No Andrew, Gay Rights Not More Important Than Welfare of The Entire Planet

Regrettably, my friend Present Tense and the inimitable Andrew Sullivan are both wrong about what should be Obama's connection to Prop 8. Sullivan goes as far as to demand Obama make an ad against it. But I say the current silence is not only to be expected but good. And why should Obama, with victory within reach, suddenly take his eye off his own campaign to start lobbying for a different cause?

Prop 8 is an that I feel passionately about and, from an abstract enough angle, it is a civil rights issue, true. But we should admit it is also a political issue, and, unfortunately, still a divisive one. Moreover, with California allowing same-sex civil unions that are nearly identical, in terms of rights, to marriage, then it is less urgent a civil rights issue than is being claimed.

Obama's quietness on Prop 8 does not mean he is not against it; it is merely political common sense. It is in keeping with his campaign: consider that on BarackObama.com, under the Issues flyout menu, there are 25 choices of general themes, from Civil Rights to Women, with a miscellaneous "Additional Issues" tab. Hate crimes and employment discrimation are two sub-issues under "Civil Rights" where sexual orientation is mentioned, but GLBT does not merit its own tab.

There is, unfortunately, a certain myopia among some quarters of progressives. (And mind you, Sullivan is not even a progressive; he is a conservative once-apologist-for-the-Bushies who happens to be gay and socially liberal). The myopic view I'm referring is one in which GLBT rights trump all other issues, period. This view requires a Democratic candidate to campaign out-and-out for gay rights, even if it means losing conservative voters in critical states. Sullivan's outrage against Obama on Prop 8 is equivalent to feminists' protests against the Augusta National Golf Club. By which I mean it focuses on what is technically a civil rights issue in the absence of urgency or global context. Feminists should concede that women's admission to golf is not the most pressing issue facing women in the U.S., let alone facing their sisters in Africa and Asia. Even here in the U.S., there are concrete problems like pay disparity. Similarly, gays in the U.S. need to work concretely on issues of GLBT persecution around the world and know when to strategically pipe down (the HRC understands this, by and large). Consider that (a) California GLBT couples already have access to civil unions, (b) even if they had marriages, these wouldn't count federally or in 46 states, and (c) there are still many other GLBT problems, both here and abroad (e.g. persecution and torture across Africa and the Middle East, workplace discrimination in the majority of U.S. states, etc.). Surely these are issues that people can come together around. And while I admit it would be in an injustice for the 10,000+ same-sex marriages in CA to be annulled on November 4, surely we can agree this is not a greater injustice than Americans living without health care, or poverty, or hunger? A greater injustice than purposefully allowing America to remain in reckless, hawkish hands with further loss of lives in unjustified wars? In such a context, with so much at stake, it would be downright irresponsible of Obama---remember, a candidate already seen as aloof and liberal, already having made the "cling to their guns and religion" comment in San Francisco--to jeopardize his candidacy in order to push for No-on-Prop-8 via TV ads. Doesn't the GLBT community understand that Obama is on their side, and that time, too, is on their side? A little patience will yield marvelous results.

The philosophers among you may say Obama vs. No-on-8 is a false choice, but in 2004, the 11 states with anti-gay ballot measures had increased conservative turnout. Gay rights remains a divisive issue, and the current polling in CA is enough to demonstrate this. (As of 2 days ago, when I took a detailed look, even the 18-29 demographic was only 50% pro-gay-marriage). However, anti-gay views will only continue dissipate over the next decade.

Can't progressives just reasonably agree that, if faced with a choice, at this critical juncture the more urgent thing to do is to prevent another Republican administration, to prevent ecological and geopolitical disaster? Wouldn't that be the more general and more urgent human rights concern? Wouldn't we rather make peace with the world, avoid war with Iran, and focus on renewable energy and health care for all? And with so many other potential spokespeople who can help defeat Prop 8 if they wanted (e.g. Schwarzenegger? Oprah?), why drag the Obama campaign and the entire fate of the world into it?