to change that. This is no easy task. We have to deal with ignorance from the left about what it means to be Republican, and narrow-mindedness from fellow conservatives who refuse to allow the Republican Party to be a big tent party.
Comment by Randy Haddock — October 9, 2009 @ 2:43 am - October 9, 2009
“It was not always that way for Gay Republicans”. No, and it was not always that way for Gay Democrats. Of all of my friends in their 70 and 80s only two have expressed anti-gay remarks to me and guess what – both are Democrats.
Comment by John W — October 9, 2009 @ 3:00 am - October 9, 2009
William is a Democrat because they validate his pathetic, humiliating, emasculating sense of victimhood.
How embarrassing for you william.
Comment by American Elephant — October 9, 2009 @ 3:47 am - October 9, 2009
Better than Roman Polanski, his liberal defenders, and certain Obama administration officials trying to have sex with your kids!
Comment by American Elephant — October 9, 2009 @ 3:49 am - October 9, 2009
Dan, I agree with you that the GOP is better on gay issues than they have been in the past. Also, Democrats are, by no means, perfect when it comes to gay rights either, as Patrick cites above.
The reason why most gay persons believe that Democrats are still better than Republicans on gay rights comes down to two reasons. Most anti-gay people believe that the GOP best supports their views, and would consider joining another party if the GOP does become more supportive of equality. As an example, see post #1. Also, when there is a vote regarding gay rights, most Democrats vote for the gay rights side, and Republicans vote for the anti-gay side. That happened with DOMA as well. And sometimes it’s virtually along party lines.
What I’m finding for the first time is that gay persons are no longer in lock step with Democrats. Many have been vocal againt Obama’s lack of leadership in this area, and have been critical of his administration’s inexcusable defense for DADT and DOMA at Supreme Court hearings.
Also, I am glad that you have found that conservatives have treated you civilly and respectfully, even the ones who are against gay rights. And it’s horrible that you get treated horribly by gay lefties. The only reason I could give (and it’s not an excuse) is that they (wrongly) believe that your siding with conservatives undermine gay rights.
Comment by Pat — October 9, 2009 @ 7:31 am - October 9, 2009
Sorry but are you high. One merely needs to look at the voting records of members of both parties to see who has been most supportive. Are there pro-gay rights politicians? A few but they are the ones being villified by many members of the GOP as being too moderate. In the Senate we can normally count on Snowe and Collins and that’s about it.
Are there anti-gay rights Democrats? Of course there is and they are a real obstacle in achieving our rights but our biggest obstacle is a party where over 90% of their members vote against us every time. It’s nice they link to etc but have no doubt they do not want you to have equal rights plain and simple.
Comment by Tim — October 9, 2009 @ 8:44 am - October 9, 2009
Seane Anna,
The principles of the Republican party have always been to judge someone by the content of their character, not the colour of their skin (or choice of bed partners).
While the results may have fallen short, personal freedom is the key. You may not like that choice of, say, Dan’s bedpartner, but the state has no right to limit that. Tano’s allowed to, for example, hate white people, but he’s not allowed to act against them that’s why the right opposes hate crime laws. If Tano goes and beats up a white guy it’s assult. It doesn’t matter if it’s because he wants his wallet, or if it’s because he’s ‘striking out on a campaign to redress grievances’ it’s still assault.
Social Cons (of which I often group myself) must remember that social conservatism truely should begin and end at property’s edge. Abortion is wrong because it deprives a person of life w/o due process. Murder and theft are wrong because they’re depriving others of property, not because the 10 commandments ‘said so’. Tano is an idiot and I won’t like him, no matter how many ‘progressive’ laws say I have to.
Comment by The_Livewire — October 9, 2009 @ 8:56 am - October 9, 2009
Conservative base vs conservative elite
I have no doubt that many urban living, coast based repubs support gay rights and would like to see gays be part of their party and the fabric of America.
But to deny that the evangelical base is anti-gay and would like gays to be closeted, cured or quarantined is simply closing your eyes to the reality we all live in.
