Taking Back America--Part 2, Gay Rights

The issue of gay rights is perhaps the hardest policy issue that Democrats have to decide over the next few years. To what extent do we push for increased gay rights and at what political cost will such gains come. There can be little question that gay marriage cost us the election. We underestimated the power of bigotry in this country. I don't think we will again anytime soon.

I think we have to halt the movement for gay marriage for the time being. We are living in a time similar in some ways to the 1920s and 1930s when there was significant support for real laws to stop lynching in the South. However, although it was the moral thing to do, it was never done because at the time it would have been political suicide. (Note--I'm not comparing not allowing gays to marry to lynching. That would be offensive. But there are some historical parallels here) Sadly, the nation was just not ready for real civil rights legislation before World War II. But slowly a new generation came to power and with a great struggle, not only were anti-lynching laws passed and enforced, but of course many other great civil rights gains were also accomplished. On gay marriage, I feel that we are in a 1930 mode. Many of us know that there is no good reason to not allow gays to marry. It is simply discrimination. But the nation as a whole is not ready. To come out and actively support gay marriage might play well with the Democratic base (see the mayor of San Francisco) but it means that we will lose elections both on the national and local levels. However, a new day is dawning, albeit slowly. Even conservatives under the age of 40 mostly don't care about gay marriage and thus in another 20 years, gay marriage could be accepted throughout the nation, though again, not without a significant struggle in, say, Alabama.

However, even if the nation is not ready for gay marriage as a legal institution yet, it may be ready for significant civil union legislation. Obviously, we are not going to get that on a national level right now. But surveys show that a lot of the people who oppose gay marriage have no problem at all with civil unions. I think that's the answer. To abandon the gains we have made on gay rights would be simply immoral. We just need to scale back the rhetoric some and some of the legal challenges for "marriage" as such and work toward civil union legislation in many states. Of course, it makes sense for us to start in states like Washington, California, and New York, but I don't think it would take too many years for that to spread to more moderate states--perhaps an Arizona, Iowa, or Missouri.

By focusing on civil unions with all the benefits of marriage, while not discussing marriage at all, I think we can go a very long way in undermining the evangelical hold on the Republican party and begin to retake America.

Coming this weekend--Part 3--"Family Values"