Politics with Marc Ambinder

« Gitmo Ruling Of The Day: A Yemeni's Freedom And The Government's Fear | Main | Steve Schmidt's Speech: The Full Text »

Apr 17 2009, 2:46 pm by Marc Ambinder

Steve Schmidt, Republicans And Gay Marriage

I know and like Steve Schmidt, and have had many conversations with him about gay marriage and his party. He and I disagree on a fundamental point. I don't think the modern Republican Party, which relies heavily on the foundational force of Christian conservatism, can shift its position on gay rights without severe penalties. I know that there are many Republicans who support gay rights, and that most members of the Republican elite are pro-gay, and that the business wing of the party could care less about the issue. I know that suburbanites are turned off by conservative intolerance of homosexuality and gay rights. I know that younger Republicans tend to be pro-gay and are alienated from the rest of the party. But I also know that the possibility that the Republican coalition will find some way to organize itself without social conservatives is a ways of a way off. Schmidt's concerns may be valid, but urging the GOP top adopt a tolerance platform WITHOUT figuring out how to declamp itself from the social conservative hook -- that's not terribly realistic. That's why so many Republican strategists, even as they're sympathetic to gay rights (and virtually ALL of them are), don't advise their clients to so much as acknowledge the dignity of gay people.

Tags: | | | |

:: Comments (13) :: Share This

Comments (13)

foolscap

Marc --

Would you mind taking the analysis a bit farther in later posts? What is the electoral make-up of the GOP? Why can't it find a middle ground core in what used to be the suburban swing districts, but are now more solidly democratic? I understand that the religious right is central to the current republican party, but that certainly wasn't always the case.

Abhinav

Marc,

What about the future standing of the party, when majority of the country is going to be for gay marriage? You dont see anybody advising the Democratic party to stick to each and every demand of the far-left code pink guys. Why are you so concerned about the social conservatives? What are they going to do, start voting for Democrats?

Greg

My question is why are so many prominent Republicans leading the charge against gay marriage. You say that politically they can't come out for it, but that doesn't explain why this isn't just a grass roots political movement but one with considerable support from "elite" politicians.

Bud Man

Marc,

What does "pro-gay" even mean? Those of us who understand that gay people do exist, and that for most of them their sexuality is not a "choice" any more than a straight person's is, and that therefore there is no reason to deny them the same rights as anyone, are not "pro-gay". Nor anti.

We can fairly be described as "pro-gay rights", but even this misses the point. We're not pro-anything. We're just not in favour of singling out gay people for exclusion from broadly held human rights.

Among people over 30, there may have been enough consciousness, growing up, of an anti-gay norm that one had to become, in some sense, pro-gay rights to get to what is really a neutral position. But those under 30 are largely ignorant of what dinosaurs like us are even on about. These divisions of opinion are simply irrelevant to them.

Also, how on Earth can you dismiss favouring equal rights for gay people as impractical for Republicans - and stop there? I can imagine what such reasoning would have led to on issues throughout history such as - to limit it to the American context - independence from Britain, slavery, women's rights and on and on. Republicans and Democrats have their differences, but neither are, in the main, as cowardly or as blinkered as your argument here.

Discrimination against gay people in America's laws or practices is simply wrong. The sooner Republicans understand that and act on it - and the sooner amoral apologists like you help them do it - the sooner the shrinking Republican party can rejoin the American branch of the human race.

Bud

Isee

Dear Sirs:

I am appalled at the ignorance that I observe these days. The political machine has done its job well. The issue of gays is serving the political elite as a very useful tool to further their cause.

While keeping the sensitive occupied, the powerful continue to erode the basis of the republic into oblivion for their own personal gains in power, prestige and wealth. Gay rights are one of their many tools.

On the subject of gay rights and marriage; to be gay, is a choice! There are those who choose to be gay after a lifetime of being straight. If those who are becoming gay have no choice, why were so many never moved toward gayness before gayness became the promoted thing in the media and one of the biggest issues of the day?

This movement shows the power of the media to move the masses.

The media has been able to take a most detestable human act and make it desirable.

Did you not know that there has been a great increase in those who have entered the gay life style within the last ten years. In Britain the numbers are as follows:

Numbers for Men year year
NATSAL I (%) 1990 NATSAL II (%) 2000
Ever had a sexual experience, not necessarily including genital contact, with a partner of the same sex?
5.3% 8.4%
Ever had sex with a same sex partner, including genital contact?
3.7% 6.3%
Have you had a same sex partner in the last five years?
1.4% 2.6%

Numbers for Women year year
NATSAL I (%) 1990 NATSAL II (%) 2000
Ever had a sexual experience, not necessarily including genital contact, with a partner of the same sex?
2.8% 9.7%

Ever had sex with a same sex partner, including genital contact?
1.9% 5.7%
Have you had a same sex partner in the last five years?
0.6% 2.6%

The above numbers were obtained from www.avert.org.

