On gay rights, our consciousness has shifted

By Rick Cendo and Gary Hamner
June 8, 2003

Recent comments on homosexuals and homosexuality by Republican U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum have prompted anger and offense among many gay Americans and their friends and families. It is hard to see Sen. Santorum's comments as a victory for the growing acceptance of gays in American culture. But it is. Here's why:

Santorum moved the anti-gay political extreme closer to the mainstream.

Santorum, who has been widely reported as comparing homosexual acts to incest, may sound pretty extreme. In reality, his position is more moderate than anti-gay rhetoric as little as 10 years ago.

In the transcript of his interview with the Associated Press, Santorum said, among other things, "I have nothing, absolutely nothing against anyone who's homosexual. If that's their orientation, then I accept that."

He went on to say that gays have no right to privacy to engage in sexual acts within the confines of their own homes. But his comments were part of a larger legal perspective that the Constitution provides no right to privacy for anyone, heterosexual or homosexual.

Compare this to campaign literature 11 years ago in support of Amendment 2, the anti-gay initiative that Colorado passed in 1992 but that was later struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court:

Under the headline "Objective: Destroy The Family," Colorado for Family Values said, "If you value the role of the family in the fabric of Colorado, then you have reason to fear the true agenda of 'gay-rights' [sic] militants. To this angry, alienated minority, the family is the symbol of everything they attack." (From "Stop Special Class Status for Homosexuality")

Conservative leaders supported Santorum, but not his comments.

Republican leaders defended Santorum and rejected calls to oust him from his leadership position in the U.S. Senate. But the defense of Santorum stopped short of defending what he actually said. Instead, the defense emphasized that he is a tolerant man, in spite of his comments. Here's what Senate Republican Leader Bill Frist said:

"People who work with Rick day in, day out understand he's a man of caring, compassion, and tolerance."

When asked about President Bush's reaction to Santorum's comments, White House spokesman Ari Fliescher said, "I have not seen the entire context of the interview, and, two, I haven't talked to the president about it. So I really don't have anything to offer beyond that."

Two days later, Fleischer elaborated on President Bush's views on homosexuality by saying, "He judges people about who they are, their individual soul. That's not a matter the president concerns himself with. He judges people for how they act and how they relate, and that's his focus on that."

Compare this to 1998, when Trent Lott was still sharing his wisdom with the nation as Republican Leader of the U.S. Senate. In a clear act of chutzpah for any career politician, Lott compared homosexuals to alcoholics and kleptomaniacs. At the time, no Republicans leader felt compelled to defend Lott as "a man of caring, compassion, and tolerance" (thank goodness) or to state that homosexuals should be judged on their conduct alone.

Some conservatives even criticized Santorum's comments

Although Santorum's comments on gays were mild, even liberal, by historical standards, he nevertheless came under criticism by some conservatives.

An example is the reaction by Tony Blankley, a former Newt Gingrich aide and the current editor of The Washington Times editorial page.

On CNN's Crossfire, Blankley said: "I disagree with almost everything [Santorum] said, both his legal analysis, which is — I don't think it's sustainable. I'm confident the Supreme Court can distinguish between consensual conduct by gays and lesbians in private and incest, which is not consensual, by definition of the relationship. So I don't buy his argument. I don't buy his argument that American families are in danger from the 1 percent to 2 percent of homosexuals in the country. We've had that population since the beginning of time, and American families are fine."

Although we never thought we'd say it, hooray for Tony Blankley! We hope that Colorado for Family Values is listening.

For the last 40 years, homosexuality has been the subject of a long discussion in America. It is a discussion that has been emotional and awkward. For gays, it has often been painful and exasperating. But it is also a classic example of democracy at work.

This discussion has debunked many long-held myths and misconceptions about homosexuals. It has moved homosexuals from a time in which we were officially classified as criminal and mentally ill to a time in which we are among valued members of all professions, including law enforcement and mental health.

We disagree with Sen. Santorum. But in making his views open and clear, he has sparked analysis, deliberation, and fact-based debate. In other words, he has contributed to a discussion whose overall direction is clear: the acceptance of gay and lesbians as productive, valued members of the American family.