First published in Bay Windows, October 9, 2008

All the talk of mavericks during the Oct. 2 vice presidential debate started me humming the theme from The Magnificent Seven. There they are, a ragtag bunch of rugged loners in a wild country. Will they learn to work together in time to save the beleaguered townsfolk from the marauding villains? Hey, wait a minute — they ARE the marauding villains.

Maybe I just have movies on my mind, since Washington’s gay film fest starts next week; but the McCain campaign increasingly feels like a movie in which the director is desperately trying to make us suspend our disbelief and buy the Republican nominee as the guy to fix the wreckage wrought by the Republican incumbent over the past several years.

Barney Frank is having none of it. The congressman from Massachusetts pounds a simple point he has made for years regarding the gay dimension in politics: that the far better record of Democrats on gay rights points to a partisan conclusion.

Defending their endorsement of John McCain, Log Cabin Republicans tout his opposition to the Federal Marriage Amendment; but he also endorses anti-gay state initiatives that Barack Obama opposes. They point to Democratic politicians’ opposition to marriage equality (displayed by Joe Biden last week) to discredit gay Democrats, but Obama supports civil unions legislation while McCain does not. Sarah Palin’s talk of tolerance mirrors the ex-gay movement’s love-the-sinner rhetoric, and her suggestion that private contracts are sufficient for gay couples is contradicted by the experience of family law attorneys working to protect LGBT families, who have found that wills and powers of attorney are a poor substitute for marriage.

Frank wrote in 2004, “Only if an attempt to make gay bashing a national political platform clearly fails will Republicans who dissent from that view begin to get the political strength to free their party from its shackles.” The Palin choice suggests that the GOP’s shift in emphasis this year does not reflect an ideological change.

On Real Time with Bill Maher in 2006, Frank noted conservative dissent against the Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence v. Texas ruling overturning sodomy laws: “The Republicans do think it should be a crime, and I think there’s a right to privacy, but the right to privacy should not be a right to hypocrisy. And people who want to demonize other people shouldn’t then be able to go home and close the door and do it themselves.”

Long one of the smartest and wittiest people in Congress, Frank is now one of the most powerful. As Financial Services Committee chair, he has been instrumental in addressing the financial crisis. On Sep. 29, after a vote on the $700 billion financial recovery bill fell a dozen votes short and Republicans blamed partisan remarks by Speaker Pelosi, Frank was withering: “Because somebody hurt their feelings, they decide to punish the country…. Give me those twelve people’s names, and I will go talk uncharacteristically nicely to them, and tell them what wonderful people they are, and maybe they’ll now think about the country.”

Frank is one of the sharpest debaters the House has ever had, and his toughness is essential. A favorite Republican tactic during the current Congress is introducing motions to recommit in order to derail bills that are about to pass. Responding to one such motion in April 2007, Frank said, “Members on the other side had every opportunity at the committee and in this open rule fully to debate this and to offer amendments. They chose not to. They chose instead to legislate by ambush.”

Frank was addressing a similar motion in November 2007 during debate on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act when he grew emotional while describing the impact of homophobia on 15-year-olds and concluded, “Please don’t turn your back on them.” The House erupted in cheers.

Frank has no shortage of detractors (a right-of-center gay Washingtonian recently created a Facebook group called “Capital Punishment for Barney Frank”), but that is a sign of his success. As I watched him respond to Bill O’Reilly’s charges of cowardice and unmanliness last week by rebuking the Fox News demagogue for his ranting and bullying, I thought how lucky we are that Frank, as The Almanac of American Politics wrote in 2006, “is one of the intellectual and political leaders of the Democratic Party in the House – political theorist and pit bull all at the same time.” He’s one of us, he’s right where he should be, and he’s at the top of his game.

Copyright © 2008 by Richard J. Rosendall. All rights reserved.

Rick Rosendall can be reached at rrosendall@starpower.net.

Patrick Sammon has an article up in the Washington Blade about why John McCain is good for LGBT people. I kid you not – even though he lied to The Advocate and said that LCR is focused first on LGBT rights in the Republican Party, he turns around and writes a column telling LGBT to vote for John McCain.

His reasons are hilarious, absolutely hilarious. But then he knows that he’s coming from an intellectually dishonest position in order to get new donors from the 23% of the LGBT community that voted for Bush in 2004 when LCR didn’t endorse him and that he has to push for a sub-par candidate.

