# What now Log Cabin Republicans? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 2, 2003, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546 "2003-08-02T14:22:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![NotWithoutRage](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/22d042/32.png) [@NotWithoutRage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotWithoutRage)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2003, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/61 "2003-08-05T16:38:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Homebrew \* > \*\* > It’s about so much more than the label. There are so many benefits for marriage that we are denied because we’re not allowed to marry. \*\* 1028, in fact. (I wrote my senior thesis last year on the Consitutionality of same-sex marriage). However, I have to deal with the reality that change is not coming quickly on this issue… much of the Howard Dean coverage these past few weeks has delighted Republicans, because they know that all Bush has to do in a debate is to mention the fact that Dean advocates same-sex marriage, and the entire issue of the WMD goes away. This country simply isn’t buying the gay marriage issue just yet. Not Republicans, and not any electable Democrats. In any case, I’m tired of people telling me that they “can’t believe” that I’m Republican, just because I’m gay. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2003, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/62 "2003-08-05T17:47:51Z")
> [@](#): > > LosAdri wrote: > to Mr. Mace’s analogy b/t Republicans being antichoice and female Republicans: MANY women (but not the majority) are antichoice. Being a woman does not make you pro choice. Being queer makes you queer. You’re analogy is flawed. > [@](#): > > NWR wrote: > I’m a queer woman Republican, pro-life (and I find the sneer antichoice as frustrating as calling a pro-choicer antilife)… > > For me, party affiliation is about a realm of choices and issues. Not everything comes down to who I want to sleep with. And while I do think that gay people should be allowed to marry, that issue cannot be the be-all, end-all of who I vote for. There are too many other important things going on right now for me to worry about how I label a gay relationship. LA: I rest my case. Looks like the analogy **is** a good one. If you’re a woman, you can find yourself with an unwanted pregnancy. If you’re gay, you can find yourself wanting to marry someone who is gay. In both cases, however, there may be more important issues which determine party affiliation. And that is what the OP is all about: How can gays stay in the Republican party. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2003, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/63 "2003-08-05T18:21:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > You’ll have to show me where in the Republican Party Platform there is anything that would put gays in jail. Allow me to present [the 2002 Texas Republican Party Platform](http://www.txgop.org/library/RPTPlatform2002.pdf). From the bottom of page 8 (bolding mine): > [@](#): > > Homosexuality – The Party believes that the practice of sodomy tears at the fabric of society, contributes to the breakdown of the family unit, and leads to the spread of dangerous, communicable diseases. Homosexual behavior is contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have been ordained by God, recognized by our country’s founders, and shared by the majority of Texans. Homosexuality must not be presented as an acceptable “alternative” lifestyle in our public education and policy, nor should “family” be redefined to include homosexual “couples.” We are opposed to any granting of special legal entitlements, recognition, or privileges including, but not limited to, marriage between persons of the same sex, custody of children by homosexuals, homosexual partner insurance or retirement benefits. We oppose any criminal or civil penalties against those who oppose homosexuality out of faith, conviction, or belief in traditional values. > > **Texas Sodomy Statutes – The Party opposes the decriminalization of sodomy.** Doesn’t it make you feel all warm and squishy inside? ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2003, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/64 "2003-08-05T18:26:57Z")
> [@](#): > > …umm were ya thinking I was going to kill some hamsters in my quest to look up every Homebrew thread on gays/marriage/Republicans/Democrats before wondering about your opinions on them (since, again you ONLY focused on (1) marriage status for gays and (2) Republicans in the OP)? Liar. I mention Santorum, the President’s comments and the Senate Policy Committee’s latest attack. > [@](#): > > The Log Cabin Republicans have had to argue with the President, ironically by quoting the Vice-President. Before, they could argue that Santorum was speaking for himself and not offical policy. Now, the Senate’s Republican Policy Committee is taking the lead against gay people. I still don’t understand how their loyality to tax and economic policy is stronger than their loyality to their own personal liberty. Wake up, kiddos, they don’t want you in their Big Tent It is obvious to anyone with even a basic understanding of language that the policy statement I referenced is simply the latest in a string of things that belie the claim to a Big Tent. The reference to Santorum was clearly about the overturned Sodomy Laws. The use of the word “Now” indicates clearly that this is the latest issue, but others like the reference to Santorum came before. The phrase “personal liberty” deals with more than just marriage rights. And I wrapped up with the accusation that gay people are not welcome in the Big Tent. This thread is not about marriage alone but about the fact that the leadership of the Republican Party is anti-gay rights and getting moreso. Log Cabin Republicans are sleeping with the enemy and deluding themselves to think they are welcome in that party. ---
