In Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Snow Queen,” a hobgoblin creates a mirror that shows the worst of everyone: moles overwhelm otherwise normal faces and items of beauty resemble boiled spinach. The mirror shatters and shards of it enter peoples’ eyes, which leaves them unable to see good in anyone. This mirror and its shards might be real, for their existence would explain much of our politics.

If there is bipartisan agreement on anything, it is that our side is on the side of angels and the other guys are on Satan’s payroll. The Democrats are out to swindle the public for government bureaucrats, while Republicans are puppets of Wall Street and big business. Gay people are out to destroy the family, while straight people are hypocrites who love marriage’s benefits more than their freshly divorced spouses.

When we view politics through the hobgoblin’s mirror, we see only caricatures, sort of like the ugly litany in the previous paragraph (for the record, the authors would like to state that some of their best friends happen to be straight). Caricatures exist because they’re a tempting shortcut: instead of doing the difficult work of trying to understand people who think differently, we make it easy on ourselves and set up a straw man whose evil justifies knocking him down—if not burning him at the stake.

When TV becomes a screaming match, remember that the people aren’t yelling at each other. They’re yelling at a caricature. The screaming heads on TV are putting on a show; the other guy didn’t take an oath saying, “evil, be thou my good,” but he looked at facts and drew a different conclusion. His conclusion might be wrong, but it was probably arrived at honestly, and screaming at him is unlikely to change his mind and likely to harden his heart. Worse, anger grows when we feed it, so screaming leads to more screaming.

It would be lovely, yet naive, to say that all we need to do to stop the screaming is to stop screaming. This simple solution doesn’t work because an underlying cause of anger is the reliance on the caricature. We do not rid ourselves of caricatures by holding hands and singing Kumbaya. Caricatures are created in part because we look at others through the hobgoblin’s mirror; ironically enough, we can rid ourselves of them when we use that mirror on ourselves.

Looking at ourselves thus is unpleasant. Do our most bitter critics have valid points? If they do, we must overcome them. Self-criticism is painful, and less fun than criticizing others, but if we do the latter without the former, we too become the caricatures. We hate it when others make uninformed, unthinking judgments of us, but we easily do it to others—just because it’s easy.

When we assume the worst about people with whom we disagree, we caricature ourselves.  With our friends and people we love, we are quick to attempt to try to see how they might see the world when they do things we don’t understand. We are usually less understanding with political adversaries. As soon as we begin to hurl accusations of bad faith around, we stop ourselves from understanding others and make it harder for them to care enough to understand us. People with different opinions from us are not caricatures, and should not be treated as such.

In a strange sense, we become invisible when we’re caricatured. Someone looks at a person and based on a caricature makes a series of assumptions: if gay, then promiscuous and liberal and flighty; if conservative, then stodgy and rich and straight; and so on. These caricatures are usually of us at our worst.

The first step to stopping the politics of caricature is not to become horrible caricatures ourselves. It’s hard work and less rewarding than a gig as a screaming head — but whoever said that being gay or political was going to be a lucrative cinch? Others will treat us badly, but when we overcome the temptation to caricature others, we make it harder to be ourselves caricatured. And when others stop seeing caricatures and start seeing us at our best, we might even change minds and hearts.

Robert Turner is president of the D.C. chapter of Log Cabin Republicans. Reach him at robert.turner@dclogcabin.org or @DCBigPappa on Twitter. Mike Hubbard is a board member of the D.C. chapter of Log Cabin. Reach him at mike.hubbard@dclogcabin.org or @mikeahub on Twitter.

Co-authored by Mike Hubbard

How should we deal with bullies? Dan Savage has started the “It Gets Better” campaign, which tells gay kids in school to endure until graduation. Waiting passively for things to get better might not be the best answer, since gays are a unique minority. The picked-on Asian or Black or Catholic child usually has Asian or black or Catholic parents – and very likely has an Asian or black or Catholic community outside of school – but gay kids almost always have straight parents, and relatively few gay kids have any kind of gay community to draw on. We in the gay community should try to protect the next generation, and we need to grasp the complicated dynamics.

