In the wake of the growing discontent among the president’s erstwhile gay supporters over the Democrat’s failure to fulfill his campaign promises, the folks at Pajamas Media asked me to write a piece for them on that very issue. Here are the first few paragraphs; you can find the rest on their home page:
Perhaps the easiest thing about being a gay conservative is that we expect less from our elected leaders than do our left-of-center counterparts. Republicans politicians don’t promise us the moon and stars in their campaigns, so we’re not disappointed when they don’t bestow such lofty gifts on our community once elected.
For gay Democrats, however, it’s a different story. They are repeatedly disappointed when their politicians do not follow through on the campaign pledges they make to our community.
In 1992, then-Democratic presidential candidate Bill Clinton promised to repeal the ban on gays in the military, but just a year later, he backpedaled on that promise. After he clumsily tried to act on that promise in the first few days of his Administration, that Democrat realized he might suffer politically should he sign an Executive Order repealing the ban. At the time, the President’s signature was all that was required to allow gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the military.
Facing a firestorm of opposition from the military and Congress, the Democratic President relented and signed a supposedly compromise policy, the legislation which became known as Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell (DADT). Gays could now serve, provided they just didn’t self-identify as gay. Now, the ban on open service is codified, requiring an act of Congress to be repealed.
This would not be the last time Clinton would sign legislation upsetting gay people who so enthusiastically backed him in 1992.
I’m a Christian before I’m a gay man. What the Lutheran and Episcopal churches have helped me do is find a way to integrate my sexuality with my faith in a healthy way. So, I’m going to go to my church for guidance on being gay–I don’t need the HRC, PFLAG, Dudesnude, or Mr. International Muscle to help me sort out my sexuality anymore. I think that specifically gay groups are mostly toxic and shame-based. I’d rather be part of a community where gays and straights together support each other. The UCC, ELCA, and ECUSA are now communities where that can happen, and I’m going to give my energy to them.
As much as it astounds Democrats that their leaders backpedaled on gay issues, it shouldn’t surprise us at all. After all, we’re not talking about a party that believes in true individual freedom at all, but rather in collective voices swayed by leadership.
Much of this leadership is of the AFL-CIO kind, which has never been friendly to gay issues. The last thing the Dems want to do is upset their bread-and-butter Rust Belt votes for the sake of true self-expression and freedom.
Ash, I liked how you said it in “I” statements. I liked how you shared your plan to improve your life (or not be a victim).
Now for what I came to say: Dan, the closing Pajamas link needs fixing atm.
As a gay, conservative Objectivist, I march in lockstep with no one, and will not suffer the company of those who do. Such a willingness to surrender one’s personal values and priorities in the hopes of being tossed a table scrap is little more than prostitution. It reveals a profound lack of character and an inability (or unwillingness) to think for oneself. More abhorrent however, it belies a delusion of moral superiority, arrived at simply because the offender has surrounded himself with equally insufferable defectives.
Except for Objectivists and Conservatives?
What did George W Bush toss you for 8 years and yet gaypatriot stood by the him and the Republican party? You all still stand by the GOP.
If you’re not bitching about the liberals infighting and thus being ineffectual then you’re bitching about the liberals being sycophantic.
Either way, you’re just plain bitching because you only know how to Not Be. You’ve forgotten how to Be Something except the white space around the world you stand contrary to.
You call out Clinton for doing something, albeit something that failed, then you skip all the way ahead to Obama.
What did the Republicans do? The Contract With America. DOMA. Attempts at a Constitutional Amendment. A unified push to get how many states to explicitly codify a (federally unconstitutional) ban on recognition of same-sex marriages performed in other states?
And yet there you are, forgetting all of that and pissing on Clinton 16 years ago.
Tend to your own messes. Like hey! How about that Drew Sweatte? He’s a winner, huh?
Eric, your prose reeks of moral superiority, and reads quite a bit like the opening scene of The Fountainhead. Just because you’re a martinet doesn’t make you any less obsequious.
#5: “Either way, you’re just plain bitching because you only know how to Not Be. You’ve forgotten how to Be Something except the white space around the world you stand contrary to.”
In other words, the only way us GAY CONSERVATIVES can “Be Something” is to stop being so “contrary” to the world and just surrender and assimilate into the hopey-changey, silky-smooth conformity of the Obama-borg.
“Eric, your prose reeks of moral superiority,…”
And yours, “God of Biscuits,” reeks of cannabis and patchouli.
So… GoBsmacker is explaining that Dan’s right and the Democrats don’t mean jack.
GoBsmacker, It’s not the Right that says “Human rights don’t matter.”
Um, Mr. Biscuits (or is it Miss?) you accuse us of bitching, but that’s all you do whenever you comment to our blog while insulting those with whom you disagree.