**Author:** ![beagledave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6de8d8/32.png) [@beagledave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beagledave)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2003, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/65 "2003-08-05T18:41:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Homebrew \* > \*\*Liar. I mention Santorum, the President’s comments and the Senate Policy Committee’s latest attack. > \*\* Hey Sparky, before you accuse me of being a liar, read my post again. Santorum, Dubya and the Senate Policy Committee are all…gasp…Republicans. Let me walk you through my post. Again. I said > [@](#): > > This is the first time in this thread that you’ve had anything bad to say about a **democrat** who opposes marriage status for gays and it’s in a completely different thread. (the word “democrat” emphasized this time since you must have missed it the last time). I then said… > [@](#): > > …umm were ya thinking I was going to kill some hamsters in my quest to look up every Homebrew thread on gays/marriage/Republicans/Democrats before wondering about your opinions on them (since, again you ONLY focused on (1) marriage status for gays and (2) Republicans in the OP)? In the context of the FIRST paragraph (quoted above), that means that your sole criticism of dems in THIS thread, is a reference to ANOTHER thread. So, I was wryly asking if you expecting me to do a search of ALL of your posts (using terms like “gay”, “marriage”, “Republican”, “Democrat” in order to find relevant posts) to find criticism of democrats for their opposition to marriage status. I did NOT say that you had neglected to cover the positions of Dubya, Santorum or any other pubbies. I eagerly await your apology for calling me a liar. ---
**Author:** ![LosAdri](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@LosAdri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LosAdri)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2003, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/66 "2003-08-05T22:52:04Z")
No namecalling and John Mace: your point is not proven. Are you daft? An anti-choice lesbian exists (the lack of shock here is incredible). So what? A woman can find herself pregnant. She then, in my belief, has a \choice\ whether to let the potential child develop and deliver or to abort the fetus. There are ways to avoid the situation (protection or abstinence (sp?)). Being gay isn’t avoidable. Her being queer and antichoice proves nothing excepts she has views. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2003, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/67 "2003-08-05T23:04:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Homebrew \* > \*\*…simply the latest in a string of things that belie the claim to a Big Tent. \*\* Oh, no, no. The tent _is_ big. But there’s only one entrance and it’s really, really narrow… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2003, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/68 "2003-08-05T23:06:50Z")
LA: I believe the daftness is on your side. The aforementioned lesbian is a REPUBLICAN. The fact that she’s pro-choice is not the issue. Sorry I had to spell that out for you-- I’ll be extra explicit in responding to your posts in the future. ---
**Author:** ![LosAdri](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@LosAdri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LosAdri)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/69 "2003-08-06T02:07:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > \*\*LA: I believe the daftness is on your side. The aforementioned lesbian is a REPUBLICAN. The fact that she’s pro-choice is not the issue. Sorry I had to spell that out for you-- I’ll be extra explicit in responding to your posts in the future. \*\* Im confused, so I’m gonna be the bigger person and let it drop btw: he’s a bishop. I’m a’ celebratin’ tonite! ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/70 "2003-08-06T14:01:05Z")
Hey **John Mace** , would you care to acknowledge where the Texas Republican Party Platform says they want to put gays in jail? I mean, since you asked so nicely and all. ---
**Author:** ![beagledave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6de8d8/32.png) [@beagledave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beagledave)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/71 "2003-08-06T15:05:10Z")
As long as we’re waiting for acknowlegements…any chance that **Homebrew** will apologize for the lying accusation? ---
**Author:** ![NotWithoutRage](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/22d042/32.png) [@NotWithoutRage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotWithoutRage)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/72 "2003-08-06T15:41:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > \*\*LA: I believe the daftness is on your side. The aforementioned lesbian is a REPUBLICAN. The fact that she’s pro-choice is not the issue. Sorry I had to spell that out for you-- I’ll be extra explicit in responding to your posts in the future. \*\* Two nitpicks, for the record… I’m queer, not a lesbian. And also, I’m not pro-choice. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/73 "2003-08-06T16:12:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by minty green \* > \*\*Hey **John Mace** , would you care to acknowledge where the Texas Republican Party Platform says they want to put gays in jail? I mean, since you asked so nicely and all. \*\* Well, since you asked in a non-snooty manner, how can I refuse?