His reasons and a few responses are after the jump.

First, McCain is a maverick — a different kind of Republican who’s willing to buck his own party to stand up for what he believes. Case in point is his consistent opposition to the Federal Marriage Amendment. He’s the only candidate in this race who paid a political price for voting in a way that benefits the LGBT community.

I don’t understand the “political price” that he’s paid, considering that he’s got full fundie support and the Republican nomination for presidency. There isn’t much more the party could be doing to support him right now. And why doesn’t Obama’s opposition to the same FMA count?

But this is just wrong:

FOURTH, McCAIN’S HEALTHCARE reform plan would increase competition, lower prices and improve access. His plan allows people to purchase insurance across state lines thus increasing competition. McCain’s proposal emphasizes individual ownership of health insurance, rather than relying on employers. This provides stability after a job loss. And it’ll prevent discriminatory practices against gay people by an employer.

Sammon’s right – McCain’s health care plan is a mix of deregulation, individualization of risk, and a tax credit to sell the whole mess. In fact, he wrote this in a column just this past month in Contingencies:

Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.

Yes, and that worked out so well for the finance industry.

McCain wants to move the tax break employers receive for providing their workers with health care to the individual. What this means is that health care providers will be more free to say no to an individual, effectively disqualifying people with pre-existing conditions from getting coverage.

The point of health care is that people come together to pool their risk, making sure that no one has to bear the cost of an extraordinary disease on their own. Since health care companies wouldn’t want to take on someone who they think would have more health care expenses than what they’d pay in premiums (someone who’s likely to get cancer because they’ve already had it, perhaps), they’ll simply refuse to take on those individuals. At least at the workplace, eligibility can be guaranteed since health care providers want to take on an entire corporation or business.

Obama’s health care plan is less-than-ideal, but McCain’s is simply a train-wreck. It’s just about the last reason to vote for John McCain.

And here’s the actual last reason:

Fifth, he’ll provide a strong voice challenging the radical Islamic regimes that criminalize same-sex behavior — and even execute gay people. McCain wants to confront tyrants like Iran’s president. Obama wants to talk to him without preconditions.

I don’t even get where this is coming from; will McCain pressure Islamic governments to decriminalize homosexuality? Besides the fact that it just wouldn’t work (”John McCain told us the gays were OK, so we’ll turn around our legal systems!”), and besides the fact that using homophobic human rights abuses as a reason to justify war and colonialism in non-white countries makes a mockery of the gay-rights movement, John McCain has made absolutely no indication that he would use his platform as president to champion gay rights around the world.

Why is Patrick Sammon just making up reasons to vote for McCain?

There’s no reason for LGBT people to trust McCain, and with his nomination of a true-blue fundamentalist to the running mate slot and promise to nominate more conservative judges, we can be sure that McCain will do what he can to turn back the clock on gay rights.

The LCR should drop the whole “working from the inside” shtick, unless they want to change that to “Working from the inside of the gay community to get Republican votes.”

(h/t Pam Spaulding)

I thought the Log Cabin Republicans would withhold their endorsement of John McCain. Maybe I just hoped they would. After all, they withheld their endorsement of President Bush in 2004. So I thought it was possible.

In making its endorsement today, the group pointed to the Arizona senator’s opposition to a federal constitutional amendment that would have defined marriage as being a man and a woman. The group also indicated that it had honest disagreements with Senator McCain on the subject of same sex marriage. The Log Cabin gang has traveled to St. Paul to carry the message that Republicans are on the “wrong side of history” when it comes to the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry.

Where to start?

First off, I understand the idea of working from the inside. I’ve seen heroic strides made by gay employees groups, gay teachers groups. From the inside. Lobbying to effect change. But I would argue that an endorsement ties your hands.

Secondly, I am not a single issue voter and most LGBT people I know are not either. We are smarter than that. However, call me crazy but my rights as a citizen (or lack thereof) are pretty damned important. And we all know that an endorsement means that an organization will mobilize its membership base to actively support a candidate. In this case, one who works against our fight for equality.

OK, so in the spirit of full disclosure, I am the Co-Chair of the National LGBT Finance Committee for Senator Obama. You could argue that I am not objective. And I suppose you could be right.