The greatest blessing that gay kids can have is the love and support of their parents. Yet parents frequently don’t understand the problem until their gay children come out. And gay kids are right to be cautious about doing so; parents throw too many out of their homes. It’s worth asking what parents hope to accomplish when they do this, since homelessness seems unlikely to make gay kids turn straight. Unthinking parental fury implies that the problem is less the child’s homosexuality than the parents’ feeling that the child reflects badly on them.

Parents should always love their children, but many are bent on children who complement a life they imagined. So long as parents think of their children as accessories to the good life rather than as individuals to be loved, closeted gay kids will be isolated from their best potential allies.  And the children become easier potential prey for bullies.

The trouble with bullying is that it’s rooted in human nature to form small groups. People want friends who are like themselves, which is normal and healthy. They define themselves by what they’re not, such as Yankees fans being united in loathing the “Red Sox Nation.” The bully has taken something normal, being in a group and needling outsiders, and turned it into something unhealthy. Gay kids are different, but they are as worthy of respect as their straight peers. Kids with support from parents, churches or elsewhere can shrug bullies off. The isolated gay kids feel lost.

To try to help the kids, people ranging from the Philadelphia Phillies to the Gay Men’s Chorus have recorded videos telling kids that “it gets better.” When Leonard Lance, Frank LoBiondo, and Jon Runyan – Republican congressmen from New Jersey – made an “It Gets Better” video, the left-wing Center for American Progress attacked them for votes on other issues on which CAP disapproved. Rather than praise sometime adversaries for trying to do the right thing, CAP unintentionally revealed a weakness of “It Gets Better”: the videos are less important for the kids than for the video makers.

If these videos were for the children, then having as wide a range of people as possible make them would be a good thing. There would be disagreements on plenty of other issues, but the video makers could all agree that supporting gay kids was good. Like the parents who throw gay kids out of the home, CAP is trying to throw Republicans out of the gay rights movement, which is shortsighted, foolish and wrong. It seems as though CAP sees the videos as status markers: yahoos don’t make them but virtuous people do. And partly because the videos are used more to stroke the egos of video makers, they may well be telling gay kids the wrong thing.

Many kids are already isolated and are desperate to do anything but wait. The kids feel that a better tomorrow won’t come soon enough, and take their lives because waiting is too painful.  These gay kids need something more concrete than more stewing in depression. The late William F. Buckley often said that industry is the enemy of melancholy. It might be better for videos to say, “Yes, other kids are bullying. And you shouldn’t wait for it to get better. First, do what you need to be safe. That is our most important goal. You need to be safe from others. But second, you also must be safe from yourself.

In order for life to get better, you need to make yourself better. Play sports, join the band, start a glee club or chess club or theater group. Or better yet, help create a Gay-Straight Alliance in your school. There are groups like GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, that seek to develop school climates where differences are valued for their positive contribution.  Don’t hide from your problems with booze or drugs. Make yourself better, and life will get better.

Robert Turner is President of the D.C. chapter of Log Cabin Republicans. Reach him at robert.turner@dclogcabin.org. Mike Hubbard also serves on the board of directors for the D.C. chapter of Log Cabin.

In 1992, Bill Clinton campaigned hard for gay votes and made promises to end discrimination. He backslid. The anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act passed both houses of Congress with lopsided, bipartisan majorities and was signed into law by none other than President Clinton.

Homophobia is a bipartisan problem and therefore requires a bipartisan solution.  Namely, that bigotry toward gay people is unacceptable and that we are equal to straight people both legally and morally. It’s an imperfect analogy, but just as racists are repudiated, so too should homophobes be ostracized — wherever they arise, in whatever party.

