G.O.P.
Hypocrisy
New
York Times, April 25, 2003
229 W. 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036
Fax: 212-556-3622
Email: letters@nytimes.com
By Dan Savage
SEATTLE—Gay groups are trying to
turn Senator Rick Santorum into the next Trent Lott. It’s not going to work.
Mr. Lott lost his post as Senate majority leader because he said something he
wasn’t supposed to. Mr. Santorum, who holds the No. 3 position in the Senate
leadership, was only repeating what many Republicans have already said.
After telling a reporter that he likes homosexuals just
fine—provided we refrain from engaging in homosexual acts—Mr. Santorum
came out in support of laws against sodomy. A right to privacy, he said,
“doesn’t exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution”—for
gays, straights, anybody. He then compared homosexuality to bigamy, polygamy,
incest and adultery. Too much freedom—allowing gays and lesbians to live
openly and without fear of arrest, for example—is “antithetical to strong,
healthy families,” he said. Homosexuality may not be as bad as “man on
child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be,” he said, but -
At this point the reporter broke in. “I’m sorry, I
didn’t think I was going to talk about ‘man on dog’ with a United States
senator,” she said. “It’s sort of freaking me out.”
She wasn’t the only one. Gay groups called for Mr.
Santorum’s head, while antigay groups like the Family Research Council, once
headed by Gary Bauer, rushed to defend him. But Mr. Santorum needn’t worry
about his leadership post. Unlike the former majority leader, Mr. Santorum
didn’t slip up and say something in plain English that every good Republican
knows must only be said in code. Unlike Republican appeals to racist voters,
Republican appeals to homophobic voters are overt. During the 2000 campaign,
Alan Keyes appeared on the same stage as George Bush and denounced the
“radical homosexual agenda” that he said was destroying the American
family. Candidate Bush, now President Bush, failed to respond, even though his
running mate’s daughter is a lesbian.
But gays and lesbians are more than just sons and
daughters. We’re moms and dads, too. My boyfriend and I adopted a son five
years ago, and we plan to adopt again. As more same-sex couples start
families, it’s going to be harder for Republicans like Mr. Santorum to say
we are somehow a threat to the American family.
As much as it may dismay Mr. Santorum and his defenders,
there really is no word other than “family” to describe the three people
who live in my house. When it comes to marriage rights, gays and lesbians are
willing to play semantic games. We will use awkward phrases like “civil
union” and “domestic partnership” so long as we can get what our
families really need: the rights, responsibilities and safeguards of legal
marriage. But two adults who love each other and are raising children
together? What are we if not a family? What other word is there for us?
In our culture, homosexuality is discussed only when it
presents a problem—for the armed forces, for closeted gay students in high
school, for those who imagine gays are undermining society. Rarely is
homosexuality credited with the creation of something positive and lasting.
Desire brought my boyfriend and me together. And it’s simple desire that
brings most couples, gay or straight, together. Responsibly acted on, this
desire is a good thing in and of itself, and it can often lead to other good
things. Like strong, healthy families.
New
York Times, May 2, 2003
229 W. 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036
Fax: 212-556-3622
Email: letters@nytimes.com
Letters
Dan Savage (“G.O.P. Hypocrisy,” Op-Ed, April 25)
excoriates Senator Rick Santorum’s failure to recognize that “same-sex
couples” who adopt or have children are “families.”
As much as it may surprise Mr. Savage, my love of 25
years and I are not just a “couple” brought together by “desire.” Even
without children, our love, dedication and caring through sickness and health,
good times and bad, have also created a “family.”
—Paris R. Baldacci, New York
Dan Savage’s observation that it is socially acceptable to be a homophobe,
but not a racist (Op-Ed, April 25) brought to mind a prophetic statement by
Bayard Rustin, who battled both racism and homophobia in his 60-year career as
an activist and organizer.
“Twenty-five or 30 years ago,” Rustin said in a 1986
interview, “the barometer of human rights in the United States was black
people. That is no longer true. The barometer for judging the character of
people in regard to human rights is now those who consider themselves gay or
lesbian.”
Given the hateful views of gay men and lesbians espoused
unapologetically by leaders like Senator Rick Santorum—and the sobering fact
that it was only four months ago that New York enacted legislation to protect
gay citizens from discrimination in housing, employment and public
accommodations—we have a long way to go.
—Bennett Singer, Brooklyn
The writer is co-director of a new PBS documentary about Bayard Rustin.
[Home] [Editorials]
[Santorum] [Spreading
Santorum]