But there are facts that are impossible to ignore:

• “I don’t believe in gay adoption,” says John McCain.
• “I believe that the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy is working in the military,” says John McCain.
• In 2000, 2002 and 2004, he voted against adding sexual orientation to federal hate crimes legistlation.
• McCain voted against extending the Civil Rights Act to prohibit job discrimination based on sexual orientation.

And as someone who is not a single issue voter, I could continue on in describing ways in which Senator McCain represents more of the same at a time when we need a fresh perspective, a new pair of eyes. And a man who takes the selection of his running mate with the seriousness it demands.

In the 2000 election, exit polls indicated that roughly 1,000,000 gay voters cast their vote for George Bush. Numbers like that make a difference in a close election. In that particular election, maybe all the difference.

The whole thing is a “shanda” (says the Irish Catholic girl). Shame on the Log Cabin Republicans. There is just way too much at stake.

Under other circumstances, I might link to the Log Cabin website so that you can read the endorsement for yourself.

But I’m mad. I refuse to drive traffic to their site.

Joan M. Garry is recognized as one of the most vocal, passionate and effective civil rights leaders in America, recently completing nearly a decade of service as the Executive Director of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD). She is currently serving as the Co-Chair of the National LGBT Finance Committee for Obama For America.

Despite the spin being put on John McCain’s anti-gay record by Log Cabin Republicans, there is ample evidence that McCain is no “maverick” on LGBT equality. As an example check out this ad from 2006 promoting an anti-gay constitutional amendment in in Arizona:

Recognize the “wrinkly white-haired dude?” Yeah, that’s John McCain, the same man about whom LCR says:

is an inclusive Republican who is focusing the GOP on unifying core principles that appeal to independent voters.

Apparently that “unifying core principle” is using LGBT people and our families as political wedge issues to appeal to right-wing voters.

McCain is on record as supporting the proposed anti-gay constitutional amendments in Arizona and Florida as well as the amendment that would strip marriage rights away from same-sex couples living in California.

Chris Crain, the blogger and former editor of the Washington Blade who has a more favorable things to say about LCR than some bloggers, eviscerated LCR in a post titled Log Cabin’s Big McCain Mistake.

It’s as if our gay Republican friends forgot the basic politics of the carrot and the stick. Now that McCain and Palin are happily chomping away on the endorsement carrot that Log Cabin could have kept dangling in front of them, all they’re left with is the stick. With apologies to my friends among their number, including my beloved co-blogger Kevin, gay Republicans aren’t exactly known for carrying a big stick.

With the Log Cabin endorsement in hand, the pressure is off Palin to commit either publicly or privately to what some accounts suggest is her “openness to anti-discrimination legislation.” If McCain is elected, inside support from Palin might be the best shot at avoiding a veto of workplace protection, since the “inclusive” senator from Arizona has voted against such legislation multiple times.

McCain has opposed every piece of pro-LGBT legislation that has come his way.

There is nothing “maverick” about that. It is just a lot of “straight talk” that leaves LGBT Americans out in the cold.

In a move as mind-numbing as it is bizarre, the Log Cabin Republicans (LCRs) today endorsed Senator John McCain for President. It happened at their “Big Tent” event in Minnesota. By doing so, they have put the GOP well ahead of their mission. By its tortured analysis only, the LCRs have made clear they would rather support the GOP’s choice for President, than deliver a truthful, rigorous analysis of McCain’s actual LGBT record to their members.

It is laudable that Senator McCain voted against amending the U.S. Constitution to curtail individual rights (for the first time in its 17 amendment history, except prohibition) and to enshrine discrimination into that document. But that is an extremely low bar. And, it is the only basis for the endorsement. But McCain is also against literally every other major goal held by the vast majority of LGBT Americans. (See policy analysis at LGBTforObama.com.) The LCRs say he paid a political price for his votes to preserve the Constitution. What price was that exactly: being selected as the Republican nominee for President?

Most annoying is the way the LCRs plant (as a kind of exclamation mark) statements such as the following at the end of their endorsement announcements:

“I expect Sen. McCain will receive strong support from gay and lesbian Americans,” said (Executive Director Patrick) Sammon. “LGBT people are not single-issue voters. Gay rights issues are a critical part of the equation, but so are many other issues impacting our daily lives—foreign policy, the economy, jobs, energy policy, health care reform, and taxes.”