We obviously aren’t there yet. Democrats have improved more than Republicans have, but they’re in danger of backsliding. Consider a state Senate race in Virginia pitting a Democratic incumbent, Janet Howell, against a gay Republican, Patrick Forrest. It’s a close race between the long time legislator and a first-time campaigner who has knocked on 30,000 doors.

Howell has a decent pro-gay rights record. But a Democratic volunteer was caught on tape claiming that Forrest will push a “homosexual agenda in our children’s schools.” As a member of the Fairfax County Textbook Selection Committee, Forrest has said that there’s “too much Marx” in textbooks. That might be an agenda — but a homosexual one? It’s an egregious misrepresentation of his views, particularly since Forrest isn’t running as a gay Republican but rather as someone who cares about traffic congested Northern Virginia and public transit and the budget and who happens to be gay.

More seriously, without defining “homosexual agenda,” Howell’s supporter who made the remarks invites projection: She could mean anything from rainbow flags to pedophilia. She has attempted a smear that affects not just Forrest but all gay men. Will she get away with it? Some people, but not enough, are criticizing Howell’s campaign.

The Washington Blade has reported this incident, Log Cabin Republicans has fired off press releases, and the Victory Fund has sent out e-mails on Forrest’s behalf. Good as these groups are, they aren’t enough. It’s troubling that the Human Rights Campaign and Stonewall Democrats have been silent; it’s worse that the Virginia Partisans (Northern Virginia’s equivalent to Gertrude Stein) have endorsed Howell. The gay groups seem to have an unholy alliance with mainstream media outlets like The Washington Post that haven’t deigned to cover this. Gay people cannot tell a newspaper to cover a bigot, but it ought to be news when a major newspaper covers up bigotry.

Yet when major gay rights organizations stay silent, something else might be at work.  It is no secret that Democrats are generally friendlier than Republicans toward gays. But that does not mean that Democrats always are better friends, nor does it mean that they are always in the right.

In politics, if something works, other people (from both sides) will keep doing it. Take, for example, negative advertising. Despite many voters’ complaints about it, it keeps being used because it works.  In this state Senate race, a Democrat has stooped to gay baiting to win a race; if it works, we’ll surely see more anti-gay smears used against both Republicans and Democrats.

Forrest is running this race to win, being honest about who he is, proudly running as a Log Cabin Republican with the endorsement of the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund. He has based his campaign not on who he is but on issues: fiscal conservatism, transportation policy and improving the 32nd District of Virginia. Now that he is a threat, Democrats want to punish him for it. Being criticized for positions is what politics and the First Amendment are all about; we wouldn’t have it any other way. But Howell has allegedly turned to smears and innuendo and everything ugly about politics. Many qualified gay people don’t run for office precisely because of the politics of slander, which Howell is accused of practicing and which the Virginia Partisans, the Washington Post and others are enabling.

If gay activists and the liberal media won’t stand up for a gay Republican against homophobic politics, then Log Cabin Republicans will. We cannot let the politics of personal destruction prevail. Patrick Forrest deserves our support.

We hope that we aren’t in danger of engendering more legalized bigotry like DOMA.  But when Democrats use anti-gay slurs, we’re backsliding. It’s true enough that many straight people have a homophobia problem, but if gay people turn a blind eye to bigots, we deserve their contempt.

Robert Turner is president of the D.C. chapter of Log Cabin Republicans. Reach him at robert.turner@dclogcabin.org.

Last week in Forbes magazine, Reince Priebus, chair of the Republican National Committee, wrote that young voters deserve better. We’ll take that one giant leap forward: all Americans deserve better.

Chairman Priebus talks about our growing national debt and high unemployment. He makes a strong case, focusing on a clear message of jobs, pro-growth policies and a 2012 campaign that capitalizes on the technology and networks that reach younger voters.

What Priebus doesn’t say is conspicuous by its absence. The 2012 campaign is about the economy, creating jobs and rejecting Obama’s failed policies. Nowhere does the chairman mention the social issues that many polls show turn off moderates, independents and voters under 40, and for good reason. The GOP can win younger voters in 2012. We absolutely can take back the White House — but we won’t do it unless we stay focused on the issues that unite us as Republicans and as Americans.