It’s the classic case of base vs elites or another way: Brooks vs Dobson
Comment by gillie — October 9, 2009 @ 9:10 am - October 9, 2009
Conservative base vs conservative elite
I have no doubt that many urban living, coast based repubs support gay rights and would like to see gays be part of their party and the fabric of America.
But to deny that the evangelical base is anti-gay and would like gays to be closeted, cured or quarantined is simply closing your eyes to the reality we all live in.
It’s the classic case of base vs elites or another way Brooks vs Focus on the Family
Comment by gillie — October 9, 2009 @ 9:11 am - October 9, 2009
Since the ‘liberal elite’ support DOMA and cheer DOJ briefs comparing homosexuality to pedophelia (Not that Tim would note the difference) I think your arguement lacks merit.
Also since when as VP Cheney been out of the mainstream?
Comment by The_Livewire — October 9, 2009 @ 9:36 am - October 9, 2009
But to deny that the evangelical base is anti-gay and would like gays to be closeted, cured or quarantined is simply closing your eyes to the reality we all live in.
What makes this really funny is that gillie screams that while endorsing and supporting the Obama Party base and its beliefs.
And of course, the fact that gillie and the liberal gay left fully support, by their own definition, taking away “gay rights”.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 9, 2009 @ 11:33 am - October 9, 2009
to quote dobson on cheney:
“In raising these issues, Focus on the Family does not desire to harm or insult women such as Cheney and Poe. Rather, our conviction is that birth and adoption are the purview of married heterosexual couples. Traditional marriage is God’s design for the family and is rooted in biblical truth. When that divine plan is implemented, children have the best opportunity to thrive. ”
In this case, he crossed the base and if he ran for president, would likely have to reconcile with them.
Comment by gillie — October 9, 2009 @ 11:35 am - October 9, 2009
NDT and Livewire
All I am saying is that indeed the evangelical base of the GOP is anti-gay, while the elites of the repubs are not.
Do you disagree or agree with that?
Comment by gillie — October 9, 2009 @ 11:38 am - October 9, 2009
Since I consider myself evangelical, I disagree.
However, you must say the same about the ‘liberal elite’ AND the rank and file are anti-gay. Funn thing though, are you saying the Evangelicals are the ‘elite’?
Comment by The_Livewire — October 9, 2009 @ 11:40 am - October 9, 2009
Tim, instead of just telling me how wrong I am, why don’t you address the actual points in the post. I am telling you my experience, as an openly gay man, of being welcomed into the party. And you referring to a voting records on issues you don’t identify.
It would be nice if you could actually address the point of the post. It has to do with the false assumptions made by people on your side of the aisle. But, basically your comment just confirms the point of my post.
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — October 9, 2009 @ 11:49 am - October 9, 2009
All I am saying is that indeed the evangelical base of the GOP is anti-gay, while the elites of the repubs are not.
I think we need gillie to do some definition.
Please state, gillie, whether the following statement is “antigay”:
“God don’t like men coming to men with lust in their hearts like you should go to a female. If you think that the kingdom of God is going to be filled up with that kind of degenerate crap, you’re out of your damn mind.”
And:
“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman”.
Then when you’re done with that, tell us whether or not it’s antigay to support and endorse state and Federal constitutional amendments banning gay marriage — and state that the fact that any member of a party does indicates that that party’s base is antigay.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 9, 2009 @ 5:23 pm - October 9, 2009
here is something fun to consider
http://www.valuesvotersummit.org/schedule
Comment by rusty — October 9, 2009 @ 10:51 pm - October 9, 2009
And again, rusty, feel free to answer whether or not these statements are antigay.
“God don’t like men coming to men with lust in their hearts like you should go to a female. If you think that the kingdom of God is going to be filled up with that kind of degenerate crap, you’re out of your damn mind.”
And:
“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman”.
Then when you’re done with that, tell us whether or not it’s antigay to support and endorse state and Federal constitutional amendments banning gay marriage — and state that the fact that any member of a party does indicates that that party’s base is antigay, as you do for parties you don’t like.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 9, 2009 @ 11:43 pm - October 9, 2009
[...] sound like he’s talking about his own party. And seems he, like many on the left, is living in the past. That 20% number is from the early days of the Obama Administration and before the Democratic [...]