So who needs the Log Cabin Republicans? Presumably the LCRs are there to evaluate a Republican candidate’s gay record, not his or her record on foreign policy, the economy, jobs, energy policy, health care reform, and taxes. Any voter can go to a variety of sources to get information on those policy positions. Indeed, the central purpose of the LCRs should be to deliver a detailed and honest analysis on where a candidate — especially for the top job in the world — stands on LGBT issues. They have failed miserably in this case.

And, by desperately wanting to be part of the Big Tent, they have folded their own.

Elizabeth is former Executive Director of the Human Rights Campaign and a longtime LGBT activist.

The Republicans has released its 2008 GOP Party Platform and let’s just say they don’t love The Gays.

Here are a couple of the anti-gay highlights:

On the Military:

Personnel policies

The all-volunteer force has been a success. We oppose reinstituting the draft, whether directly or through compulsory national service. We support the advancement of women in the military and their exemption from ground combat units. Military priorities and mission must determine personnel policies. Esprit and cohesion are necessary for military effectiveness and success on the battlefield. To protect our servicemen and women and ensure that America’s Armed Forces remain the best in the world, we affirm the timelessness of those values, the benefits of traditional military culture, and the incompatibility of homosexuality with military service.

(emphasis added)

On Marriage

Preserving Traditional Marriage

Because our children’s future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man and a woman, so that judges cannot make other arrangements equivalent to it. In the absence of a national amendment, we support the right of the people of the various states to affirm traditional marriage through state initiatives.

Republicans recognize the importance of having in the home a father and a mother who are married. The two-parent family still provides the best environment of stability, discipline, responsibility, and character. Children in homes without fathers are more likely to commit a crime, drop out of school, become violent, become teen parents, use illegal drugs, become mired in poverty, or have emotional or behavioral problems. We support the courageous efforts of single-parent families to provide a stable home for their children. Children are our nation’s most precious resource. We also salute and support the efforts of foster and adoptive families.

Republicans have been at the forefront of protecting traditional marriage laws, both in the states and in Congress. A Republican Congress enacted the Defense of Marriage Act, affirming the right of states not to recognize same-sex “marriages” licensed in other states. Unbelievably, the Democratic Party has now pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which would subject every state to the redefinition of marriage by a judge without ever allowing the people to vote on the matter. We also urge Congress to use its Article III, Section 2 power to prevent activist federal judges from imposing upon the rest of the nation the judicial activism in Massachusetts and California. We also encourage states to review their marriage and divorce laws in order to strengthen marriage.

As the family is our basic unit of society, we oppose initiatives to erode parental rights.

In the midst of what can only be described as an assault on LGBT Americans, the Log Cabin Republicans have issued an endorsement of the anti-gay duo of John McCain and Sarah Palin claiming that

Sen. McCain is an inclusive Republican who is focusing the GOP on unifying core
principles that appeal to independent voters.

(emphasis added)

I guess focusing the GOP on its hatred to LGBT Americans is a “unifying core principle.” But, why an organization that claims to promote “legislation to provide basic fairness for gay and lesbian Americans and works to build a more inclusive GOP” is beyond me.

The lines have been drawn and the choice is clear. If you support LGBT civil rights, then Barack Obama is the presidential candidate for you. If you believe that LGBT Americans are unworthy of basic civil rights and that our families should be used as political punching bags to raise cash and court right-wing votes, then John McCain is your man.

Cross-posted at Bilerico

Open Letter to Log Cabin Republicans

First, congratulations on your upcoming convention and the historic choice of Governor Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate. Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) now faces the important decision of endorsing, or not, the McCain-Palin ticket.

We applaud that LCR supports all Equality Goals, including marriage. We also applaud that in 2004 they had the good judgment not to endorse George W. Bush.

But should LCR endorse the McCain-Palin ticket? See after the jump.

The main argument for an endorsement so far would be because “Governor Palin is an inclusive Republican who will help Senator McCain appeal to gay and lesbian voters” (from a Log Cabin press release).

To justify this statement, her record should be examined in as much detail as possible.

