Mitt Romney and gay rights
Mitt Romney is generally considered the most conservative of the three leading Republican presidential contenders (the other two, of course, being John McCain and Rudy Giuliani). But a Massachusetts gay newspaper accuses Romney of having "a secret gay history," by which it means that he has taken some political positions sympathetic to gay rights.
Other socially conservative Republicans may view the matter differently (and, as I note below, appear already to do so), but I don't see much in the article that concerns me. In 1994, running for the Senate against Ted Kennedy, he promised that he would support "full equality for America's gay and lesbian citizens" and do so more effectively (given his "mainstream" credentials) than Kennedy could. Romney does not seem to have meant by this that he supported gay marriage; however, he did provide gays with some reason to believe he might do so. According to the article, when Romney was asked whether he supported same-sex marriage, he answered, "I am sure [Gov. Weld] will study it and evaluate it and I will endorse his position on that." Assuming the accuracy of this account, it speaks poorly of Romney that he would defer to Weld or anyone else on this issue, and the statement appears to be a dodge. In any case, when Weld eventually came out in favor of the same-sex marriage, Romney did not follow suit. Instead, he has been a leading voice on the other side of the issue. And statements he made as a church leader in 1993 indicate that he did not support same-sex marriages back then either. Moreover, as a candidate for governor of ultra-liberal Massachusetts in 2002, Romney told gay rights activists that he opposed same-sex marriages although, according to the article, some of the activists did not take him to mean he was inexorably opposed.
On the issue of the admission of gays to the Boy Scouts, Romney said, as a candidate in 1994, that "I support the right of the Boy Scouts of America to decide what it wants to do on that issue." However, he also expressed his personal view that "all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation." I can't find major fault with Romney on either score.
With respect to gays in the military, Romney said in 1994 that he supported President Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. He went on to predict that this would be “the first in a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military.” As a presidential candidate, Romney will have to state whether he now believes that gays and lesbians should be able to so serve. My guess is that he's content with current policy and would not change it as president. That's fine with me.
The article goes on to show that as governor Romney has appointed openly gay individuals to state office, has continued to speak generally in favor of defending civil rights without regard to sexual preference, and has continued to fund (though at a very modest level) the pre-existing Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth. I don't see anything here that Romney should be embarrassed about.
According to the New York Times, leading social conservatives Tony Perkins and Paul Weyrich have said they are disturbed by Romney's 1994 letter. I don't think many social conservatives will be embracing McCain or Giuliani on this account, but if Romney is unable to satisfy concerned conservatives like Perkins and Weyrich there will be more room for a new candidate on the right than may now exist. But, while I would welcome the presence of such a candidate, Romney's overall record on gay rights issues does not make me less inclinded to support him.
JOHN adds: Or me either. I suspect that much mainstream news analysis is filtered through the false assumption that conservatives generally hate homosexuals. Thus, if a Republican politician is friendly toward gays, appoints gays to office, speaks of protecting their civil rights, etc., this is viewed as somehow at odds with, say, opposition to gay marriage. It isn't. I think a large majority of conservatives have no ill will toward homosexuals, while at the same time believing that gay marriage would be an unwise social policy. I know that some accuse Romney of flip-flopping on gay marriage, and I haven't investigated to figure out whether that charge is true or not. In general, though, his attitude toward homosexuals sounds like it is in tune with what I described as the majority conservative view.
To discuss this post, go here.
