Top

news

Stories

 

A Gay Man Considers Joining the GOP

Is it possible that Republicans could prove to be a closer ally?

I used to consider myself a typical out-and-proud gay Democrat, but the Obama administration has managed to change that. It started early—on Day One, in fact: the inauguration. Reverend Rick Warren, a megachurch evangelical who has equated homosexuality with pedophilia and exported his hateful beliefs to Uganda, gave the invocation. Why did our president handpick such a divisive figure? Since then, the Democratic leadership on the Hill has ducked, stalled, or flat-out obstructed on a range of our issues.

Like a growing number of gay voters, this has driven me to ponder crossing over to the Dark Side. A gay Republican? Yeah, I know: Oxymoron! Denialist! Uncle Tom! But scope out the GOP and conservatives in general, and you may be surprised at all the pro-LGBT activity.

Consider the military’s ridiculous “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy. While the Obama administration has given tepid support to ending it, Log Cabin Republicans, the nation’s largest gay GOP organization, has been working through the courts on a viable legal challenge. Then there’s the ongoing same-sex-marriage debate. Obama favors second-class civil unions. His administration has gone further: In a brief defending the despised Defense of Marriage Act, the Department of Justice compared gay marriage to incest and boasted that denying gay nuptials helps conserve Social Security funds. Locally, it’s not much better. In December, the New York Senate voted down gay marriage with the help of eight Democratic lawmakers. A month later, the Democratic-dominated New Jersey State Senate couldn’t pass a similar bill.

Meanwhile, national GOP figures like Meghan McCain, the outspoken daughter of John, are speaking out forcibly for gay rights. Meghan’s mom, Cindy, posed for the NoH8 campaign protesting Proposition 8, California’s gay marriage ban. Newly elected U.S. Senator Scott Brown shrugged off gay marriage as being “settled here in Massachusetts.” Even the left’s bête noire, former Vice-President Dick Cheney, has come out for marriage equality—as has former First Lady Laura Bush.

The most powerful and symbolic turnaround, however, has proved to be George W. Bush’s solicitor general, Ted Olson. He and his first wife, Barbara (who died on 9/11), were then-paragons of the right-wing intelligentsia. These days, the man who won Bush v. Gore in the U.S. Supreme Court is in a San Francisco federal courtroom, where he’s arguing, as he put it in a Newsweek essay, “The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage.”

Empowered by such allies, ultra-conservative gays have burst out of the closet. GOProud, an upstart group to the right of Log Cabin, co-sponsored the Conservative Political Action Conference, the annual beauty pageant for right-wing political candidates. As if on cue, the extreme right threatened a boycott, but prominent conservatives like influential Hot Air blogger Ed Morrissey embraced the sponsorship: “We should not allow a purity campaign to push away natural allies,” he wrote.

When Ryan Sorba, the outspokenly homophobic head of the California Young Americans for Freedom, spoke at CPAC, he went off-message to condemn CPAC’s inclusion of GOProud—and the crowd cut him off with jeers. “Even social conservatives came over and said, ‘We disagree with you, but we’re glad you’re here,’ ” says GOProud Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia. Notorious right-wing U.S. Senator Tom Coburn went a step further and co-wrote an opinion piece with GOProud in the Advocate against Obamacare.

A gay conservative groundswell is also evident among the general voting public. While only 17 percent of self-identified gay, lesbian, and bi voters pulled the lever for George Bush in 2004, according to Los Angeles Times exit polls, the number increased to 27 percent for John McCain in 2008. “Not only have numbers been going up,” notes New York Log Cabin Chairman Gregory T. Angelo, “but donations have been increasing, and specific candidates have been doing outreach to us.”

The biggest recruiter for their cause, however, may be the Democratic Party itself. “When people come to the Log Cabin socials, a lot of them are disillusioned Democrats or turned off by being taken advantage of by their party,” Angelo says. “They want to find out what gay Republicans are doing to advance their issues. And when they see we are for equal rights, all of a sudden, they have their eyes opened.”

If it’s true that more and more estranged gay conservatives are returning to the fold, it’s due to pocket-book issues: “Many gay people may have been disillusioned by the conservative movement,” GOProud’s LaSalvia says. “But now, because of the out-of-control spending of the government, every day they’re reminded why they’re not Democrats.”

All well and good for the GOP mainstream, you say. But what about the new player in town, the Tea Party? If many individual members may well be homophobic, the party itself has tried to steer away from gay marriage. “Social issues don’t come into play at all,” Angelo says of the group. For proof of Tea Partiers’ inclusiveness, Log Cabin’s national spokesperson Charles Moran points to the group’s platform, the “Contract FROM America,” which contains no mention of “family values.”