As Governor of Alaska for the past 20 months, and prior as a mayor and council member of a small Alaskan town, Sarah Palin does not have many public statements regarding equality for gays, lesbians, bisexual, transgender and queer Americans. We have created a comparison of Palin’s known positions on LGBT equality with those of Senators McCain, Obama, and Biden, and we have also listed the specifics about Palin positions on gay rights. From this we know three things about her regarding equality:

1) She opposes marriage equality. Unlike Obama, who says that marriage is between a man and a woman, but who supports the right of each state to define relationships (including civil marriage in California), Palin supported an amendment to Alaska’s constitution to define marriage as only between one man and one woman. McCain did the same in Arizona.

2) She vetoed legislation that would have denied the rights of same-sex partners of Alaska state employees to receive health and retirement benefits. This veto is often referred to in order to say she is pro-LGBTQ. In reality, she vetoed the legislation not because of any support for equality, but because the Alaska Attorney General, also a Republican, informed her that the legislation was clearly unconstitutional in view of a recent decision of the Alaska Supreme Court. Palin then went on to support a statewide public referendum (which cost the state between $750,000 and $1.2 million) to ask voters about a constitutional amendment to ensure that partners of state employees would not get these basic benefits.

3) She has stated that she has gay friends. This is used, presumably, to point out her open mindedness and support for LGBTQ equality. As we know, even the most staunchly anti-equality politicians have gay friends and family. Vice President Cheney has a lesbian daughter, Karl Rove had a gay stepfather (whom he adored and considered a father), and Alan Keyes has a lesbian daughter. These individuals have not only friends, but also close relatives who are gay and lesbian. Yet these individuals did great damage to our community and were road blocks to the advancement of LGBTQ equality.

We do not yet know her positions on other Equality Goals (Hate Crimes, ENDA, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, DOMA, Transgender Equality, LGBTQ Youth Protections, LGBTQ Parenting Rights). We encourage Log Cabin Republicans to ask for her clear positions on these goals before issuing an endorsement. A simple and quick questionnaire for a candidate’s positions on equality is available here.

Those answers will have to be compared to John McCain positions on equality to make a decision. If answers to the questions to Governor Palin are not available in time for the endorsement, then the only real guidance for making an endorsement is Senator McCain’s well documented positions, which are anti-equality, and do not warrant the endorsement of a gay rights organization.

A recommendation based on other criteria would damage the reputation of Log Cabin Republicans because it would go against its own mission which states, “We stand for the proposition that all of us are created equal-worthy of the same rights to freedom, liberty, and equality.”

Respectfully,

Juan Ahonen-Jover, Ph.D.
Ken Ahonen-Jover, M.D.
Founders, eQualityGiving

P.S. Readers commenting on this article: we ask that you please do not attack Log Cabin Republicans. The purpose of this article is to encourage them to follow their own mission and make an endorsement based on the position on equality of the candidates.

I’m still reeling by the Log Cabin Republicans hearty approval of lightweight fundie Sarah Palin. Isn’t this supposed to be a group that believes government should get out of the lives of taxpayers? So far, the only folks jumping for joy are not fiscal conservatives, but the wingnut fringe who want to peep into your womb and bedroom. Here are some more, from Bob Unruh at WND’s, “Does chick mate spell checkmate for McCain?” –

“The excitement was palpable among conservative leaders when they heard that Gov. Palin was Sen. McCain’s choice for vice president. There is a high level of optimism among conservative leaders that the McCain-Palin combination is a ticket that will connect with values voters…Gov. Palin is pro-life and pro-marriage.”
— Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel, the Liberty Alliance Action.

“The country now has a clear choice between an avowed pro-abortion ticket that would continue to push for unrestricted abortion on demand, and a strongly pro-life ticket that will bring us closer to a society that embraces the value and dignity of human life.”
— Darla St. Martin, co-executive director of the National Right to Life committee

“It is particularly significant that a conservative woman was nominated for the nation’s second highest office. For years the feminist movement has acknowledged for leadership only those women who embrace a radical agenda. How refreshing that now we have a woman who reflects the values of mainstream American women. Take that feminists – here is a woman of accomplishment who brings a fresh face to traditional values and models the type of woman most girls want to become.”
–Janice Shaw Crouse, director of the CWA’s Beverly LaHaye Institute.

