It’s My Party – and I’ll Cry If I Want To

There’s something inexplicable that happens to a woman when she becomes a mother. I guess it’s probably best explained as an instinctive response to protect their young. But, I’ve found that this instinct or whatever it is doesn’t diminish or go away when the kids grow up. Even if your baby is six feet tall, when he is under attack the old mama grizzly rears up without even thinking.

That’s what happened when I saw that #1 Son twittered about this Republican Party Platform plank:


Homosexual Acts
We support the clear will of the people of Montana expressed by legislation to keep homosexual acts illegal.

Here comes the she-bear.

What the hell were they thinking? More to the point – who the hell came up with this piece of vile, hateful stupidity? And what, pray tell, might this “legislation” be that is so clearly supported by the people of Montana? No specific reference is mentioned in the Platform. Might it be a Koopman plan (whispered directly into his ear by God, of course) to round up all the gays in the state and ship them off to concentration camps ala Hitler? Gosh, Roger – are you sure that’s such a popular proposal? Or could it be something equally bizarre and sinister that’s being shared only by the chosen few homophobic, uneducated, religious zealots who still think that the Spanish Inquisition was a great time in the annals of Western history and Torquemada a real swell guy?

And how many otherwise rational conservatives thought that criminalizing a whole class of people was such a cool idea that they supported and voted in favor of this abomination that would have our government willy-nilly breaking down bedroom doors?

I am a Republican, and generally speaking, proud of my party and what it stands for. Not this. This is beyond unacceptable. As a conservative, I’ve always felt that what any consenting adult does in private is none of my business and certainly nothing that “small government” needs to regulate. As long as you don’t do it on Main Street and scare the horses, I really don’t need to know about it. And I sure as hell don’t need to have my tax dollars pay to police it.

In a time of serious economic crisis, this kind of absurd posturing is not only unnecessary, it’s completely counterproductive. When our candidates should be carrying a message of fiscal responsibility and job creation, sound energy and resource development, the mental midgets behind this idiocy have now offered the Democrats a huge weapon with which to deflect the debate and wage a successful attack focusing on an issue that has no place in the arena of conservative ideas. In an election where our party should have the upper hand on the issues that matter, we could end up losing some swing seats simply because of this one sentence.

This statement of our party’s official position is breathtakingly offensive to many good republicans; I am not the only one who objects – ” This is the criminalization of the private lives of consenting adults. I am embarrassed such language was approved.”

Yes, I am ashamed of my party. Very ashamed. And angry. And hurt. There is no room in my party for this kind of short-sighted, hypocritical, mean-spirited, asinine activism. As the parent of a gay child, I have witnessed, first-hand, the unwarranted, bigoted attacks from small-minded, loud-mouthed jerks, and I have no intention of participating in an effort to promote or condone any legislation that is intended to endorse or support such attitudes.

I certainly never expected that the Montana Republican Party would become a branch of the Westboro Baptist Church and I, for one, won’t be a party to it. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

12 thoughts on “It’s My Party – and I’ll Cry If I Want To

  1. You don’t have to be a mother of a gay to object to this move. STUPID. What an opening for the liberals and if the Republicans were dumb enough to vote for it, we don’t deserve to win. Good grief. We are smarter and have better ideas so why do we get caught up in this garbage?

  2. I stumbled across this quote a while back – “Get the Democrats out of my wallet and the Republicans out of my bedroom”. I like it.

    From what I understand, that has been a plank since about 1995, even though the SCOTUS overturned it in a Texas case as I recall. I believe it was in the 2008 platform also.

    Here’s some of the laws:
    http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/45/5/45-5-505.htm
    “45-5-505. Deviate sexual conduct. (1) A person who knowingly engages in deviate sexual relations or who causes another to engage in deviate sexual relations commits the offense of deviate sexual conduct. ”
    (2) A person convicted of the offense of deviate sexual conduct shall be imprisoned in the state prison for any term not to exceed 10 years or be fined an amount not to exceed $50,000, or both.

    “deviate sexual relations” are defined as “(20) “Deviate sexual relations” means sexual contact or sexual intercourse between two persons of the same sex or any form of sexual intercourse with an animal. ” in 45-2-101.

    MCA 45-5-505 has been found unconstitutional by the Montana Supreme Court in 1997 in http://www.sodomy.org/laws/montana/gryczan_v_state.html

    This needs to be removed – as BCM has stated, we do NOT need to shoot ourselves in the foot and give the D’s any ammo to use against us.

  3. RP is correct that the law was declared unconstitutional in Gryczan between consenting adults, but it remains as a statute against bestiality and other things that the legislature finds offensive. Never mind how offensive it is to combine homosexuality with bestiality, but it does exhibit their fear based ignorance. (Are they too afraid that they might become gay?)
    But I am really starting to ask my Republican friends, that if they had a choice of control under the aegis of limited government which permitted homosexuals to be open about their relationships, and the ability to condemn and keep illegal such activities but not have a governing authority, which would they choose?

  4. Well, obviously, the fools who first introduced this language at a prior convention are still vocal and confirming for all their bigotry and fear. As in the past, I suspect many others who voted for or abstained on this measure went along to get along; however, it remains unfathomable that a Party which decries government interference in business, parenting, personal defense, education accepts the criminalization of a segment of society that exists under God and not by choice.

    My kind of Republican: fiscally conservative, socially liberal. There are many of us.

  5. A PS….not too socially liberal….I don’t want you “making out” on my lawn, straight or gay. I’m trying to think of another word besides “liberal”….help me.

  6. How about “socially sensible” – encompassing the radical idea that we expect everyone to behave in a responsible, conscientious, and respectful manner towards our fellow human beings. Most of the Republicans I know would fit quite comfortably in that category – and the ones that don’t would stick out like Obama’s ears.

  7. Annie, I would add “private” as in I want to live my life undisturbed by others, which requires that I give others the same degree of privacy.

  8. Steve – I think that is inherent in the meaning of “respectful” – respecting the rights of others as you would expect them to respect yours.

  9. Pingback: Hamm On Wry » Blog Archive » What the hell, MT GOP?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.