Pingback by GayPatriot » The Rising Tide of Democratic Hate Speech — October 10, 2009 @ 5:00 pm - October 10, 2009
The problem is one of definitions. What does it mean to be “anti-gay”? To be “pro-gay”?
If one accepts the notion that support for gay marriage is a necessity for being pro-gay, then I most certainly am not because of my belief in the traditional definition of marriage that has been common in western society for centuries.
On the other hand, I oppose DADT. My best friend (other than my wife) is a gay man, I’m vigorous in my defense of gay students at my school when they face bullying, and I personally will not do business with companies that discriminate against gay people (though I question the propriety of laws that forbid private discrimination of any sort). When my cousin came out to the family and her sister demanded ostracism, I complied — by inviting my cousin and her partner to my home and telling her sister that she and her family were no longer welcome in my home until they learned to behave like civilized people.
But hey — if liberal gays want to count me as the anti-gay enemy, they can feel free to do so. I promise to show them more respect than they show me.
Comment by Rhymes With Right — October 10, 2009 @ 5:06 pm - October 10, 2009
Gays ARE part of the Republican party and ARE part of the “fabric of America’ whatever the hell that means.
Indeed, if you want to see where the real anti-gay hate in America is, just start naming some gay republicans around a bunch of liberals! Then stand back and listen to what the “enlightened left” really thinks about –as they call us — “faggots”
My evangelical neighbors know I am openly gay, and they are far kinder people than any of my liberal neighbors.
Try to venture outside your echo chamber every once in a while!
Comment by American Elephant — October 11, 2009 @ 1:45 am - October 11, 2009
Since you brought it up: “To be sure, it was not always this way for gay Republicans. A handful state parties in the 1990s, particularly that in Texas, did attempt to exclude gay people.”
In the 90′s? here’s a link to the Texas Republican Party platform for 2008:
http://www.1888932-2946.ws/TexasGOP/E-ContentStrategy/userfiles/FINAL_2008_PLATFORM.pdf
Now, do a search of the word homosexual and see what you find (there are 13 occurrences, by the way). Page 14 specifically links homosexuals to child abusers and molestors.
To be fair, please feel free to cite another state Republican state or national platform statement that says Homosexuals should receive the same rights as all other citizens.
Comment by Kevin — October 11, 2009 @ 10:56 pm - October 11, 2009
That would be because, Kevin, you and your fellow liberal gays insist that dressing children as sex slaves and taking them to sex fairs constitutes an “educational experience”, that children as young as five should be taught the pleasures of gay sex, and that NAMBLA supporters like Harry Hay should be role models for gay people.
That would indicate that you need to be kept as far away from minor children as possible and, if you are around them, watched. If you want to support child molestation and exploitation, you should be treated as are child molesters and exploiters. The fact that the Obama Party sees nothing wrong with your sexualization of underage children and support of NAMBLA does not make it right; it only makes them hilariously hypocritical.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 11, 2009 @ 11:58 pm - October 11, 2009
NDT, is the Republican Party of Texas incapable of separating the support for gay persons and condemning the actions you highlighted. Since we all acknowledge that there are gay Republicans in Texas, and I’m sure most of them oppose children going to street sex fairs, pedophilia, etc. Perhaps gay Republicans in Texas, like you, believe they should be tarred unfairly with the same brush, but I doubt it.
Comment by Pat — October 12, 2009 @ 11:00 am - October 12, 2009
NDT, is the Republican Party of Texas incapable of separating the support for gay persons and condemning the actions you highlighted. Since we all acknowledge that there are gay Republicans in Texas, and I’m sure most of them oppose children going to street sex fairs, pedophilia, etc.
Gay Republicans are not really gay according to “real gays”, Pat.
Furthermore, according to Kevin Jennings and his defenders, “authentic gays” would never speak out against pedophile gays.
If you wanted to use us as an example, you should have thought of that before you banished us.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 14, 2009 @ 1:19 am - October 14, 2009