We are the only site on the web devoted exclusively to intellectual conservatism. We find the most intriguing information and bring it together on one page for you.

Home
Articles
Headlines
Links we recommend
Feedback
Link to us
Free email update
About us
What's New & Interesting
Mailing Lists
Intellectual Icons
Submissions














 

Will Democrats Embrace "Gay Marriage?"
by Dan Middleton
24 February 2004

The Democrats stand to lose far more than they will gain by coming out in favor of "gay marriage."


The licensing of so-called homosexual and lesbian "marriages" in San Francisco only serves to confirm what most of us have long thought and what was already manifest: liberals have no regard for laws or authority, and will openly flout both when it serves their purposes.  

The fact that liberal activists hold morality, ethics, and even democratically enacted laws in utter contempt is obvious to any objective, honest observer.  While disgusting, this truth does not interest me right now, and I will spend no further time discussing it.  At the moment, I find an analysis of the issue from a political strategy perspective much more intriguing.

Astute commentators have already pointed out that the push for "gay marriage" is being portrayed by its leaders and those sympathetic to the cause as a classic oppressed versus the oppressor situation.  These "gay rights" crusaders have even had the unmitigated gall to compare their struggle to the civil rights movement of the last century.  It is worth pointing out here that homosexuals and lesbians have never been forced to drink at different water fountains or eat at different lunch counters than heterosexuals.  Nor have they ever been forced to give up their seats on buses, and they certainly have never been enslaved or defined as three-fifths of a human being.  But none of that matters to the foot soldiers of the "gay rights" Jihad.  By putting their movement on the same level as the civil rights movement, these people deliver a monumental insult to all those who fought the good fight to gain equal rights for blacks and other minorities, and to truly oppressed and downtrodden groups throughout history.  But the spin serves their purpose, so they go on with it.  Whether or not they truly believe their own propaganda, I don't know.

But that's not the point.  The point is that in every society, there is a minority class of people who are, for whatever reason, right or wrong, discontent with the status quo.  Clever and ambitious people have always sought to harness this anger and dissatisfaction and use it to propel them to prominence, sometimes out of a genuine desire to right a perceived wrong, but just as often as a tool in their own pursuit of power.  The "gay rights" movement is no different, and the farcical representation of the movement as a grand endeavor every bit the equal of Reverend Martin Luther King's gives rise to the suspicion that members of that latter group are present and active.  

However, mainstream, high-profile liberals such as the Democrat Party's presidential candidates have refused to take a firm stand on the issue.  At first this surprised me.  Granted, John Kerry, as a rule, never takes a firm stand on anything.  But when I considered the situation more carefully, I saw that the Democrats wishy-washiness is entirely understandable.  In fact, I should have expected it.

The Democrats stand to lose far more than they stand to gain by "coming out" (forgive the heinous pun) in favor of "gay marriage."  The fact is that the majority of people in this country do not support the idea.  Numerous polls have proven this beyond debate.  If John Kerry, for example, stated clearly and publicly that he supported marriage rights for homosexuals and lesbians (if you can't tell by now that this is a purely hypothetical scenario, I'm telling you now), he would turn away many voters and gain far fewer.  Furthermore, he would give the Bush team a club to bludgeon him with in the campaign and a bugle-call to energize their conservative base.  (Something the issue is already becoming, actually.)

Kerry knows this.  Virtually all Democrat politicians know this.  Even the openly homosexual Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) has half-heartedly condemned the idiotic act of "civil disobedience" in San Francisco.  The Democrat pols also know that they have nothing to lose by remaining uncommitted on the "gay marriage" issue.  The homosexual and lesbian lobby is going to vote for them in every election no matter what, so they can continue to hedge safely.

Here's another totally hypothetical scenario: Imagine that the homosexual and lesbian "community" got fed up and told the Democrats in no uncertain terms that they were going to withhold their votes until the Dems made it known that they were in favor of "gay marriage" and would fight for that cause in office.  Think of something along the lines of Al Sharpton's rumblings about the Democratic Party and the black community.  "The Democratic Party has got to stop treating gays like a mistress."

Pause to consider all of the amusing implications and connotations of that statement before we go on.

What would the Dems do?  Practicality dictates that they would have to cut loose the homosexual and lesbian voters and take their chances rather then commit political suicide.  This illustrates another fundamental truth about liberalism that other astute commentators have pointed out time and again: liberals are afraid to reveal what they really stand for because they know that to do so would destroy them.  Howard Dean was the only unabashed liberal in the field of Democrat presidential candidates, so he had to go.  A combination of his own boneheaded comments and his rivals' attacks crushed his campaign, and its demise was then blamed on conservatives.  Like an abused attack dog, Dean snarls when he's been trained to snarl and never stops to think that his real enemy might be the master at the other end of the leash.

The fact that the Dems avoid the "gay marriage" issue like a leaking nuclear reactor should give all of us reason to hope that the erosion of traditional, Judeo-Christian values in America has not gone as far as we had feared.  We must make it our mission to see that those who despise the morals and laws of this land never advance far enough into the accepted mainstream that power-hungry politicians can safely use this issue to their advantage.


Dan Middleton is a freelance writer
.

Email Dan Middleton

Send this Article to a Friend