Priebus’s actions show even greater promise than his words. In recent months, Priebus has invited the Log Cabin Republicans to participate in activities aimed at growing the party. In June, to the chagrin of the Family Research Council, Priebus named Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director Clarke Cooper to its finance committee. Cooper is playing a critical role there in raising funds for the party’s efforts to elect Republicans to the White House and across the country.

As we are discovering each day, there are moderate and conservative Republicans all over the country who are coming to the realization that inclusion does win and increasingly agree with Britain’s Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron’s statement that, “I don’t support gay marriage in spite of being a conservative, I support gay marriage because I am a conservative.”

We’re lucky to have true pioneers in our own country like the “New York Four” — Jim Alesi, Mark Grisanti, Roy McDonald and Steve Saland — the four Republican state senators who voted for marriage equality, and Maryland state Sen. Allan Kittleman, who did the same in the Free State. In the upcoming battle in North Carolina, Rep. Renee Ellmers opposes the amendment to the North Carolina Constitution banning recognition of same-sex couples that will be on the ballot in May 2012.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has become the first Republican to co-sponsor the repeal of Defense of Marriage Act — a law signed by President Clinton, a fair weather friend if ever there was one. With Republicans who support inclusion, we get true friends: people who will do the right thing regardless of the vagaries of the latest polls.

Our true Republican friends are multiplying each year. This is due, in part, to Priebus. His vision for our party is one where the principles of equality for all are a given. The Rick Santorums of the party are going the way of the dinosaurs (when you try to fight Google bombs, you’re losing).  Each day we are seeing an increase in those within the party who both offer us a seat at the table and defend us when we’re slandered.

While the gay left recites yesterday’s talking points, we will continue to be involved, stay active and work to change hearts and minds one voter at a time. Conservative gay activism will not so much defeat the left as transcend it.

The Log Cabin Republicans look forward to supporting candidates in 2012 and beyond who believe in the conservative principles of fiscal responsibility, a confident foreign policy and individual liberty — core values that unite us as a party and as Americans.

Robert Turner is President of the DC Chapter of Log Cabin Republicans, and can be reached at robert.turner@dclogcabin.org

It has been a little more than two weeks since “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was officially removed from the books. There have been no reports of sexual tension, harassment or sexual assault, as predicted by the Family Research Council. There have been no shower rapes or any mass exodus of straight men and women who would not stand side-by-side with one of their own because of their sexual orientation.

What there has been is a slow and steady stream of brave men and women who have decided to tell the truth about who they are. As someone who did not serve, but grew up in a military household, I was taught that one of the essential pillars of the serving in the Armed Forces was honor.

If brave men and women are willing to enlist in the military, fight and make the ultimate sacrifice for our country, then they deserve the same rights and privileges as any other American.  The bottom line is that in the days since repeal, everyone in the military is serving with the same people they were serving with before repeal.

This is something that former Sen. Rick Santorum doesn’t seem to understand. In a recent presidential debate, Santorum said that there was no place for sexual displays in the military.  What he fails to understand is the simple fact that before Sept. 20, a gay soldier could not set a picture of he and his partner on his desk, while a straight soldier could. A lesbian Marine could not display a photo of her girlfriend near her bunk.

Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper was absolutely correct in his statement that, “Sen. Santorum’s shameful response to the combat soldier’s question regarding open service was incoherent and out of touch. America’s uniformed leaders support gays and lesbians serving alongside their colleagues with dignity and respect. Santorum’s divisive and homophobic remarks do not befit a commander-in-chief.”

On that same evening of repeal, Log Cabin Republicans honored Sens. Susan Collins and Scott Brown with Spirit of Lincoln awards for their critical roles in bringing repeal to reality.  They, along with six other Republican senators, voted in favor of repeal, pushing the vote above its needed margin of victory.