The more you write here, the worse an image you give to the left. You don’t argue with us, you should at us. We criticized Bush on numerous occasions and don’t exatly stand by the GOP, but do prefer it to the Democratic Party as we plea for it to return to its Reaganite principles.
So, go read our posts before you level your insults. Note how, in your attack, you don’t bother to address the points I made (you know the points in the post to which you attach your comments) choosing insteadto rant, rave, misrepresent and insult.
And the Contract with America was such a bad thing that Bill Clinton himself listed never items for the Contract as his accomplishments when he accepted the Democratic nomination for President in 1996.
There’s a lot the Republicans have done, that Contract chief among them. Clinton would never have balanced the budget without a Republican Congress. So, since you spend so much time on right-of-center blogs, why don’t you actually read the posts and consider their ideas instead of continuing to wallow in your own ignorance and animosity.
And it seems that animosity is your animating principle. Why else would you frequent a blog of people whom you dismiss as ignorant and take the time to express you hatred in their comments section?
What I’m seeing happening is that, at least for me, being gay does not have to involve the old ghetto-paradigm where gays could only understand other gays. I think gays are getting the equal rights we need in terms of marriage, work, and, ultimately the military. Once we have those, I don’t think gays will need “special places for special people.” I think gays will probably be healthier as they join everyone else in day-to-day life.
I am openly gay in a conservative Bible study where I am the only one who believes in evolution. Yes, it is THAT fundamentalist. (And what’s weird is that these guys are much smarter in terms of sheer critical thinking than all my graduate seminars.) What is interesting is that while I can’t say everyone applauds my gayness, they accept me as a person in a way which I really appreciate. No one is trying to change me (though I’m sure some secretly pray for me). I would trust their support and discernment over any gay group I’ve ever seen. The point is, if I can be gay with these guys, and build real friendships, I’m sure that out there in Non-Jesusland, it would be even easier. I just don’t think the gay ghetto is necessary anymore.
I continue to try to work on I-messages. This is my image of a healthy gay life.
Speaking as an “outside observer” (a straight male who reads the columns here because the quality is very good) that politically, the majority of gays behave in a manner similar to blacks. Sticking with the party that is, over the long term, actually less beneficial. Get past being automatically glued to the Democrats – and support the party that you think will actually do more good for you. (Which sometimes will be Democrat, and sometimes Republican.)
“Sticking with the party that is, over the long term, actually less beneficial.”
Less beneficial than what? The GOP?
The great comedy going on here is that y’all criticize the Dems for being all talk and no action (which is absurd, of course – Dems have been pushing for ALL of the progress made over the past several decades – opposed fiercely by conservatives) – and use that as an implicit argument in favor of the party which doesnt even give lip service to gay issues – but is absolutely hostile.
Look at Dan’s pajama piece. What a bizarre argument. Gay republicans arent nearly as disappointed as gay Dems, because Republicans dont promise us anything. This is supposedly a point in their favor?
Well, Tano, we do know you read the opening lines of my posts, but it doesn’t seem you get much further.
I’m not making the point here that gays should support the GOP for its advocacy of gay issues, merely that we don’t let ourselves be deceived.
Yeah, so what if Democrats have been pushing for what you call progress? The issue is that they make promises they don’t keep.
And the real progress we’ve seen has come not from government but the private sector. So, I’d rather support a party that trusts the people rather the one which has become dependent upon the state.
um, wasn’t God Of Biscuits REPEATEDLY banned here due to violating our terms of conduct?
Why does it keep coming back like a herpes virus?
I guess Tano conveniently forgets that two largest setbacks for the gay community in the past 40 years have William Jefferson Clinton’s signature on them?
Deeds, not words.
been there and done that haven’t we? And yet Gays continue to give Democrats their money and vote year after year.
The majority of gays seem to get off on being used and abused by Democrats. They keep going back for more punishment, lies and throwing away their money.Until they break that continuing cycle, nothing will change for you. No one cares that Democrats won’t help you when you continue to support them despite the obvious lie/promise/ignore cycle they have been doing for years on end.
I wonder if Harvey Milk would have more criticism for the liberals than conservatives. Before his assassination he was planning a march on Washington and the target was Jimmy Carter!
Here’s a secret: Conservatives will let you do anything, anything, in your private life if you just don’t talk about it. Beyond a momentary “ick,” most conservatives really don’t think about gays. What they hate are the parades. The funny clothes. The constant whining. If gays would just SHUT UP, Republicans would quietly, almost invisibly, give them the rights they want.
The attitude in my conservative Bible study is this: OK, we know you’re gay. Now, let’s move on to something more interesting–like corn prices.
