It’s Not Easy to Be Gay—and Republican
It’s got to be tough to be gay and a Republican. Almost every day people who identify as both are likely to hear words to the effect of, “That just can’t be. It’s a contradiction.” Still, a relatively small percentage of the LGBT population persists in publicly supporting the GOP, often making the argument, “I’m not a one-issue voter.”
It’s their best retort, as no one should base her or his vote on a single issue when there are so many urgent matters facing our country, like addressing climate change, implementing affordable health care for all, and saving the safety net of Social Security and Medicare even if it means the ultra-rich must lose a few of their tax breaks. While it’s arguable whether prevailing Republican attitudes regarding any of those concerns are in the best interest of our citizens, it is even more difficult for queer Republicans to defend their leaders’ views on the paramount issue to most gay voters—achieving equality with their fellow non-gay Americans.
As President Obama continues to build an impressive record of accomplishments for LGBT people—including this month’s endorsement of the Respect for Marriage Act and repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act—gay Republicans struggle to find a sliver of hope here and there in their party. With no major GOP presidential candidate on record as supporting any kind of legal protections for gay Americans, the Log Cabin Republicans are looking to fringe candidates for a ray of sunshine.
This summer, for example, the LCR called upon CNN to allow all Republican presidential candidates to be included in its televised debates. Without so doing, the cable news network “is manufacturing a narrative rather than presenting the candidates,” said R. Clarke Cooper, Log Cabin’s executive director. “The pointed exclusion of pro-equality candidates, such as former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson and openly gay Republican candidate Fred Karger, perpetuates the myth that Republicans are uniform in their opinions on social issues—a myth which hurts the Republican Party among independents, moderates and younger voters.”
Fred who? Fred Karger has never held elected or public office but he served as a consultant to the campaigns of Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and Gerald Ford. His run for the Republican nomination makes him the first openly gay presidential candidate from a major political party in American history.
Although he has nary a chance of winning a primary, Karger seems like a decent fellow, having worked on gay rights causes including leading Californians Against Hate to investigate the Mormon Church’s and the National Organization for Marriage’s campaigns to repeal the state’s same-sex marriage law. He recently organized a protest at a San Diego bookstore where Mitt Romney was appearing, urging Romney to tell the Mormon Church to “stop its nasty campaign to ban gay marriage.”
Karger acknowledges that one of the goals of his campaign is to persuade Romney, who continues to be the GOP frontrunner (by a thread), to rediscover the appreciation of gay rights which helped him with Massachusetts voters when he successfully ran for governor. Mitt’s attitude made a quick U-turn when he ran for president in 2008 (rather like his position on universal health care).
Karger’s heart is in the right place, and one can appreciate what he is attempting to do to bring enlightenment to his political party. In fact, among the handful of gay Repub-licans I count as friends, almost every one has told me that they believe it is crucial that at least some gay people penetrate the party structure to work for change. Yes, some concede that their influence is approximately at the level of support gay people received from the Democrat Party in 1970, but it’s hard to dispute their theory that someone has to try to lead the GOP out of its wilderness —especially at a time when Americans in general have become far more accepting of gay rights, including marital rights.
The old New-Right fear mongering is not going to win the Republicans electoral votes in many states anymore, and today’s gay Republicans are making their leaders aware of it. They’re quick to point out that major Republican donors were crucial in pushing gay marriage through the New York state Senate; Republican leaders allowed the vote to proceed, and a few even voted for the measure, putting it over the top.
What’s more, an increasing number of openly gay people are slipping into party leadership roles—including Log Cabin executive director Cooper. The Republican National Committee recently named Cooper to its finance committee, marking a significant fundraising outreach effort to what Log Cabin acknowledges was “a constituency long ceded by the party.”
Cooper has said that his appointment demonstrates that the RNC “believes that inclusion wins and that our Party is strongest when we reach every community. I look forward to working within the Party to help ensure we are victorious next November.”
Of course, there’s still the problem of what winnable candidate the Log Cabin membership and other gay Republicans can accept in 2012 without suffering a severe gag reflex.
Frontrunner Romney seems to be frightened by the Tea Partiers and fundamentalists he thinks he needs to win. Nipping at his heels is Michele Bachmann, and can you imagine any self-respecting LGBT person supporting this curious soul who has built her entire career campaigning against gay rights while pledging subservience to her equally curious husband? Then there’s good old Newt Gingrich who used his fundraising organizations to bundle nearly $400,000 to defeat the Iowa Supreme Court justices who ruled to legalize gay marriage.
Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum also raised money for that cause. Like Gingrich, Santorum has a long and often vocal history of opposition to any kind of legal protections for LGBT people. At a recent GOP presidential debate, for example, Santorum reacted passionately when asked whether he would tone down his anti-gay views in order to help his party win the White House: “Anybody that would suggest that we call a truce on the moral issues doesn’t understand what America is all about.”
Or perhaps you don’t, Rick.
Then there’s the other Rick, Texas Governor Perry, who for years has battled rumors that he is gay—but only in an intensely closeted Republican kind of way because he publicly has no use for gay sexuality or citizenship. In fact, he repeatedly has stated that his state’s old homosexual conduct statute, which had criminalized gay sex, was a good law that should not have been overturned by the Supreme Court. Now, as his campaign gears up, he’s joining hands with the ultra-right American Family Association to host a national day of Christian prayer called “The Response” in August.
The AFA, which is on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of hate groups for its anti-gay stances (among others), has alleged that homosexuals caused the Holocaust and plan to do it again; that homosexual behavior should be criminalized, and that gay people should be banned from holding public office. (At least they haven’t called for our extermination, as they have Muslims.)
As the major candidates line up today, Ron Paul seems the closest to reasonable on at least one subject of importance to many gay voters. Asked at a recent debate about same-sex marriage, Paul said he “favors marriage by the church or private contract” and “the government should just be out of it. We just shouldn’t have this argument. ...I have my standards, but I shouldn’t have to impose my standards on others. Others have their standards, but they shouldn’t have the right to impose their marriage standards on me.”
Paul added that he believes marriage, if it must be regulated by government, should only be at the state level, which is why he supports the Defense of Marriage Act—because it “protects” the states. Hmmm. I thought government was supposed to protect the people.
Then there’s Herman Cain who suggested that, by not defending DOMA, President Obama is committing “a breach of presidential duty bordering on treason.” He has said that, despite the sinfulness of homosexuality, he would appoint an openly gay person to his Cabinet as long as he or she wasn’t a Muslim. One conservative gay group actually sent Cain a thank-you message for his support.
It’s too early for either party to begin drafting a 2012 election platform, but it would be absolutely mind-boggling if the GOP, despite the influence of a few more gay people within its party structure, includes any positive statement about the rights of LGBT citizens. If that day ever comes—as many gay Republicans hope against hope—the gay vote could truly be up for grabs. Think about it: how refreshing it would be if we gay voters could focus on debating other important issues without having to weigh our votes so heavily in favor of the fight for our own civil rights.
In the meantime, it’s got to be tough to be a queer Republican.
Bill Sievert’s comic mystery novel “Sawdust Confessions” is available at online booksellers. Email Bill Sievert