Between 1993 and Tuesday, Sept. 20, 2011, more than 14,000 service men and women were discharged under the failed policy of DADT. That’s 14,000 American jobs that men and women have been fired from simply for having the integrity to say who they are. How do we live in a country where being honest is a disqualifying factor?

If you have faith in our armed forces, then you should have faith that everyone serving has the proper training and skill set to successfully perform their duties and missions. If you respect the military, then you should respect the men and women who valiantly serve in it. All of them.

Sen. Scott Brown said it best at that Log Cabin dinner: “When a soldier answers the call for duty, it only matters if they’re willing to give their all.”

Robert Turner is president of the D.C. chapter of Log Cabin Republicans. Reach him at robert.turner@dclogcabin.org.

We often use race and gender as a way to shame or silence our adversaries. But we should try to go beyond skin color to explore genuine ideas. We are not, thankfully, in the old days of segregation and Jim Crow, but neither are we within a post-racial world yet.  In order to get beyond race, we need to deal honestly with people who try to use race to divide or deride.

Alex Blaze of the Bilerico Project blog wrote recently that the leadership of Log Cabin Republicans is so “white and male.” While the author drew the reader in by first talking solely about the national board of Log Cabin, he swiftly pulled a bait and switch further into his column by expanding his examination to all leadership positions within the organization.

So imagine my surprise when the author asked is it really “that there are almost no queer people of color or women who are Republican?” Or his odd statement of questioning why “women and minorities are less likely to be in leadership positions” within the gay right. At first glance, I thought “so what?” But something kept me coming back to his piece.

As a black man who serves as president of D.C. Log Cabin Republicans, I should be offended. But I’m not. It is nothing more than the status quo from the gay left.

The Log Cabin Republicans are a cross-section of not only the GOP, but also of the LGBT community. In the last presidential election, 27 percent of gays voted Republican.  We range from RINOs to right-wingers to proud members of the Tea Party. We are well off and upwardly mobile, as well as lower to middle class just getting by. We are white, black and brown, male and female and even transgender.

But this is an anathema to what many liberals believe. The left believes the Republican Party and the Tea Party movement are comprised of a bunch of rich, white guys who are surely sexist and racist. But tell that to South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, or New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez. Or better yet, the dozen or so minority freshmen Republicans elected to Congress last year who were supported by the Tea Party. But I digress.

You couldn’t help but wonder if Blaze had taken the same strict scrutiny to our counterparts at the National Stonewall Democrats. While a cursory look at their website showed an abundance of lesbians on its board of directors, there is a dearth of minorities. Yet, no questions from Blaze as to where the black and brown gay Democrats are in leadership positions.

Perhaps it doesn’t matter that Log Cabin Republicans have women and minorities leading strong chapters in places like D.C., Chicago and San Diego. That’s merely an inconvenient truth.

Being a gay Republican is sometimes tough because both sides of the political spectrum discount us. Some on the right don’t think we’re true conservatives. To the left, my individualism reeks of selfishness, self-hate and even betrayal by some. How silly to think the rainbow flag we hold so dear as a community represents strength through diversity.

But throwing in the additional identifier of being black or brown can often cause apoplectic shock to those in the other party. So, when they say they don’t mean to bean count, that’s exactly what they mean to do. We create a chasm in the gay left’s demand for political solidarity.

When I was first elected president of the D.C. chapter of Log Cabin Republicans last year, I declined to make an issue of being the first black president of a chapter. I believed, then as now, that my race should not be an issue. My talents and energies as an activist should be the measuring stick of my success.

To quote Martin Luther King, Jr., we should not be judged by the color of our skin, but by the content of our character. The Log Cabin Republicans — especially the D.C. chapter — have moved beyond bean counting. When will the gay left?

Robert Turner is president of the D.C. chapter of Log Cabin Republicans. Reach him at robert.turner@dclogcabin.org.