What did the Republicans do? The Contract With America. DOMA. Attempts at a Constitutional Amendment. A unified push to get how many states to explicitly codify a (federally unconstitutional) ban on recognition of same-sex marriages performed in other states?
And, given that gay liberals like yourself fully endorsed and supported the FMA and state constitutional amendments as “pro-gay” and “gay-supportive”, what is more than obvious is that you don’t really care about any of it in the least.
Which makes your whining hilariously hypocritical.
Tano, please state 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.
The Obama Party will be the best party for gays on the day on which all gays are racist Jew-hating anti-military and anti-religious bigots who don’t pay taxes, live on welfare, and insist that everyone is out to get them.
But it’s not surprising that several gays are confused; as we see from Tano, that describes a sizeable chunk of the gay community and an overwhelming portion of its leadership.
I dunno who Drew Sweatte is, but he must be doing something right to have a douchenozzle like GOB gettin her panties all twisted up.
Well, it seems to me that the GOP ‘offers’ the same thing to everyone. At least when they want to win.
* Security from all threats, foreign and domestic
* The right of free association
* The rights given in the constitution
* The safety of knowing those rights won’t be infringed by made up court rulings.
It’s when they get away from that (and start acting like Democrats) that they lose. You’d think that they’d learn.
GOB seems to take issue with the manner in which I write, yet deliberately ignores my point. Textbook example of being caught with your character down around your ankles: blame anyone except yourself. Again, I remain unsurprised.
As for being an “obsequious martinet,” I hardly feel the need to defend myself for having the courage of my convictions.
Why do many readers have it backwards? It’s not that the GOP policy has to appeal to the “moderate gays” to get them involved. …It’s that the moderate gays have to get involved in the GOP to affect policy.
Members of the G/L community have to get involved in the actual workings of the GOP, give money, write letters…and most importantantly get involved at the local and state-levels. The leaders of the GOP don’t listen to those on the sidelines, they are affacted be those on their committess, names they see on checks, and people they meet face-to-face. You change a political party from the inside the room, not by waving signs outside the doors.
And you don’t have to 100% approve of the party’s policy-plank…supp[ort it if you agree with 90% of it, or even 80%. How did the Christianist Right gain it’s throw-weight? It mobilized people to join their local GOP committees, to volunteer their time and effort in fund-raising and poll-watching, to give money…and to show up at the polls.
Ted,
If you believe Sullivan’s “Christianist” crap, that Christians conservatives are really “ChristianISTS” trying to force their religious beliefs on others, then I suggest you are a Homosexualist and you belong in the Democrat party — the home of all the true haters.
Interesting, it’s all just namecalling right from the off. You guys haven’t changed one bit. Still stuck in Kindergarten.
Eric, you can’t label yourself with a primary label like Objectivist and then say you don’t march in lockstep. Especially when the label is Objectivist.
Silly anti-positivist religious masquerading as its opposite and trying to get away with it all using different words and hoping no one notices.
I didn’t ignore your point, Eric. I addressed it. You just missed it because you couldn’t swallow past the pull quote.
You dare accuse liberals of living on table scraps from Obama when LCRs lived with and defended the abusive spouse GW Bush for 8 years? That moves well beyond hypocrisy into obscenity.
Again I ask, what did Bush do on behalf of gays that came close to the efforts of Clinton, success or fail, in his 8 years?
Did Bush do ANYTHING pro-gay? Did he do anything gay-related that wasn’t vehemently ANTI-gay?
These are not rhetorical questions. You had your say with pissing all over Clinton’s attempts to change things for the better only to be shot down by a Conservative Legislature.
Now tell ME what Bush did that helped us.
GOB, unfortunately, your defense of DOMA and DADT, as well as your endorsement of state and Federal constitutional amendments and employment discrimination against gays for criticism, demonstrate quite nicely that it’s none of these things that bother you in the least.
You just hate Republicans and unquestioningly worship the Obama Party.
Unfortunately, you’re too much of a coward to admit you’re an outright bigot and syncophant of that order, so you insist on dragging a perfectly good sexual orientation through the mud as an excuse for your intellectual laziness and reactionary attitude.
Oh Lord yes! He defended the nation. He sent our military to fight terrorism abroad so that we wouldnt have to be the targets here at home. He liberated 50 million people from brutal tyranny…millions of them gay. He turned the dot com recession into the longest period of continuous economic growth in history (56 months i believe) , he staved off a second recession after the 9/11 attacks, he attempted to prevent the financial crisis by trying to reform Fannie and Freddy over 25 times, but failed because Democrats blocked him, he gave money and power that Democrats had seized from the people back to them, and he nominated two excellent Supreme Court Justices and a whole slough of lower court judges that will protect the rule of law and help guard against judicial tyranny, and so much more!
ALL of which is far more pro-gay than anything any Democrat politician has done …ever.