1 | 2 | Next Page >>
 
  • Tarun Banerjee 07/11/2010 3:15:00 AM

    Dear Mr. Straube, I hope you will read this as it directly addresses your arguments. You made one very simple mistake over and over again: utterly false comparisons. In paragraph 3 you compared Obama’s lackluster work on DADT repeal with the work of Log Cabin Republicans. That is a false comparison because the unit of analysis is not the same. You should have compared Obama to McCain (or whomever else you believe is the leader of the Republican Party). Do you know where McCain, Palin, or the other leaders are on DADT repeal? In paragraph 3 you also compared Obama’s opposition to marriage equality to the wife and daughter of his former competitor (paragraph 4). That is a false comparison for the same reason. Do you not know the position of the vast majority of Republican “national…figures” on gay marriage? In paragraph 3 you also say Democrat controlled State Senates in New York and New Jersey were unable to vote in gay marriage. That is correct but an incomplete comparison. Do you not know that Republican State Senators in those states were far more opposed to marriage equality? In paragraph 4 you mention again the wife and daughter of Obama’s former competitor and their posing for the No H8 campaign. That is an incomplete argument. Do you think more of the public figures in No H8 are Democrats or Republicans? I would venture it is Democrats but how that is not even knowable at this stage without at least the author sampling from both sides to provide a comparison. In paragraph 5 you point out that Ted Olson argued for Bush in Bush v. Gore. That is true but an incomplete and false argument since, of course, the other lawyer with Olson, David Boies, argued for Gore in Bush v. Gore. In paragraphs 6 and 7 you talk about GOProud’s inclusion in CPAC. Leaving aside (as you did mention) that this was opposed by many conservatives at CPAC, you did not offer us a comparison of whether or what Democrat-based gay groups meet at liberal conferences. Are there any? Have you checked? If you have checked, you should report your findings if you hope to make an argument. In addition, you should also do a comparison of the anti-gay groups at both CPAC and the conference of your choosing on the Democratic side. Make a note of some of the other presenters at CPAC and their statements on gay rights at the conference for a more full explanation. In paragraph 8 you need to compare the rise in donations for Log Cabins to those amongst gay groups on the Democratic side. Have those been the same, falling, or rising as fast or faster than for Log Cabins. In addition, you should report on more than the New York chapter of Log Cabins. In paragraph 10 you contradict the first 8 paragraphs by arguing that the changes mentioned earlier as due to lack of progress amongst Democratic leaders is really due to economic issues. By paragraph 11, I tried of writing example after example of comparisons across inconsistent units of analysis, incomplete comparisons, or inherent contradictions. I would suggest outlining your points first and trying to form complete arguments that are not entirely spurious, non-falsifiable by no comparisons, or internally unsustainable by later contradictions. In my opinion, it makes for better writing! Regards, Tarun

  • W. 06/29/2010 11:48:00 PM

    Sadly, you seem to live in an adolescent world with junior high school sports-rally values. And you have no choices but those between Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee. These are built-in. You, and the nation, have achieved those goals. Sad.

  • 06/28/2010 9:09:00 PM

    Wow! A gay person willingly joining the GOP is kind of like a person of color (especially African-American or Hispanic) doing the same thing: Sure you could do it, but seeing that they appear to be against everything that you stand for–and let's be clear here. The GOP ACTIVELY works not only against the interests of people of color, but homosexuals as well–then the logic of why someone would so escapes me. Could the goal of gays (or people of color) inside the Republican party be to change the party from the inside? If so, they're doing a heck of a job.

  • RoughAcres 06/26/2010 2:50:00 PM

    This just proves that compromise must come from all sides of an issue, and that no one has cornered the market on being right. I've said all along that this is an individual-rights issue, and am happy to see that Ted Olson, among others, now see it that way, too; "social" conservatives on both sides of the aisle need to check their glasses to make sure they're not blind-sided by bigotry or fear or religious fundamentalism. As a registered Independent for years, I'm relieved to at long last see some "bipartisanship" on any issue... really tired of demagogues. As a gay American, I welcome the day my second-class status is rejected and my equality confirmed.

  • John E. Smith-LAPD RETIRED 06/26/2010 4:28:00 AM

    "A gay conservative groundswell is also evident among the general voting public" It think the irony in all this is guys like my partner and I-we could not stand Calif and Los Angeles so much-we left for a "red state" and the "bible belt". We hated WeHo so much and the crap over in the GLBT community-we stopped going to one of our favorite places to eat. I am a native Californian, and he is from Jalisco, Mexico-yet, we sold everything and moved to Texas. We live in a "dry" community and nearly everyone is Southern Babtist-we have not had any problems. WE consider our move to Texas one of the best choices we ever made in our 16 years as life partners (NO WE ARE NOT MARRIED!)

  • Steve Weinstein 06/25/2010 6:48:00 PM

    Courtney: As much as I hate to defend the GOP — especially the Texas GOP — that was only a PROPOSED platform. Someone put that out on the Net as the ACCEPTED Texas GOP platform. Not so. The real one will probably be nearly as crazy but not quite as crazy.

  • corrective_unconscious 06/25/2010 8:43:00 AM

    I enjoy delusional nonsense but this trope isn't new. A high percentage of "homosexual Republicans" - meaning about five - have tried to make similar arguments. And it doesn't make any more sense the sixth time around. If non talibangelical portions of the Republican Party are less homophobic now than they were a decade ago that change has nothing to do with Republicans. (With very few exceptions, like William Weld, who was more of a libertarian than a Republican, anyway.) Democrats and celebrities and face to face coming out and grass roots organizing and the glbt legal groups led to progress. Not Republicans. This article is nothing more than an attempt to troll Voice readers.