Forty-two years ago we fought back. We said we had had enough, and we weren’t going to take it anymore. That was the message of the Stonewall Riots of 1969. Bless those gay men and lesbians of yesteryear; those queers and benders; and especially those drag queens. What would we have done without those drag queens? One year later, Gay Pride marches occurred in New York, Chicago and Los Angeles to commemorate the anniversary of Stonewall. That began the tradition of what we celebrate as Pride.

Today, Pride is celebrated the world over. You can find it in every big city from New York to Paris to Rio, and in small to mid-sized towns like Annapolis, Richmond, Austin and Seattle.  Chances are if you are reading this, you have more than likely attended at least one event produced for Capital Pride — Washington, D.C.’s own Pride celebration.

Capital Pride is the annual celebration of the LGBT community in our nation’s capital. This year, Capital Pride celebrates its 36th anniversary. This year, Capital Pride has offered more than 30 events that have spanned 10 days that highlight, showcase, and represent D.C.’s LGBT community. We’ve honored heroes, hosted town halls and religious programs, as well as dances, parties and pageants. This weekend, we will conclude with an amazing parade that will be viewed by tens of thousands and a free festival the entire family can enjoy that ranks in the top five for attendance in North America.

Each year, we reflect on how far we’ve come as a community, and how much further we need to travel down that path toward full equality. The last 12 months have been no exception.  Since last Pride, we’ve seen the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” along with other steps toward equality. But conversely, in many jurisdictions across our country, we still have not reached our goals with regard to marriage, adoption and a host of other issues. And so we continue to have Pride.

The celebration of Pride is a time when all aspects of our community can come together as one. But Pride has a different meaning to many people.

The dichotomy that is Pride boils down to this: Is it a party or is it a protest? Generally speaking, the answer to that question will depend on the age of the person responding.

I am here to say that it can and should be both! While we will most certainly fail if we attempt to be too many things to all people, we must certainly have a variety of activities that span the cross-section that is our community. This means not only dance parties and happy hours, but also educational and cultural events.

Gay society is changing. Pride celebrations need to reflect that. We are no longer confined to the gayborhoods of Dupont, Chelsea, West Hollywood and North Halsted among others. So it can’t only be about the bar scene.

Many of us who grew up and came out more than a decade ago have a different take on what Pride should be than some who are now coming of age. That’s not to say one group is wrong or right.

Many of the younger generation look to Pride as a celebration — a party. And that’s fine.  Those who are a little more “seasoned” often view Pride as a protest, mindful of the riots on those late June nights back at the Stonewall Inn.

And it is extremely important that we show our youth, especially in small towns and throughout middle America, that it does get better. Though we may face hardship and ridicule from our peers, we can become anything we dream of being.

Locally, we need to do more to bring the various Pride celebrations — Capital Pride, Black Pride, Youth Pride, Latino Pride — together, while still retaining individual identities. And we need to do more throughout the calendar year.  Pride should be a year-long celebration, not just a few weeks in the summer.

So please come out this weekend and celebrate Pride. And once the fun events and activities are done, give back. Help us plan next year’s festivities. After all, this is for you, the community.  Constructive feedback and input are necessary for us to thrive as a community.  And if that’s not your cup of tea, volunteer with a local group or organization. There are many in our great city.  The point is to show your Pride!

Robert Turner is on the board of directors for Capital Pride Alliance, which produces Capital Pride. Reach him at rturner@capitalpride.org.

On Tuesday, many of us in the District will go to the polls to vote for a candidate in the At-Large race for City Council. There are nine candidates vying for this seat. Several are actually decent candidates.

However, I would like to point out a few reason why you should vote for Patrick Mara on Tuesday, fiscal responsibility being at the top of that list. Mara would seek a top-to-bottom review of all city contracts and spending. Mara will scrub contracts for fraud and abuse, and demand performance. In doing so, he would cut waste, while fully funding education, law enforcement and public safety.

