Every so often, I hear that gay Republicans just sit back and support anti-gay candidates. I tend to wonder what world these people live in, because I know of many, many gay Republicans who stand up against the religious right, including yours truly.
The other arguement I hear is that gay Republicans should just leave the GOP and go to a party where they are loved, ie: the Democrats. I have nothing against Democrats, but in a two party system, do we really want a party that bigoted towards gays? I don't think we would ever tolerate a racist party, so why would we tolerate a homophobic one?
Carol Newman a lesbian who was an alternate at the New York GOP convention, pens a strong attack against the religious right and the Republican platform which is attrocious against gays. When asked why she doesn't leave the party she replies:
"If I drop out of the party, the religious right wins. Much as we might like to believe that a third party is the answer, no third party has been able to consistently garner a substantial portion of the vote in the United States. Our government is, for better or worse, a two-party system. That is the very reason the religious right has sought to take over the Republican Party, and that is why the struggle for the heart of the party is so important. We cannot cede control to the Jerry Falwells and the Rick Santorums. "
Amen. We have to work against the far right. I and many gay Republicans will not give control over to people like Santorum. That would be like giving the party over to pre-conversion George Wallace. That should not happen and it won't.
I'm glad to see so many Republicans who are willing to work against homophobia. We will fight for an inclusive party and we won't give up.
Another lesbian Republican making waves is Eva Young. Please read her wonderful commentary on the "protecting marriage" community in Minnesota who are basically bigots in drag.
Don't mess with the Lesbians. Especially the Republican ones.
Posted by Dennis at September 19, 2004 09:29 AMAs a Democrat who visits this site because the issues and responses are intelligent, why not join the Dem party and work on the changes that you would like to see? That is what Dems are having to do due to the seemingly ineffective candidates my party has nominated in rrecent past.
Posted by: Teena at February 15, 2005 06:58 AMI equally wonder why progressive Dems continue to support non-progressive candidates.
The real solution, in my opinion, is for there to be more than two parties. Let people like you who are perhaps more conservative on economics but abhor the theocracy brigade.
Our govt is a two party system only because people accept it as such. If, say, 35% of the present GOP bolts to a moderate center-right party, then that's still pretty influential.
Further, it allows them to align with Republicans on, some economic issues and with Democrats on social issues or whatever the case may be.
Additionally, you can't look only at national politics. A significant third or fourth party could have widespread influence on state and local governments.
Take Britain, for example. While most think of the Tories and Labour as the two main parties, the Liberal Democrats are the second largest party in local government.
Posted by: Brian at September 20, 2004 01:37 PMI do question the polling that's going on: one polls skews far too much to Bush while most of the others say it's a neck-and-neck race.
But then you read the Internet, you watch the protesting at the GOP convention, you note the millions of people seeing Farenheit 9/11, and you have to wonder just HOW Bush can be getting any support at all.
As a journalism student I can remember how polling and surveying is done: your polling results are not based on EVERYONE but on a select population group, which might not reflect average reality. Just look at 1936 election: the Dems crushed the Republicans even though pollsters called an even race. It turned out the pollsters used the phone to conduct interviews: at the middle of the Depression the only ones with phones were wealthy Republicans, which skewed the results. We could be seeing the same thing: the wrong populations are being asked the wrong surveys...