Obama & Gay Benefits

28 Comments so far ↓

• Kirk // Jun 21, 2009 at 2:05 pm

  Mr. Frum,I agree with your general goal of changing the Republican Party, as this is obviously needed. But the premise that homosexuality should be given recognition for political purposes undermines the validity of the enterprise. As individuals, homosexuals have always had equal rights. Homosexuality as such has not been accepted, because it is a perversion of the basic functions of the family. As giving sanction to it affects not only those who engage in it but the broader culture, it undermines the social norms which underpin the family. That is the substance of the issue.In my mind, reform of the Republican Party is necessary, because (1) the America which Reagan won does not exist demographically, and (2) the Reaganite alliance with the commercial class has gone sour, as the commercial class has in multiple ways (through corporate policies and the media) undermined American society. America does face foreign challenges and threats, but none are sufficiently similar to the Soviet Union for a party based on Reagan’s foreign policy to make any sense.To broaden the coalition between its white middle class base – whites made up a much higher percentage of the population in 1980, let’s be frank that it was a white majority – any future majority must include sizeable minorities, if not majorities, of other ethnic groups. And it should focus on the things that matter most.What is at stake in the homosexuality issue is not simply homosexuality, of course, but a broader value system which everywhere it is applied undermines the ability of the society to maintain itself. Homosexual conduct is not by itself a threat to society; the homosexual socio-political agenda is a different matter. My suggestion is to begin with a correct understanding of how a society maintains itself, then then build the political coalition off of that, rather than simply trying to piece together a majority from disparate groups. You have been very critical of Karl Rove for precisely that, and rightly so. I think you should rethink what is the purpose of this “new majority” – if it is simply to win an election, I’m not sure I get the point.

  Log in to Reply

• sinz54 // Jun 23, 2009 at 7:16 am

  Kirk claims: “As individuals, homosexuals have always had equal rights.”No.Prior to the 1960s, gays and lesbians lived lives of fear and shame. They could be instantly dismissed from their jobs in government or corporate America, if their homosexuality was discovered. They could be instantly discharged from the military if their homosexuality was discovered. Their relationships were not recognized as valid for the purposes of next of kin or hospital visitation rights. That situation has greatly improved. But your claim that they have “always” had equal rights in America is just false.

  Log in to Reply

• sinz54 // Jun 23, 2009 at 7:26 am

  Kirk sez: “any future majority must include sizeable minorities, if not majorities, of other ethnic groups. And it should focus on the things that matter most.”I do agree with this part of your post.But any attempt to broaden the GOP’s appeal runs into a strongly insular, defensive, nativist attitude from the base.The two fastest-growing voting blocs in America today are single women and Hispanics.You can forget about the GOP appealing to single women, as long as the GOP has taken such a hard right approach to abortion. (Fetuses getting Fourteenth Amendment rights?) And as long as the GOP’s base looks down on single moms for having had children out of wedlock. (“You should have kept your legs together,” is a typical response from Townhall.com.)You can forget about the GOP appealing to Hispanics, as long as the GOP opposes ANY path to citizenship for the illegal aliens who are already here.So as things stand now, the GOP doesn’t have a chance of appealing to anybody beyond white married Christians. The GOP base has turned inward, huddling around themselves. They see themselves as Ayn Rand’s “Galt’s Gulch,” the last bastion of freedom in a nation that’s going socialist.

  Log in to Reply