D.C. has a $320 million budget deficit for the coming fiscal year. There have been talks of tax increases, additional user fees and other revenue raisers. Sekou Biddle, the current interim Council member has flip-flopped on the issue of raising taxes. Mara wants to trim government spending by reforming many of the District agencies that are bloated and inefficient.

Recent events have shown that the Council needs a watchdog looking out for taxpayers.  Patrick Mara will provide that oversight. Between fully loaded taxpayer-leased vehicles, unaccountable non-profits run by Council members, and questionable hiring practices, it is clear that the one-party rule over at the Wilson Building is not good for the citizens of the District.

Mara would be a fresh and independent voice on the Council. He would help set an example by behaving responsibly and ethically. With these strings of ethically challenged issues plaguing various members of the Council and the mayor’s office, now is the time for a fresh approach; someone who is not beholden to the current crop of city leaders. Biddle has been endorsed by half of the Council – including Mayor Gray and Chairman Brown, which would undoubtedly lead to his continuing the status quo.

As a moderate Republican who is fiscally conservative and socially progressive, Patrick would bring common sense to city hall.

Last week, when the Washington Post endorsed Mara, it said in part, “Mara would use his standing as a Republican to lobby for congressional representation and budget autonomy for Washington.” It went on to say that he doesn’t change his positions to “please the interests of the audience he’s addressing.”

In addition to the Post, not only has Mara been endorsed by the D.C. chapter of Log Cabin Republicans, but also by the local Fraternal Order of Police who say that he would be a “voice on the Council that is committed to public safety.”

With the current makeup of Congress being split, we will need someone on the Council who is willing to meet with the Republican leadership and show them why it is best to leave D.C. alone. Getting oneself arrested in support of D.C. rights and local autonomy may show passion and conviction, but it does not show effectiveness.

It will be useful in engaging with a GOP-led House to have a vocal GOP advocate on the Council. And after the last minute budget shenanigans on the Hill, it is more important now than ever. Last year, Mara, along with D.C. GOP Chairman Bob Kabel went up to the Hill to lobby against overturning D.C.’s marriage law.

Speaking of marriage, Mara is a proven friend to the LGBT community. Not only has he marched in several Capital Pride parades, but he is the ONLY candidate on the ballot Tuesday who actually testified before the Council in support of bringing marriage equality to the District.  While others have talked about their commitment to our community, and some have “evolved on our issues,” he has shown it. Patrick Mara has been there for us. Now let’s be there for him.

I had the pleasure of attending the Victory Fund’s National Champagne Brunch last week. It was a day of firsts. It was my first time going, and it was their first time at the Washington Hilton. They were celebrating their 20th anniversary. There was a wonderful performance to start the day from the D.C. Cowboys. The speeches were good and not too long. And thanks to David Perruzza and JR.’s, the Champagne was definitely flowing. It was indeed a great afternoon of celebration.

The work that the Victory Fund does is important. We need more gays and lesbians serving in elective office. We need to build leaders who today will run for the city councils and state houses so that tomorrow, they can run for governor, Congress and even the White House.

Victory Fund endorses candidates who have gone through a vetting process to ensure that the candidate has a serious campaign and that they’ve demonstrated a real path to electoral success.  There are not many, but Victory Fund does endorse a few Republicans each cycle.

Their mission is simple: “To change the face and voice of America’s politics and achieve equality for LGBT Americans by increasing the number of openly LGBT officials at all levels of government.”

However if you look closer, in a bit of mission creep, they add in a few caveats that are limiting. They almost always endorse pro-choice candidates. In fact, to my knowledge, they’ve only endorsed one pro-lifer in recent history — Dan Hill, who ran for the General Assembly in Nevada last year.

Now this column is not intended to start a discussion about abortion. Let’s save that for another day. But is it wise to couple being gay with being pro-choice? Of course not. Although it is true that the inspiration to create the Victory Fund comes from EMILY’S List, that’s where the similarities should end.

