As Bruce got the ball rolling yesterday with his post on CPAC, let me follow up with some thoughts of my own. Basically, this whole kerfuffle (if it amounts even to that) provides a snapshot on the status of gays in the conservative movement. It m may well have exposed a me-tooism at the Heritage Foundation (though Gabriel Malor says that conservative think tank is bowing out for budgetary reasons). (More on this anon.)
As Chuck Muth (in the post Bruce linked) reminds us, leading conservative organizations are not following some of the fringe social conservative groups and avoiding next month’s confab, but have signed up in droves to participate. Gabe noted last month that a number of prominent social conservative groups were still taking part.
While the fact that some groups are boycotting does show that that not all conservatives are willing to include their gay and lesbian confreres, overwhelmingly, conservative organizations don’t have a problem working together with gays in common purpose. And that purpose is reducing the size and scope of the federal government while standing up for basic American values, including the freedom to live our lives as we choose.
We may not agree with some of these organizations on all issues (nor they with us), but at least they welcome us into the conservative fold. And that really should be the takeaway from this kerfuffle, that the conservative movement is increasingly opening its doors to openly gay men and lesbians. And that the narrative of a movement based on animus to homosexuals is just that a narrative, full of condescension and misunderstanding, signifying nothing save what it reveals about the prejudices of those putting it forward.
For Further Reading:
Ed Morrissey, David Keene: Full steam ahead for CPAC
Jennifer Rubin, A response to the CPAC boycotters
David Harsanyi, Hating the “sinner”
If the GLBT community is onboard with Conservatives, then why bother going when one is against the GLBT community?
Or, said another way: perhaps they are taking a wait-&-see approach?
As a deeply conservative heterosexual, I was appalled at the acts of World News Daily and Family Research Council. The conservative tent can and must be large enough to encompass everyone who is concerned with the core issues facing our nation. Moreover, to the extent that their arguments over social issues – fine, let’s argue them in the full light of day. Taking your chips and going home suggests that neither of those organizations are interested such a debate. That is a tactic I expect from the left, not from someone under the conservative tent.
People of faith insist that homosexuality is the most serious of sins because the Bible calls it an abomination.
But the word appears approximately 122 times in the Bible. Eating nonkosher food is an abomination (Deuteronomy 14:3). A woman returning to her first husband after being married in the interim is an abomination (Deut. 24:4). And bringing a blemished sacrifice on God’s altar is an abomination (Deut. 17:1.). Proverbs goes so far as to label envy, lying and gossip as that which “the Lord hates and are an abomination to Him” (3:32, 16:22).
As an Orthodox rabbi who reveres the Bible, I do not deny the biblical prohibition on male same-sex relationships. Rather, I simply place it in context.
There are 613 commandments in the Torah. One is to refrain from gay sex. Another is for men and women to marry and have children. So when Jewish gay couples come to me for counselling and tell me they have never been attracted to the opposite sex in their entire lives and are desperately alone, I tell them, “You have 611 commandments left. That should keep you busy. Now, go create a kosher home with a mezuza on the door. Turn off the TV on the Sabbath and share your festive meal with many guests. Put on tefillin and pray to God three times a day, for you are His beloved children. He desires you and seeks you out.”
Once, I said to my friend Pat Robertson, whom I have always found engaging and open in our conversations, “Why can’t you simply announce to all gay men and women, ‘Come to church. Whatever relationship you’re in, God wants you to pray. He wants you to give charity. He wants you to lead a godly life.”
He answered to the effect that homosexuality is too important to overlook, seeing as it poses the most grave risk to the institution of marriage. Other Evangelical leaders have told me the same. Homosexuality is the single greatest threat to the family.
BUT WITH one of two heterosexual marriages failing, with 70 percent of the Internet dedicated to the degradation of women through pornography and with a culture that is materially insatiable even as it remains all-too spiritually content, can we straight people say with a straight face that gays are ruining our families? We’ve done a mighty fine job of it ourselves.
The extreme homophobia that is unfortunately to be found among many of my religious brothers and sisters – in many Arab countries being gay is basically a death sentence – stems from an even more fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of sin. The Ten Commandments were given on two tablets to connote two different kinds of transgression, religious and moral. The first tablet discusses religious transgressions between God and man, such as the prohibitions of idolatry, blasphemy and desecrating the Sabbath. The second tablets contains the moral sins between man and his fellow man, like adultery, theft, and murder.
The mistake of so many well-meaning people of faith is to believe that homosexuality is a moral rather than a religious sin. A moral sin involves injury to an innocent party. But who is being harmed when two, unattached, consenting adults are in a relationship? Rather, homosexuality is akin to the prohibition of lighting fire on the Sabbath or eating bread during Passover. There is nothing immoral about it, but it violates the divine will.
For the record, I am in favor of gay civil unions rather than marriage because I am against redefining marriage.
But I hardly believe that gay marriage is the end of Western civilization.
For me the real killer is the tsunami of divorce and the untold disruption to children as they become yo-yos going from house to house on weekends.
The American religious and electoral obsession with all-gay-marriage-all- the-time has led to a values-vacuum where it is near impossible to discuss real solutions to the erosion of family life. For instance, making marital counselling tax deductible would do infinitely more to bolster the crumbling institution of marriage than any opposition to gay relationships.
