National
CPAC highlights GOP division on gay rights, marriage
‘A few in our movement just don’t like gay people’
Conservative pundits urged the GOP to evolve on the marriage issue at CPAC. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — The message from Republicans on gay inclusion in the party was mixed as the Conservative Political Action Conference unfolded over the weekend. As one faction of the party was saying evolve or die, the other was saying there’s no need for change.
The push for Republicans to adopt a more inclusive tone was heard most distinctly during an unofficial event at CPAC titled, “A Rainbow on the Right: Growing the Coalition, Bringing Tolerance Out of the Closet.”
That panel concluded just hours before Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) announced he supports marriage equality. But at the same time, leaders of the Republican Party — most prominently House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) — continue to assert steadfast opposition to marriage equality.
Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of the gay conservative group GOProud, was one of the lead speakers on the panel and advocated for a change in the conservative movement.
“In 2013, those who demonize gay people and oppose homosexuality are way out of the mainstream, because everyone has a gay person in their lives — and they know better,” LaSalvia said. “I believe that this issue contributes more to conservatives’ image problem than any other, because it’s an issue that cuts across all demographic groups. And it has to be addressed.”
LaSalvia, whose organization endorsed marriage equality in January, said the conservative movement has tolerated “anti-gay bigotry” for too long, but emphasized those who oppose same-sex marriage aren’t necessarily homophobes.
“Opposition to gay marriage isn’t, in and of itself, bigotry,” LaSalvia said. “There are, however, a few in our movement who just don’t like gay people, and in 2013 that’s just not OK in America anymore. Gay people are in every family, every circle of friends, and every community in the country now. Everybody knows a gay person.”
The panel, hosted by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, was an unofficial event that took place in the Gaylord National Hotel as CPAC was underway. GOProud, along with the John Birch Society, was barred in 2011 from sponsoring the annual conservative conference and hasn’t been allowed back since. While the American Conservative Union, which organizes CPAC, said the groups were barred because of “disrespectful behavior,” GOProud says they were barred from participating because it’s a gay organization.
On stage at CPAC, mention of marriage equality or other LGBT outreach was scant, although a few speakers brought up the issue. Most prominent was Sen. Marco Rubio, who said during his remarks on Thursday, “Just because I believe that states should have the right to define marriage in a traditional way does not make me a bigot.”
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush on Thursday as the keynote speaker of a dinner honoring former President Reagan also warned against an anti-gay image for the Republican Party.
“Way too many people believe Republicans are anti-immigrant, anti-woman, anti-science, anti-gay, anti-worker, and the list goes on and on and on,” Bush said. “Many voters are simply unwilling to choose our candidate — even though they share our core beliefs — because those voters feel unloved, unwanted and unwelcome in our party.”
Off stage came another announcement: Portman announced that he’s had “a change of heart” and came to support marriage equality after his son Will, a student at Yale University, came out as gay two years ago.
“One way to look at it is that gay couples’ desire to marry doesn’t amount to a threat but rather a tribute to marriage, and a potential source of renewed strength for the institution,” Portman wrote in an op-ed for the Columbus Dispatch.
While the panel took place before Portman’s announcement, a number of prominent conservative commentators on the CEI panel, who spoke before a packed audience, advocated for a similar evolution in the Republican Party on marriage equality.
Jennifer Rubin, a conservative blogger for the Washington Post, said outreach to the LGBT community would be akin to the Republican Party’s effort to reach out to Latinos by working on immigration reform.
“I suggest that in another generation, or a half generation, this argument is going to be gone,” Rubin said. “Virtually every state in the union will have voted by popular vote; some may choose not to, and they’re going to experience whatever social and economic consequences flow from that. But in 10 years or so, no one is going to be talking about this.”
Earlier this month, polling analysis was unveiled by the LGBT advocacy Freedom to Marry showing opposition to marriage equality rests within three groups: white evangelical Christians, older people and non-college educated white people. Another notable statistic: 51 percent of Republicans under the age of 30 support marriage equality.
