Republicans’ irrational defensiveness on same-sex “marriage”

Tim W. writes:

Only the Republicans could be stupid enough to find themselves on the defensive on an issue where their side has won 33 of 33 state-wide referenda. If the Democrat/liberal side of any issue had been approved by the voters of 33 states, every single time the issue was put to a popular vote, and in most cases by a lopsided landslide, the Democrats would be pounding the GOP into the ground with that issue.

Same-sex “marriage” has gone down to defeat on every referendum vote. 33 times at my last count. It’s only been close (53-47) a couple of times. Usually, the no vote on same-sex “marriage” is massive. Last November Iowa voters threw three judges off their Supreme Court who had imposed same-sex “marriage” on their state. Never before in the history of Iowa had even one Supreme Court judge been removed by the voters. So obviously this is an issue where a sizable majority side with the conservatives and where the voters seem animated to take action. Yet the GOP cowers on the issue while Democrats feel increasingly confident in embracing same-sex “marriage.”

I’m sure there are state senate districts in a more liberal state like New York where most voters support same-sex “marriage.” But surely those districts are represented by leftist Democrats. I can’t imagine that a single Republican in the New York Senate has a constituency that’s clamoring for same-sex “marriage.” I’d guess that every Senate Republican and half of the Democrats have constituencies who are mostly opposed to same-sex “marriage.” Yet it’s the GOP that’s acting scared to death. Are they that frightened of the liberal media and the vocal homosexual activists?

- end of initial entry -

Aaron S. writes:

In re: Tim W.’s observation on the political cowardice of the republicans concerning gay “marriage”, I must agree only in part. Yes, one would think that on an issue where one has overwhelming public support, timidity should not follow. But the cowardice is entirely rational when we consider the inability of any Republican of note to think or speak outside the language of rights. And on this ground, I think they sense (correctly) that their argument is a loser. Is there a Republican candidate or party official capable of saying and defending in public things like, “marriage is an inherently discriminatory and prejudicial institution,” or “marriage is unavoidably connected with the natural interests of the society of which is a part,” to take but two obvious possibilities?

Timidity will disappear when we actually get public officials capable of thinking in non-liberal terms. As it is at present, they know that two steps into the argument they have little but appeals to raw emotion or “preference”; and this clearly won’t cut it, even if most of the country shares these preferences.

LA replies:

Excellent traditionalist point. :-) Notwithstanding the brute fact of electoral majorities opposing homosexual marriage, publicly arguing against homosexual marriage is a different matter. In liberal society, in which no non-liberal principles are recognized, it is difficult to do.

Derek C. writes

The GOP is defensive on the issue because in politics gratitude is fleeting, but enmity is forever. It’s also very, very personal. Those voting “no” will be targeted by gay and liberal groups, especially if they’re in a swing district. They won’t push on the marriage issue, but they will bankroll opponents, and they’ll find other reasons to highlight every bad thing that legislator may have done. If they want it bad enough, not even family or home will be safe. Look at what happened to Anita Bryant. Her family was harassed. Her employers were boycotted. Her marriage was broken up and her finances were driven into bankruptcy. All of this happened before the big sympathy push homosexuals got from AIDS. Do you want to go through what she did?

Really, we should all appreciate, a lot more than we do, those legislators who do stand firm.

Greg W. writes:

Tim W. said:

“Yet it’s the GOP that’s acting scared to death. Are they that frightened of the liberal media and the vocal homosexual activists?”

Of course they are. They are cowards. Any time a celebrity says anything opposing gay marriage, it is plastered all over the media outlets. Last week, it was a former football player they tried to destroy (but, he is black, so the media will not go as far to destroy him).

There’s a lot of heterophobia going around.

June 25

Anthony M. writes:

“Only the Republicans could be stupid enough to find themselves on the defensive on an issue where their side has won 33 of 33 state-wide referenda. Are they that frightened of the liberal media and the vocal homosexual activists?”

Republicans believe in the same “principle” of equality as liberals, i.e. that gays are entitled to the same relationships as normal people. Their hesitation comes not from a disagreement with liberals but with the speed at which certain principles become legislation. If the Democrat moves towards an objective at 90 MPH, the conservative prefers to do it at 60 MPH such that the existing framework not be shocked and destabilized by a sudden acceleration. It’s a question of accomodation at which rate of acceleration.

LA replies:

A variation on this is: “The Democrats will take us over the cliff at 90 miles an hour. The Republicans stay within the speed limit, but they will still take us over the cliff.”

Posted by Lawrence Auster at June 24, 2011 01:01 PM | Send