I guess that it is a coincidence that all these people just happened to discover that they were gay in the last ten years! The largest increase was among the most vulnerable, women and the young.

If you think those becoming gay have no choice, how did so many wait so long to find out that they were gay? Would they have become gay if the gay thing had not become politically charged, and began to be introduced to the people, through every means available by those in power? The powerful, in control of broadcasting, have changed the social norm associated with homosexuality from negative to positive.
The young and vulnerable have fallen into the trap.

The change in this social norm illustrates the power that the media holds over the masses.

Why have those in power enforced the gay life style, and allowed so much advertising and promoting of gayness, if it did not some how fit into their scheme of things? Some of these powerful people are gay and wish to further their own agenda, but most of those that hold the reigns of power are not gay, and will never be gay.

They have an agenda too!

Do those in power have something to gain by all the confusion this controversy has caused? If not why are they promoting gayness? How are they promoting it? They are allowing it and making sure it is viewed in a positive light.

If the powerful were not promoting gayness, you would be hearing nothing about it in the media!

Those in charge are demonstrating their power by taking the most hideous and detestable human acts, and propelling these acts into places of prominence and respect.

What is happening makes my head spin.

Never, in thousands of years, has any society assigned a place or respect to homosexuality. This detestable act has always been confined to the hidden, secret, dark places of the human heart. This act has no function place in society. It cannot produce children. It cannot create a stable home. This act can only fulfill the deviant desires of those who rebel against the prevailing social norms.

Even the worst of societies has condemned this act of deviance. No society has sanctioned homosexuality as valid in thousands of years.

What is this controversy doing to the very structure of our society and the basis of our life; our laws?
_________________________________

Has the controversy of gay rights and gay marriage caused a reduction in the freedoms you are guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill or Rights of the United States of America?

Has the controversy of homosexual rights and gay marriage empowered groups like people for the American way who wish to destroy the American way of life?

Do you think that you right to free speech has been called into question because of this controversy? Free speech is guaranteed to all Americans. What if you are against gay rights? Are you not guaranteed the right to free speech?

How about your right to assembly; has it been called into question by those in power, especially if you are against gay rights and marriage?

If the rights of those to speak against gay rights are revoked, do you not know that your rights will also be revoked, because all rights will he abolished and the Constitution and Bill of Rights will be abolished?

Do you not know that it only takes the decision of a few people called Supreme Court justices to remove your rights completely? They have been moving in that direction lately.

If those who wish to change things cannot abolish the dictates of the Constitution directly, they will do it indirectly. The result will be the same. You will be without any Constitutional protections. Your rights will be past history and you will be at the mercy of the ruling elite.

Lawlessness will rule in the halls of power. A government by the people, for the people and of the people will cease to exist. Your rights will cease to exist.

Will you continue to be persuaded by the powerful, that the rights of the gay are being denied them and will you continue to support a cause that is undermining your rights of free speech, your right of assembly, your right to possess and carry a firearm to protect yourself, your family, and your property?

The question those in power are asking themselves is "How can we overcome the existing power structure, and gain power over our opponents? How can we gain personal power and access to wealth?

They know that the only way to sweep away the old power structure, in which they are of little importance, is to call into question the basic tenants of the old system and convince a small number of citizens that the old is wrong and the new is a better way. It only takes about 10% to overthrow a system of government. If you do not believe me then ask the muslims. They know the numbers well.

It does not matter what the new is, as long as it is controllable from the vantage point of those who are struggling for power.

It does not matter that, what the media is doing, is all based on lies and deception, its for the cause, they say.

They are promoting change. Any change. If those in power can promote the gay life style then any change will do! Just get rid of the old ways and powers. Get rid of the prevailing ideology and adapt anything else.

When the old way is destroyed, then they can take their seat of power. Then the new powerful can replace these controversial issues with the things that they really want to do. The old American Republic will be finished. Passed. Dissolved.

They will create a New World Order. The New Elite will hold the Reigns of Power. WITH YOUR HELP.!

Informed1 (Replying to: Isee)

Wow! The degree of ignorance and oversimplification displayed in the comment by ISEE is staggering. Did it ever occur to you that many people (especially in past years) would not be willing to ADMIT in a poll that they had had sex with someone of the same sex? Do you think someone like, say, Pastor Ted Haggard, for example would have answered such questions honestly? Fat chance. And there are many like him in the world. Many older people or those from certain religious backgrounds simple do not ever discuss their sexuality openly, even if they are actually homosexual. Many are also in denial. So whatever polling you're citing has to be taken with a huge grain of salt.