Likewise, promoting a code of gentlemanly conduct for men on American college campuses and negating the prevailing hook-up culture where sex even precedes dating could spark a return to romantic and long-term commitments.
Finally, getting more families to sign up for our international “Turn Friday Night into Family Night” would give children in general, and girls in particular, greater self-esteem as they are focused on by their parents for at least two hours each week without any electronic interference. And children with self-confidence later create stronger adult relationships.
I have numerous gay friends whose greatest fear, like so many straight people, is to end up alone. Should we merely throw the book at these people? Does not the same book, the Bible, also say, “It is not good for man to be alone?” And all I’m asking from my religious brethren is this: Even as you oppose gay relationships because of your beliefs, please be tortured by your opposition. Understand that when our most deeply held beliefs conflict with our basic humanity, we should feel the tragedy of the conflict, rather than simply find convenient scapegoats upon whom to blame all of America’s ills.
The writer is the author of Renewal: A Guide to the Values-Filled Life and is founder of This World: The Values Network, a national organization that promotes universal Jewish values to heal America. Follow him on Twitter@Rabbishmuley and at http://www.shmuley.com. Subscribe to our Newsletter to receive news updates directly to your email
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=191923
I remember when someone’s birthday party started problems like this. “If Johnny’s coming, I’m staying home.” “Why wasn’t I invited?” It only bothers you if you take parties seriously. Let it go.
One of then-General Colin Powell’s rules is: “Get mad, then get over it.”
Reading GW’s comments, I’m reminded why we aren’t Democrats. We don’t force any conservatives to take a litmus test for acceptability and support. It’s best to let the social conservatives stay out of CPAC. They’ll vote for conservatives if allowed their freedom; but they’ll stay home if they feel forced to toe the line on GOProud’s agenda.
FRC noted it’s primary concern over embezzlement at ACU. That’s actually a very major reason to be concerned until the matter is resolved legally, and in a manner above reproach.
Given the embezzlement of the NRCC’s funds in 2006, and the RNC’s poverty in 2008, and the heinously incompetent management of the NRSC in 2010, Republicans got money issues that speak directly to their integrity. ACU got money issues, which allegedly speaks to its integrity.
Get mad, get over it, and fix the money issues before January 2012.
However effective boycotts might have been back in the ’50’s and ’60’s, I feel they don’t really work today. I think every individual and group that objects to GOProud being at CPAC should attend CPAC, make their concerns known, and take a stand for their convictions in a passionate yet civil manner.
And to echo DaveO, GOProud should make it clear that it’s NOT seeking to force the gay agenda on the conservative movement. If social issues are to be secondary in modern conservatism then gay conservatives need to acknowledge that means putting THEIR social issues on the back burner just as they tell social conservatives to do. I think the fear of being forced to toe the line on the gay agenda may very well be a big motivation for at least some of the CPAC boycotters. They may have that fear because the gays who get the most press are usually left-wing gays who DO demand that everyone support their cause. So, I think GOProud has an obligation to present a different face of homosexuality. A homosexuality that’s not snarling and yelling “Bigot!” at everyone who doesn’t endorse it. Maybe, if GOProud would do that, CPAC will take place without controversy next year.
I don’t think “fringe” should be used, because it comes off, in my opinion, snarky and vindictive. I think we should be more humble and not let our egos and pride get a head of us. We should instead be saying that we know you don’t like us but will you at least stand with us for a common cause? And if they say screw you, which they have, then there’s nothing else to do but be polite and move on.
But I’m 21 and very aware of my ignorance, so what I said was probably very ignorant.
fair critique, Blaster. And well said.
Seanna- You are most correct. If I were a hard core conservative (SoCon, or not)… and all I knew of the gay community were the anti-war, anti-capitalist, anti-American, pro-abortion positions of its “leaders” who openly work to elect far left Democrats — I wouldn’t want them at CPAC either.
So, GOProud has a lot of work to do in order to overcome that natural recoil at a gay political movement that historically has rejected most if not all of the things that Conservatives stand for.
Well you know, according to people like Britebart gay advocacy is worse than Al-queda.
You people don’t get it, these guy’s don’t hate the gay left, they hate GAYS
I think people have a right to boycott. Why people getting so mad about it? Its complaining about a cup that half empty rather than half full. In fact, this cup is about 90% full. I agree and disagree with GW and Rusty.
I agree the Bible is clear about homosexuality and applies to all sins, not a mere portion of it, but in America, we have the right to assembly. The boycotters don’t want to be there, but there are other opportunities. They can’t boycott them all, but if they do, then it is clear that they are not in the Republican Party, which is okay in another way. Sometimes, you have to be clear with your conscience. You can’t just bend and compromise.
Nonetheless, let’s put this in perspective. The “sound and fury” is taking the boycott much too seriously than it warrants.
What’s with all this bible talk? The bible is not factual nor is it sound for logical argument, so why is it being treated as such?
We need to stick to the realm of reality, not faith and fairytales. Why should gays have to bend to the will of the religious? Unlike their god we have clear proof we exist.
Regardless of what SOME people think is a sin, they have zero right to continue to push their religion on the rest of us.
There is so much hypocrisy is Doom’s comment I don’t know where to start or even if I need to point it out.
I will say this, don’t be bitching about religion pushing their stuff on you when you’re here doing the same thing.
Plus, do you even know what rights are?
Read Dooms posts.
Then laugh at the thought of him accusing anyone of fiction.