In limiting the scope of their field, Victory Fund risks circumventing its very own mission – electing more out LGBT people to office.

While abortion is a very important issue to many in the LGBT community, it is not, nor should it be, what defines us. The one thing that should define us is our goal to bring full equality to all LGBT Americans.

What would be next in this mission creep? Only supporting out gay and lesbian pro-choice candidates who are pro-union, left-handed, recycle and support federal funding for National Public Radio? Now that’s just silly.

Unlike other national organizations in our communities with big budgets, Victory Fund has done a good job showing that it’s not a political arm of the Democratic National Committee.

But it needs to understand that being pro-life is not bad for the gay cause. And what would happen if science were to ever discover the “gay gene?” Would everyone in the community suddenly become pro-life so parents don’t abort babies who have “it?” Again, silly.

My message to Victory Fund is simple: Get rid of the pro-abortion plank in your vetting process and move on. Chuck Wolfe, Victory Fund’s executive director, said it best at the Sunday brunch about the type of people we need to help get elected: “Not just out candidates, but outstanding candidates.” Some of them just might be pro-life. And that should be OK. There should not be a litmus test other than being out and proud and having a credible campaign with a chance of success. That’s the winning ticket.

Robert Turner is president of the D.C. chapter of Log Cabin Republicans. Reach him at robert.turner@dclogcabin.org.

One is sometimes indeed the loneliest number.  But standing up for justice and equality rarely starts with the masses. With his endorsement, Maryland State Sen. Allan Kittleman last week became the first, and unfortunately probably the only Republican senator to support SB 116, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, which would bring marriage equality to Maryland.

In previous statements, Kittleman has said, “I am a strong believer in personal liberty and freedom. I believe that we have an opportunity to make Maryland a more fair state, a more just state and a state which treats all of its citizens equally under the law.”

If SB 116 becomes law, the bill would remove the state requirement that a marriage be between a man and woman. There are also provisions to ensure that religious groups opposed to same-sex unions not be required to perform such marriages, hence the religious freedom aspects of the bill.

This is an important section of the bill. It says that we don’t seek to inflict our views on one’s free exercise of religion, as guaranteed by the First Amendment.

The Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee held a hearing on the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act on Tuesday, in which Sen. Kittleman testified. The measure is expected to pass out of committee and go to the full Senate for a final vote. There, the outcome is not so clear.  There are 20 definitive ‘yes’ votes and 21 ‘no’ votes, while 24 are needed to pass in the 47-member chamber.

If the Senate approves the legislation, it will move on to the House of Delegates, where groups such as Equality Maryland say they have the votes to pass it. Gov. Martin O’Malley has already signaled his willingness to sign the bill when it comes to his desk.

Marriage equality is a vital step in assuring the true meaning of our Constitution’s 14th Amendment clause of equal protection under the law. Thomas Jefferson once said, “No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another.”

We have seen over the years the outcome when the majority dictates what rights are afforded to the minority. From the Dred Scott cases of 1857 involving freedom, to the Loving v. Virginia case in 1967 dealing with interracial marriage, this great country has started out on the wrong side of history and equality, only to be rectified with the courts interceding.

Now, Maryland has a chance to not only come down on the right side of history, but to also do so without the involvement of the judicial branch of government.  In doing so, Maryland would join the District and five other states in recognizing same-sex marriage.

Many of the detractors to this bill have and will continue to argue on moral and religious grounds, quoting the Bible as to why this is a travesty.  May these detractors be reminded that this country was built on religious freedom. And may these detractors be also reminded that many of those who came before us used the same great Book to deny slaves their freedom.

It has been said repeatedly here on these pages and on many others that we are not seeking special rights, simply equal rights. Or, better put 143 years ago as part of the Fourteenth Amendment to our Constitution, “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Maryland, this is the right thing to do. And Sen. Kittleman, thank you for your bravery in standing up for justice and equality.