Secondly, the question of whether homosexuality is a choice is irrelevant. The fact is that homosexuality exists, and always has, everywhere on the planet. If it is a choice, it is just as much a choice as heterosexuality. So, I assume (if you are straight) that at some point in your life, you contemplated gay sex yourself and made a decision to be heterosexual? Is that how it happened for you? Probably not. Most likely, you grew up and found yourself attracted to someone and falling in love naturally. It's the same for gay people. No one can talk you into being gay against your will. That's just silly. Either it feels right to you or it doesn't. No amount of media coverage or pop culture will make a man who loves women decide suddenly to have sexual relationships with men instead, unless that's what he wanted in the first place.

Lastly, the best thing you can do, if you are truly interested in understanding this issue is to (genuinely) get to know people who are gay. Maybe then you can begin to have some idea of what you're talking about. Right now, you haven't a clue.

tc125231

Your poster ISEE is the future of the Republican Party. Their brain must be like the screw bin in a hardware store.

What the GOP has done, Mr. Ambinder, supported by its fellow travelers such as yourself, is make itself the party of the far right. They have effectively ceded the center to the Democrats, with their many flaws.

So the rest of us, who aren't crazy, have no choice but to view the GOP with repugnance, even if we are not wildly enthusiastic about the Democrats. Our children, who see this gay-bashing as the despicable activity it actually is, are even more turned off.

Nice work.

Banefire

ISEE,
Having read your overly long post that meanders into areas not relevant to the topic at hand, I can see you do not understand a basic point-namely that people do not "choose to be gay" later in life but were always gay to begin with. However for a multitude of reasons including religious, societal and familial to name a few, they conform to what is expected of them. It is only later in life, after child are grown, parents dead, sposes gone etc that they are able to finally be who they always were. As the false stigmata of homosexuality fades and gay people no longer tolerate being second class citizens within their own country do the numbers of people willing to admit to being gay rise.
No one is asking you or anyone else to give up your beliefs, ask your religion to marry them or for special rights. I simply want the same rights the you and others like you take for granted. I want my religion to be allowed to marry me and my partner. I want 10% of the population to stop telling the other 90% how to live their lives.

jaebersole

You all are missing the entire issue. Even if republicans were not socially opposed to gay marriage, the whole idea of affording people rights based on their sexual choice (which is all it's been scientifically proven to be)is ludicrous to most empiricists. There's no genetic basis for homosexuality, but there is a genetic indicator of race. Hence, discrimination on the basis of race is forbidden. Most republicans feel that if we allow special rights based on sexuality, what's next? Why couldn't someone choose to adopt some other socially aberrant practice (sexual or otherwise)and claim a right not to be discriminated against based on it?

tleonard

Personal experience tells me it isn't just a choice to be gay. But so what if it was? Don't we provide for non-discrimination based on religion? As Jon Stewart told Mike Hucklebee: "Religion is a life-style choice if there ever was one..."

CShine

Let's say that homosexuality IS a choice and it's not genetically predetermined. Why is it wrong to make that choice?

Let's take another tack. Let's say that there might be some people who are genetically predisposed towards a specific sexual orientation while, at the same time, there might be others who are genetically predisposed to choose one way or the other of their own free will. Isn't that a free exercise of liberty? Why would you take away their liberty?

Is there any reason for such a move other than using the law to enforce one's religion upon society?

CALIX

The US did not fall apart after the Supreme Court ruled on abortion, it won't if it comes to that with gay marriage.

Thankfully US citizens are for the most part more informed that ISEE understands, and more tolerant. There is no grand conspiracy for some "elite" group to take over.

There is every possibility that there will be an evolution of the GOP in the years to come as the older folks who have been around since the years of Nixon pass away - folks who have been very good at pushing these social agenda wedge issues. Change was scary then for other reasons, like communism and racism, and it was used skillfully.

Today's scary topic is being gay...

walr

Once the GOP loses this albatross, they're going to find themselves in the same position as Truman did in '48 after he lost the Dixiecrats. Scared, because how the hell do you win now? But suddenly with a helluva lot of room to maneuver and define the issues.

And like Truman, they'll probably lose fewer votes than their fears would have them believe. In fact, it'll probably go a helluva lot easier on the GOP because it won't have to contend with what faced Truman -- massive vote-rigging in places like Mississippi and oil money after the loss of state's lost control of the tidelands.

I think the question now is not, Should They? or Will They? But Who's Gonna Break the Bad News? That is, who's gonna be the GOP's version of Hubert Humphrey in '48? Which, unfortunately for that person, is another way of asking, Who's ready to get sh*t upon the rest of his political life?