  • DavyG 06/24/2010 9:35:00 PM

    It's absurd to think that the GOP might be a good option for disillusioned gay Democrats. Absolutely absurd! How can a gay Republican really protest his or her maltreatment? How can a gay person support (with money and/or votes) the single most virulently homophobic organisation in the US and then turn around and say that that they are outraged at American homophobia? It doesn't make sense. The Democrats have their problems, and lots of them. But if we're talking about gay rights, there is no other party more committed to equality. The second most powerful Democrat, Nancy Pelosi, is as excellent an advocate the gay rights movement could ever ask for. There are three openly gay Democrats in congress, and there are even many Democratic senators who support gay marriage (not a single Republic supports marriage equality in congress). Obama is far from perfect, but he attended a pride month reception yesterday along with his VP to which the leaders of the gay movement were invited. Look at any of the potential GOP presidential candidates for 2012 and tell me any of them would ever hold such a reception? Obama has passed hate crimes laws, is working on repealing DADT and even DOMA, has issued directives that make the everyday lives of gay and lesbian Americans better (hospital visitation rights, spousal benefits for federal employees). Hillary Clinton has spoken out against the vicious homophobia in Malawi and Uganda - can anyone imagine Condi doing the same? Of course not. So I don't care if the talentless daughter of an awful senator (Meghan McCain) or the wife of a horribly homophobic president think the gays are ok, the Republican Party is NO PLACE for gay people and certainly not our votes and, even more importantly, certainly not our money nor our influence.

  • Yo y Tu 06/24/2010 4:31:00 PM

    As a Puerto Rican, gay, brown skin person who speaks English with an accent I know that some of my white gays citizens will also consider my rights and current historical conditions in order to choose for whom they vote. I am sure the can move beyond their petite political priviledges to also support other groups that are being discriminated and denied their rights as citizens.

  • ThatGayConservative 06/24/2010 10:27:00 AM

    Bill White, the liberal running for Governor of Texas, seems to be opposed to soldiers stationed overseas being able to vote here while out of the country. Can we use the same logic and conclude that ALL liberals are opposed to that? I suppose we could considering Algore tried to throw out those votes in 2000. On what basis, David, do you arrive at the conclusion that TEA Partiers aren't "very welcoming"? Aside from myself, I've seen gays at TEA Party gatherings and many others have reported the same. Dan over at GayPatriot has blogged about that a few times. Much to your chagrin, I'm sure, there's also blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Democrats etc. I know the lilly white PMSNBC wants desperately for you to believe that TEA Partiers, and Republicans are racist, sexist, bigot homophobes, but that's the campaign of fear liberals play to make sure you don't get any ideas about wandering off their plantation.

  • Courtney Watson 06/23/2010 11:49:00 PM

    Please read the following articles and you can reconsider whether you think the GOP has your best interests at heart. This one shows recent works- it is all under the radar so that we do not cause a rift and get stopped. Strategy! http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/21/AR2010062104709.html This is the Texas GOP Plat form. Please reference the languange for homosexuals. They want to put you in prison. http://jaysays.com/2010/06/texas-gop-official-platform-calls-for-imprisonment-of-homosexuals-and-supportive-heterosexuals/

  • ThatGayConservative 06/23/2010 11:20:00 AM

    Also, some folks grow up and choose not to be a hyphenated American kept on the liberal plantation in a perpetual victim caste ruled by hate, anger and fear.

  • ThatGayConservative 06/23/2010 11:12:00 AM

    Correction, that would be the Log Cabin RINOS who reside in Tim Gill's pocket next to his check book.

  • adamsmo 06/23/2010 6:47:00 AM

    Kind of nonsensical. Going from a party that is moderately pro-gay to one where recent state platforms have advocating criminalizing homosexuality altogether - and making the act of granting a marriage license to a same-sex couple a felony? Really? The sense in that is... Where, exactly?

  • FlexSF 06/23/2010 5:04:00 AM

    I was open to everything you said until the end. "We may just have to wait until the bigots and hypocrites die out—in both parties—before we see real, permanent change." No way. We pay for their social security, and health care. There isn't any need to wait when we can rightfully take what is ours. Peace.

 

Most Popular Stories


Browse Voice Nation
  • Voice Places

    Voice Places

    Discover restaurants, nightlife, travel, shopping...

  • VOICE Daily Deals

    VOICE Daily Deals

    Get 50 to 90% off every day on restaurants, movies, massages...

  • Best Of

    Best Of...

    More than 10,000 of the BEST things to eat, drink, and experience

  • My Voice Nation

    My Voice Nation

    Join the Village Voice community and get exclusive deals and info

  • Happy Hour

    Happy Hour

    Your local Happy Hour guide at your fingertips

or

Log in or Sign up

Social Connect:

Use your favorite account to access My Voice Nation.


Use your My Voice Nation account to log in:





Forgot password?
or

Sign Up or Log in

Social Connect:

Sign up for My Voice Nation with your preferred network.


Sign up for a My Voice Nation account:



Privacy policy