Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« The Magical, Magical Google Image S… | New Chrome App Reminds You Not to B… »

Monday, December 19, 2011

2012 / Politics / LGBTQITSLFA There's Something Happening Here

Posted by Dan Savage on Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:00 PM

Mitt Romney, who doesn't want gays marrying but who once promised to do more to advance gay rights than Ted Kennedy, staggers along, the unpopular-but-still-presumptive nominee. Ron Paul, who thinks gay people should be allowed to marry and legally buy heroin thinks we should be able to serve in the military that he won't use to bomb Iran, surges into first place in Iowa and pulls into second in New Hampshire. Gingrich is in free fall, despite having taken a pledge to "defend traditional marriage," while the most passionate anti-gay haters in the race—the thee rightwing stooges: Bachmann (who thinks gays should marry straights because that worked out so well for her), Perry (who doesn't think gays should serve in the armed forces), and Santorum (who thinks gays are destroying marriage for the rest of us)—are stuck in a three-way tie for last place. And then there are these headlines from the last 24 hours:

Rick Perry Confronted by Teenager Over Gays Serving Openly in Military

LGBT Advocates send a message at Bachmann event

That teenager? A fearless 14-year-old bi girl who—no surprise here—beat Perry in their brief debate. Those LGBT advocates who confronted Bachmann in a small town? Mostly straight, it seems, and one of 'em was a feisty, quotable old broad who just wasn't having Bachmann's shit. And who can forget Romney getting his ass handed to him by that gay Vietnam vet in a New Hampshire diner?

Republican politicians used to feel they could attack LGBT people with impunity. The queers wouldn't confront 'em because we didn't want to get outed at work or to our folks back home and the straights folks who supported gay rights didn't think the issue of LGBT equality was important enough to get in a politician's face.

Times have changed. It used to be pro-gay politicians who paid a political price. Now it's the haters and nutjobs who are paying the price. There's not much upside to bashing gays these days—even on the right—and there's a definite downside.

Comments (19) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

Dan don't forget Iowa and New Hampshire are both marriage equality states. I think that makes a big difference too.

Posted by Simply Me on December 19, 2011 at 12:08 PM

If equality depends on turning conservatives into liberals, it is a lost cause. The future is convincing conservatives that equality is perfectly consistent with their own values. That marriage equality IS a pro-family position. That the ability to serve openly IS good for national security. That non-discrimination IS living up to the principles of the Constitution.

I think in this regard, some Republican voters are way ahead of most Republican politicians. I hope the trend continues.

Posted by bleedingheartlibertarian on December 19, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Stand up to bullies! Huzzah!

Posted by Vince on December 19, 2011 at 12:09 PM

Ron Paul remains horrible on reproductive rights. Do not let this slip your mind.

Posted by d.p. on December 19, 2011 at 12:14 PM

@2 There's a shitload of difference between honest-to-God Constitutional conservatives, and the God-bothering, prosperity-gospel, born-again, xenophobic, evangelical, "social conservatives" that the GOP has thrown their lot in with.

I'll happily argue with Constitutional conservatives over social welfare and consumer protection issues and the like. Social conservatives aren't worth the mud on their shoes or the time of day.

Posted by Brooklyn Reader on December 19, 2011 at 12:25 PM

@5-Right there with you. Just didn't want to try to parse all the flavors of "conservative" in one blog comment.

Posted by bleedingheartlibertarian on December 19, 2011 at 12:33 PM

@4; who gives a shit about repro rights, you pussy. Why not let a few states try their own thing as an experiment. I prefer diversity over the homogenized, wal-martization of culture. I want me some rednecks in my boonies and some authentic asian joints in my chinatown. If you really cared about those "rights" you should put your money where Michelle Bachmann is and drone bomb the entire middle east back to the 20th century.

Posted by porchedge on December 19, 2011 at 12:38 PM

President Ron Paul will also make sure that millions of gay people* have no health insurance, no right to unionize and no access to free education.

*Straight people too.

Posted by DOUG.

on December 19, 2011 at 12:42 PM

Except a few weeks ago it was Herman Cain in front, and Rick Perry before Cain, and before that it was Bachmann. I don't think anything is happening here. It's just musical chairs.

Posted by avocado on December 19, 2011 at 12:43 PM

You're nuts if you think Ron Paul supports gay marriage. His position is, as always, an extreme state's rights one, but he strongly supports DOMA and was opposed to the Lawrence v Texas decision that overturned his state's law against sodomy.

Posted by Fnarf

on December 19, 2011 at 12:51 PM

I think what's happening is that these issues don't matter to as many people as they did in previous races. It's just not something that will get people votes anymore, because deep down people realize that these issues don't really affect them. They'd rather have a president who can fix the economy.

Posted by Andy on December 19, 2011 at 12:54 PM

It's a bit of a reach to just say Ron Paul thinks gay people should be allowed to marry without qualification. He's been sort of against federal laws about it, but says he would've voted for DOMA and he co-sponsored the Marriage Protection Act. He wouldn't stop states that support it from allowing it, but more than likely would favor states to ban it and wouldn't require states where it's illegal to recognize marriages performed elsewhere. It's another issue he rarely gives a straight answer on.

Posted by gt_10 on December 19, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Yeah, you're dead wrong on Ron Paul. In reaction to Lawrence v. Texas, he wrote a bill, the "We the People Act" which he keeps reintroducing in every Congress, that would strip federal courts of the power to make decisions and issue rulings "regarding the right of privacy including sexual practices, orientation or reproduction, and the role of the Equal Protection clause on the right to marry."

He's kind of a turd

Posted by Chajusong on December 19, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Ron Paul is a hater and a nutjob, just not in exactly the same way as Michele Bachmann

Posted by bobbo on December 19, 2011 at 2:54 PM

Danny!

You're WINNING!!!!

Just look at the awesome
HomoLoving Gay Marriage pushing
President your Party elected!!!

Posted by Man On Dog Sex on December 19, 2011 at 3:27 PM

So how are you going to pass the time from now on, Dan?

Posted by Chris in Vancouver WA on December 19, 2011 at 4:00 PM

Ron Paul is still a horrible candidate. He wants to repeal Roe V. Wade. How can any politician who claims to be libertarian and wants the government out of anyone's business be so pro-life that he would've signed a Life At Conception Act? Ron Paul is evil, just like every other Republican candidate, he's just better at hiding it.

Posted by VictoriaK on December 19, 2011 at 7:51 PM

So when do you think the Ron Paul fanboys will show up to lecture on how we should just accept the loss of free K-12 education and bargaining rights, and letting states legislate women's and queers' bodies because states have more rights than people, because we'll be somehow "freer" that way?

Posted by Whoop Di Doo on December 20, 2011 at 2:52 AM

You haven't included how these losers feel about my body and what I have a right to do with it. Important information left out.

Posted by Moonmaid on December 20, 2011 at 11:48 AM