Sirius XM: Gays Explain "Why I Voted Republican" to Signorile

Michaelangelo Singorile interviews gays who voted Republican. The interviews go from pathetic--"I wanted to send a message to Obama, so I voted for Ron Paul...No. I don't like Ron Paul."--to really sad, "I want to adopt...no, I didn't know the Senator I voted for wants to make that illegal.")

I know gay republicans, and that's fine. There are a few of them who even have valid reasons for being Republican (a few...). However, I know a lot more who, despite what they say, seem to be Republican because it gives them what I'll call "straight cred". What I mean by this is, in an effort to gain acceptance by the majority, they espouse views that are down the line right-wing in an effort to somehow court the majority's favor. By slamming immigrants and spending, being hawkish on war, supporting right-wing justices (including Harriet Meiers failed bit at a Supreme Court seat), these guys seem to think that somehow, the majority opinion (ie. straight white men) will be more accepting.

The incredibly sad part is, they wont. Acceptance doesn't come from buying into a self-loathing or prosecutorial ideology. Acceptance from others comes from accepting oneself. But that is a hard sell to someone who is in the closet, or if not in the closet someone who doesn't want to be who he is. Hell, I had a gay republican tell me two weeks before the 2008 election that he had not donated to No on 8 because, and this is a direct quote (I save IM messages), "It will never pass. All the liberals will do whatever dear leader says, so it doesn't matter what people in California want." So much for that prediction...

This won't always be the case. At some point, gays and lesbians will have full equality. Don't Ask will be over, ENDA will be passed (or gays and lesbians will be added to the Civil Rights Act) and DOMA will be no more. At that point, there will be a re-alignment of politics with the minority of gays being split between both parties. At that point, the Republican Party will start acting on its pocket book and hope that gays and lesbians forgot that they were crushed by years of Republican obstructionism. What remains to be seen is how quickly gays and lesbians will move on, forgive and forget. If this election is any sign, it will be far more quickly than most people think.

But, until that happens, Michaelangelo poses an interesting and difficult to answer question: Is it selfish for gays and lesbians to vote their economic interests over their civil rights?

A secondary question this interview brought up in my mind was the following: Has the push for acceptance taken the air out of the fight for equality? The two are not the same. Acceptance is what the third caller talks about. No, he cannot get married and no, he does not have equal rights. But, he says, he lives with his partner and has for years and they're happy. Does the representation on TV, the ability to go out and hold hands and the general "acceptance" (if simply NOT being attacked on the streets like in the past is acceptance) make the gay and lesbian population apathetic to fighting for full, legal equality? If one can be "happy enough" with the status quo, what is the impetus to fight for something more?

I know for me it's a simple matter of principle--that the very idea of America is that "all men are created equal" and so long as we, as a nation, do not uphold that belief, we are selling ourselves, and the nation, short. But not everyone sees it that way. So for those who don't see a broader message and meaning to their daily lives, then why bother? Would the Civil Rights movement have ever taken off if separate really WAS equal? If African-Americans could have sat at the same counters, had equal water fountains and sat anywhere on the bus and suffered nothing other than dirty looks (and hundreds of tax breaks and pension benefits etc.), would the movement have had the backing it did? It seems the movement for full equality for gays and lesbians is answering that question in the negative.