God Bless Editorial Writers

May God in her wisdom continue to bless editorial writers, but let the rest of us be thankful they are not the ones we must depend on to get things done.

An example of this would be Chris Crain who has written a number of editorials in the Washington Blade supporting gay marriage and exhorting partisans on both sides of the issue to force their candidates to take even clearer positions. He states, "If we can force both sides to say what they really mean about gay marriage, we will have won half the battle." This is an easy stance to take for those who stay above the fray when it comes to the business of real politics. The politics where you have to raise money for your candidate, build coalitions, appeal to those with widely differing views, and finally get them to the polls on election day to vote.

I agree it would be nice if every candidate said exactly what he or she meant on every issue. And as someone involved in the development of position papers for many candidates, I have often fought to have each position stated clearly and with no room for misinterpretation. But the reality is that this doesn’t always happen. It never really will in a democracy where all the people have the right to vote and to get elected, and where to even begin to work on the things you believe in, you need to appeal to the inconsistencies of the electorate.

It is the nuances in politics that win elections, along with the statement of basic principles that the candidate espouses. I happen to agree with Crain that the battle for gay marriage will go beyond politics and the presidential election. But what those of us in the trenches are dealing with now is a presidential election, and this one has much more at stake than just our right to marry. I believe that this election may be seminal to our future and that of the nation in many ways. It is clear that those now leading the Republican Party and those leading the Democratic Party see that future differently. Activists on both sides have the right and responsibility to fight for that victory, even if we don’t force our candidates to be crystal clear on every issue including the marriage issue. I believe that issue is as focused as it needs to be for people to choose sides. Bush is for a federal anti gay marriage amendment, Kerry is opposed to it. Kerry favors giving state approved civil-unions all the benefits and responsibilities of marriage at the federal level, Bush is against this.

Now let us focus on all the other issues that will affect our lives for generations to come. Who will get to nominate and consent to the next Supreme Court justices? Who will nominate the hundreds of judges needed to fill the vacancies on the federal bench and what kind of Congress will we have to consent to the nominees? Who will decide what war we next fight or don’t fight? Who will decide on whether we make the Bush tax cuts permanent or whether we put more funds into education, medical research, the international fight against AIDS, or the Ryan White program to assist those with HIV/AIDS in our country? What will the Congress look like after January 2005? Will it be more conservative and right wing, or will it be more liberal and have the potential to pass ENDA, hate crimes legislation, and overturn "don’t ask, don’t tell"?

These are the issues that our community and the real politicians and activists in our community must deal with. Gay marriage will be dealt with even after the Presidential election and most likely by the courts. So who decides on the members of the judiciary becomes even more crucial in the long run.

I am a Democrat and believe John Kerry and a Democratic Congress will do what we need done for the future. I will raise funds, make phone calls, and campaign wherever I can. But I can respect Republican politicians who will fight for their candidate and do all these things because they believe that their candidate will lead the country toward their vision of the world.

It is our visions that are different, but what we seem to agree on is that we are fighting for the same 10% of the electorate that has yet to make up their mind. This 10% is why we don’t always force our politicians to make every position crystal clear with no room for any later thought. It is why those of us who support a candidate passionately, do so because we believe that when they have the ability, power and authority to govern, they will make us proud.

Editorial writers are lucky in many ways. They can take positions and say what they please, but then walk away from the responsibility of actually electing the candidate. It is a lofty position to be in, but I would ask that they don’t always condemn the activists on either side who have the responsibility to get the candidates whose vision they share elected. Writing the editorial is easy, doing the grunt work to elect the next President and Congress, is the hard part.