Interesting opinion piece here on why conservatives should embrace gay marriage.
Most Republicans aren't stupid. (I say most because some do make you wonder.) But those who can see beyond their next primary election should be able to read the tea leaves on gay marriage. It's going to happen, and it is a losing issue for the Republican Party. I think a lot of the party's leaders can see this, and now a few, such as Sen. Portman, are actually acting on it and getting ahead of the issue before it bites them back.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/21/opinion/hoover-gop- … le_sidebar
It is true that our state political leadership is a bunch of nasty, gay-baiting hatemongers, and we lack some legal protections that gay people in some more progressive states have. (Gov. Rick Perry once said that if gay people don't like the laws in Texas, they should feel free to move.)
However, our major cities -- Dallas/Fort Worth, Austin, San Antonio, Houston -- have thriving gay communities, and gay life here probably isn't much different than it is in major cities elsewhere in the nation. Gay people are treated equally, for the most part, and some cities have passed anti-discrimination ordinances on their own without waiting for the state. The lack of statewide legal protections rarely, if ever, comes into play in daily life.
Now, I'm not speaking for life in small-town Texas, which I'm sure is a different experience altogether. But we aren't an abused, mistreated, persecuted minority in our big cities. So, if any of you out-of-staters wish to visit us, or even consider moving here, you don't have to worry about running into a redneck lynch mob waiting for you at the border!
I do not have any impression that BearinFW is some kind of a gay uncle Tom. I think he is being very reasonable and above all, REALISTIC! Zealotry turns people off, no matter how righteous you may think you are. Enough said.
(MEOW!)
Now, I would agree that Dems haven't always treated us great and have taken advantage of us to get our votes. But the GOP has used us as a boogeyman to scare up votes on the right and from "religious" voters.
Your choice.
I also don't think society as a whole is our enemy, and we see this very clearly on the evolution of marriage rights. Our enemy was staying in the closet. When we are out and open, and people know their sons, daughters, friends and coworkers are gay, they know we're just regular people and we deserve the same basic human rights as they have.
Being out of the closet has been our secret weapon. If people don't know you, it's easy to be scared of you and demonize you.
When the GOP concedes on marriage rights, the battle is all but over.
And besides, it's also kinda fun to see Republicans twist in the wind on gay rights when they have given us so much grief over the years :)
How about this one: Karl Rove (yes him) says he could imagine a GOP presidential candidate supporting gay marriage.
http://gma.yahoo.com/karl-rove-could-imagine-gop- … ories.html
We are going to prevail. Its just a matter of how much the court helps us along.
Texas actually has progressive pockets other than Austin. Our major cities have gay communities and are gay friendly. The problem is our states political leadership is not. Without help from the courts it will be many decades before equality can be achieved here. But it will happen eventually as the states demographics are changing markedly.
On the other hand the courts are going to have to intervene for equality to ever happen in some places.
I doubt the court will be brave enough to expand marriage nationwide at this time. But well see. Its an exciting moment in history for gay Americans.
Additionally, for those following the cases starting tomorrow, here's an excellent piece from the AP that breaks down the cases and gives the potential outcomes on both DOMA and Prop 8: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/mar/24/tp-wid … es-on-gay/
Attached pic has nothing to do with post/blog, but is of Matthias Schoenaerts--he's so darned nice looking that I had to share.
Because of this, incumbents in these districts (and other top candidates of the majority party) only have to appeal to enough voters to get a majority of votes in their own party primary. Their win in the general election is assured.
So candidates do not have to play to the middle at all.
So, just taking the issue of gay marriage ... if a GOP candidate is in a hard-core, conservative, white, Bible-thumping district that is 70 percent Republican, he doesn't even have to worry about a Democratic or middle of the road challenge. So even if the national trend is way in favor of gay marriage, it is his self-interest to oppose it. All he has to worry about is being challenged by an even more conservative right-wing Republican.
Computerized district lines, which is what we have today, only encourage extreme partisanship and all but preclude the idea of legislative moderation. On both sides of the aisle.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/22/opinion/anderson-st … ?hpt=hp_t3
This is the reality that this lame argument misses:
OK, I don't think anyone would seriously dispute that the ideal situation for a child would be to be in a loving, secure home raised by his/her married birth mother and birth father.
Fine.
So, how does allowing gay marriage change that? We aren't going to snatch your children. Nor are heteros going to be getting our children to raise in their perfect homes. Kids have always grown up in gay households, and that will continue to happen whether or not gay people are allowed to legally marry. Allowing gay people with children to marry actually makes life better for children by providing the framework of a committed relationship (or at least a legal one) for them to grow up in. Gay marriage is actually *good* for children, not bad.
So find another argument.
OK, if one lame argument isn't enough: Gay marriage will lead to group marriage :)
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/20/opinion/george-gay- … le_sidebar