🙂 That part of the Texas GOP platform, as quoted, **is** pretty disgusting. The overt religiosity is not something we need in this country and the equating of “sodomy” exclusively with “homosexuality” is incorrect. (I’m personally not in favor of labelling any sexual behavior as “sodomy”, but if we’re going to use that term, it should be applied to heterosexual sex as well as gay sex.) Having said that, do we actually know that “not decriminalizing” equates to “putting in jail”? Does the criminal code call for jail as punishment? I understand it’s a misdemeanor, but that doesn’t tell me what the punishment is. Giving these guys somewhat the benefit of the doubt, I believe where they are coming from is that they see “decriminalizing” as “sanctioning”. I don’t agree with that position, but I think that’s the crux of the matter. ---
**Author:** ![LosAdri](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@LosAdri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LosAdri)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/74 "2003-08-06T17:47:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by NotWithoutRage \* > \*\*Two nitpicks, for the record… I’m queer, not a lesbian. And also, I’m not pro-choice. \*\* Little question. Why do you distinguish b/t the two, or not care for the term lesbian? ---
**Author:** ![beagledave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6de8d8/32.png) [@beagledave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beagledave)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/75 "2003-08-06T19:51:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > \*\* > Having said that, do we actually know that “not decriminalizing” equates to “putting in jail”? Does the criminal code call for jail as punishment?. \*\* Well the SCOTUS [struck](http://us.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/26/scotus.sodomy/) down the Texas sodomy law, where 2 guys **were** arrested. In that case, they **were** fined and spent a night in jail. The Texas Republican Platform statement occured before this ruling was handed down, but I suspect it does favor some fine/jail time for sodomy. I don’t know how frequent the prosecution of these cases occurs…I suspect not real frequently. In this case, the only reason they were arrested is that a neighbor reported some sort of disturbance in their residence…and the cops “caught” them in the act. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/76 "2003-08-06T21:10:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > Having said that, do we actually know that “not decriminalizing” equates to “putting in jail”? Does the criminal code call for jail as punishment? I understand it’s a misdemeanor, but that doesn’t tell me what the punishment is. Upon double-checking the statute, it’s a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by a $500 fine but no jail time. Of course, there is still the matter of being arrested and taken to jail at the time of the offense (as I believe the defendants in the Supreme Court’s recent sodomy case were), so I’m still standing behind my claim that the Texas Republican Party want to put homosexuals in jail. Not sure what the punishment for homosexual sodomy was in the other states that criminalized it, and I don’t have the time to check right now. I’d bet at least a couple of them had jail time as an option. > [@](#): > > Giving these guys somewhat the benefit of the doubt, I believe where they are coming from is that they see “decriminalizing” as “sanctioning”. I don’t agree with that position, but I think that’s the crux of the matter. Huh? How on earth is it _not_ “the crux of the matter” if the party of low taxes and gigantic deficits also wants to criminalize gay sex? Besides, what’s so bad about “sanctioning” the right of consenting adults to be free from state intrusion into their bedroom? ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/77 "2003-08-06T21:21:37Z")
> [@](#): > > Upon double-checking the statute, it’s a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by a $500 fine but no jail time. Of course, there is still the matter of being arrested and taken to jail at the time of the offense (as I believe the defendants in the Supreme Court’s recent sodomy case were), so I’m still standing behind my claim that the Texas Republican Party want to put homosexuals in jail. I believe that conviction under this law would require one to register as a sex offender? So, even if there is no jail time, this law would basically attach a life sentence to a gay person. ---
**Author:** ![NotWithoutRage](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/22d042/32.png) [@NotWithoutRage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotWithoutRage)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/78 "2003-08-06T21:29:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by LosAdri \* > \*\*Little question. Why do you distinguish b/t the two, or not care for the term lesbian? \*\* The term lesbian implies that I don’t date men, which I do. I don’t care for the term bisexual, because I don’t like the stereotypes that people have of bisexuals. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2003, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/79 "2003-08-06T21:47:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by BrightNShiny \* > I believe that conviction under this law would require one to register as a sex offender? Sorry, but that is incorrect under the Texas sex offender registration statute. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546/80 "2003-08-07T02:23:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Minty wrote: > Huh? How on earth is it not “the crux of the matter” if the party of low taxes and gigantic deficits also wants to criminalize gay sex? Besides, what’s so bad about “sanctioning” the right of consenting adults to be free from state intrusion into their bedroom? Actually, I said it **was** the crux of the matter. I don’t agree with those Republicans who want to criminalize gay sex. But let’s be realistic. With the Republicans in control of the Presidency, the Congress, and many states, if they wanted to jail gay folks, we’d be reading about gays being jailed all the time. As far as I know, no gay person has been convicted and senteced to jail for “sodomy” in recent memory. I’m not defending the law or the position. Just saying that it’s overreacting to take the position that Republicans want to put gay folks in jail. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-now-log-cabin-republicans/192546.md?page=5)