While I’m not a prognosticator I do know a Republican will not win the 2016 presidential bid.
With four GOP debates now aired where all the presidential hopefuls are clearly either conservative or ultra-conservative on social issues, one has to wonder—where are the Log Cabin Republicans in pushing forth LGBTQ concerns this campaign season?
While I am not a Republican, and I don’t expect from Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) the sort of public protesting as that of the “Black Lives Matter” movement, I am hoping, however, to see LGBTQ Republicans publicly bring to the fore how being anti-LGBTQ in 2015 is a huge political liability for any Republican candidate, especially one seeking the highest office in the land.
On the Log Cabin website it states, “We believe equality for LGBT Americans is in the finest tradition of the Republican Party. We educate our Party about why inclusion wins. Opposing gay and lesbian equality is inconsistent with the GOP’s core principles of smaller government and personal freedom.”
With that said where is the groundwork being done to help the G.O.P move forward on LGBTQ inclusion?
While I’m not a prognosticator I do know a Republican will not win the 2016 presidential bid.
However, my hope is when one does she or he won’t repeal LGBTQ gains won.
For example, although the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of marriage equality Republican presidential hopefuls still think marriage should be between one woman and one man. And their opposition to the June SCOTUS decision isn’t as hatefully demonstrative and obstructively cynical as that of Kim Davis—the now infamous Kentucky County clerk who not only refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couple but she also forbade her co-workers to do so, too.
As a born again Christian, Davis cited that her First Amendment rights protected her actions. And with a movement afoot with bills called “ Religious Freedom Restoration Acts’ (RFRA) looking to codify LGBTQ discrimination I was hoping Log Cabin Republicans would step up their game against their Republican brethren.
The two Republican presidential front-runners—Donald Trump and Ben Carson—tout heterosexual marriage, but their response toward Obergefell v. Hodges are diametrically different.
While Trump twice-divorced touts traditional marriage he spoke against Davis’ obstructionist actions. But Ben Carson, on the other hand, did not. And if he were to become president, as a Christian conservative, it would be his God-given calling and moral imperative to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges.
And one of the reasons is because Carson doesn’t see LGBTQ love on a spectrum of human expression. Carson has compared same-sex marriage to bestiality:
“Well, my thoughts are that marriage is between a man and a woman. It’s a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn’t matter what they are, they don’t get to change the definition."
In 1996 LCR did not endorse President George H. W. Bush’s bid for the White House because of his public anti-LGBTQ rhetoric. And they followed suit in their actions with George W. Bush because of his robust support of the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004. However, in 2012 LCR endorsed Mitt Romney in spite of his support to a constitutional amendment to ban marriage equality, his objection to repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and his opposition to Employment Non-Discrimination. But in a public statement LRC announced their reason for rallying around Romney: “due to the gravity of the economic and national security issues currently at stake.”
LCR’s endorsement of Romney forced former Democratic congressmen Barney Frank to call them out. In his September 11, 2012 public statement Frank penned a no-holds-barred jeremiad.
"I am not surprised that members of the Log Cabin Republicans are offended by my comparing them to Uncle Tom…
But my use of ‘Uncle Tom’ was based not simply on this awful fact that they have chosen to be actively on the wrong side of an election that will have an enormous impact on our right to equality, both in fact and in the public perception of the popularity of that cause.
The damaging aspect of the Log Cabin argument, to repeat the most important point, is that they may mislead people who do not share their view that tax cuts for the wealthy are more important than LGBT rights into thinking that they are somehow helping the latter by supporting Mitt Romney and his Rick Santorum platform.”
Like Barney Frank I’m calling you out. But not to shame you. Rather it is to encourage you to see that not only is the work for LGBTQ inclusion not done, it’s most needed in the GOP And the ball is in your court.