My question here, since it’s safe to say most LCRs are men, is what does this say about support by gay conservative men for the individual rights of women? Sarah Palin does not believe in reproductive freedom, and doesn’t believe in equal pay for equal work (like their man McCain). This is troubling. Does limited government only extend to those without vaginas?

Just asking, because IMHO, this ticket in no way represents limited government, save a strong pro-second amendment stance and a pledge to reduce taxes while the country’s economy goes down the toilet as we maintain $upport for this endless war action. What are the LCR’s true conservative principles? I only see a ticket that supports appointing SCOTUS justices that will roll back freedoms the LCRs currently take for granted.

Courtesy of Jesus’ General, what should be on campaign buttons everywhere:

Denial is more than a river in Egypt. During the same week Michelle Obama, Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton speak out for gay rights at the Democratic National Convention, a draft emerges of the new, anti-gay platorm of the Republican Party. Oh, and the capital gains tax-lovin’ homocons at the Log Cabin dismiss the platform as "symbolic." Priceless. The Associated Press reports:

The platform draft calls for constitutional bans on abortion and gay marriage, two steps McCain does not support.

It would put the party on record as accepting that economic activity contributes to global warming, in line with McCain’s views.

But the platform is loaded with caveats about the uncertainty of science and the need to "resist no-growth radicalism" in taking on climate change. …

Sharp divisions still exist in the party on social issues, but there appeared to be little taste for complicating McCain’s chances by mounting a symbolic platform fight as the document is hashed out in Minneapolis. "This isn’t a hill we’re going to die on," said Scott Tucker, a spokesman for the gay rights group Log Cabin Republicans.

Log Cabinette Tucker continues his denials over at Blog Cabin. You know, the same blog that never reported its off-the-record "backdoor" diplomacy with John McCain. Tucker’s revisionism is quaint. "Yes, the GOP party platform again includes anti-gay things that it shouldn’t," Tucker says. "As we said in this Associated Press article, the party platform isn’t the hill we’re going to die on. Party platforms are largely symbolic. That doesn’t mean that they don’t matter at all. They do. But sometimes you have to pick your battles."

Here is some straight talk for Scott Tucker, the Log Cabin Republicans and other gay McCain groupies: The Reopublican presidential nominee is just not that into you. What "battles" will you fight? McCain supports the marriage bans in California and Arizona and opposes pro-gay legislation such as ENDA or expanding hate crime definitions. The Log Cabinettes are quick to remind us that McCain opposes a federal amendment but he sure did campaign for the Arizona marriage amendment that ultimately failed. These are not “symbolic” gestures, these are positions and legislation that affects millions of gay men, lesbians and transgenders. Barack Obama opposes state and federal marriage amendments and supports increased rights for our community. ‘Nuff said.

At least we know the Republican Party’s position on "gay rights".

Just yesterday Terry Bean wrote a fantastic post calling the Log Cabin Republicans out for considering an endorsement of John McCain even though McCain has one of the most anti-LGBT records in the Senate. Now comes word that the draft 2008 GOP Platform is calling for a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

The GOP platform co-chairmen, California Rep. Kevin McCarthy and North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr, told AP on Monday they wanted the party principles to be about the actual party. And in the past, Burr said, “there was a lot of Washington-speak.”

Despite the stylistic change, familiar divisions are back as Republicans debate the principles over two days and strive for a united front behind McCain. That means bridging some differences, detouring around others.

The platform draft calls for constitutional bans on abortion and gay marriage, two steps McCain does not support.

Okay, so McCain supposedly does not support a federal constitutional ban on marriage, but he has come out in favor of the anti-gay state level amendments that will be on the ballot in Arizona, California and Florida. That for me is enough of a reason to oppose him as the president of a country that includes some 25 million LGBT people.

I admit that our friends at Log Cabin Republicans are in a serious bind. Their party’s nominee has opposed LGBT civil rights at every turn while Barack Obama has issued the strongest LGBT platform of any presidential nominee from a major party.

I feel bad for them. I really do.

But, the leaders of LCR have a very clear choice to make: they can either stand with the Republican Party even as it continues its assault against LGBT Americans or they can stand with their LGBT brothers and sisters who are fighting every day to live their lives openly and honestly and free from anti-LGBT discrimination.