That last statistic was a point that Liz Mair, president of the Arlington, Va., consulting firm Mair Strategies, drew upon as she advocated for greater Republican outreach.
“The way that we’re going to talk about these issues and in some cases, the stands that we take on them, is going to prove to be a problem,” Mair said. “There’s something that needs to be addressed here, and that needs to be addressed now.”
Margaret Hoover, a conservative CNN contributor, also warned that continued opposition to marriage equality will harm the conservative movement as younger voters grow older.
“The millennial generation, the 30 and unders, are simply not hearing conservatism because they’re tuning us out based on a certain set of issues,” Hoover said. “Winning the argument and showing that we’re an inclusive movement is critical to not turning them off to a whole other rainbow of our other ideas.”
One question that sparked discussion concerned whether government should get out of the institution of marriage altogether — for both same-sex and opposite-sex couples — and simply allow individuals to form contracts with whomever they choose. That view was espoused last week by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who won the CPAC straw poll as the attendees’ preferred presidential candidate for 2016.
Mair explained that while many conservatives would like to see the government out of marriage, many aspects of government are involved in marriage, so support for marriage equality is the best option for libertarians.
“Unless you have a radical overhaul of the tax system, a radical overhaul of the entitlement system and, frankly, probably a radical overhaul of the immigration system, also, because that is going to affect certain same-sex couples, that’s not actually going to be a practical way of ensuring equality and rights,” Mair said.
Jonah Goldberg, editor-at-large for the National Review, said he agrees the Republican Party needs to work on greater inclusiveness toward LGBT people, but noted that work needs to be done to hold onto social conservatives within the movement.
“You’re going to have to show me who you’re going to replace the 20 to 30 million social conservatives and evangelicals who may leave the party if you completely abandon some of those issues,” Goldberg said. “So the trick is to explain to people on our side why this is the right position because if you do that, you’ll have a great moral victory, but you’ll lose even more elections. It makes a lot more sense to try to persuade the people who agree with you on 80 percent of the issues to stick with you, than to say, ‘Go to hell over this one issue!'”
And remarks from other prominent Republicans over the weekend demonstrate the view that marriage is one man, one woman is still held by leaders within the party.
Most prominent is Boehner, who said in an interview on ABC “This Week” airing on Sunday that he couldn’t imagine his views on marriage changing, even if — like Portman — a child came out to him as gay.
“I believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman,” said Boehner said. “It’s what I grew up with. It’s what I believe. It’s what my church teaches me, and I can’t imagine that position would ever change.”
According to Roll Call, former Republican presidential candidate U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum under questioning at CPAC indicated he was unmoved when asked about Portman’s newfound support for marriage equality, saying, “Just because someone changes their mind doesn’t change things.”
Santorum reportedly added Republicans are confronting “very difficult facts” in their live, but if marriage were just about “two adults who love each other,” there’s no reason not to let “three or four people” marry. His remarks reportedly generated loud applause.
And on a CPAC panel on bullying faced by conservatives, titled “Stop THIS: Threats, Harassment, Intimidation, Slander & Bullying from the Obama administration,” Brian Brown, president of National Organization for Marriage, maintained opposition to marriage equality is a conservative principle.
“When you hear someone act as if standing up and believing for the truth about marriage is not a conservative principle is not the truth, refuse to back down, refuse to be cowed, do not accept the notion that this is an issue that somehow we can’t talk about or we can’t debate,” Brown said. “Don’t accept the idea that we need silence on this issue. What we need is people standing up more than ever for marriage is the union between a man and a woman. What we’ve seen in state-after-state is that when people do this, far from being a losing issue, it’s a winning issue.”
National
Gallup finds LGBTQ support among Americans is dropping
Marriage equality support lowest since 2016
Gallup, one of the leading organizations in public opinion polling, has found that LGBTQ support among Americans is dropping.
The poll, whose data was collected using Gallup’s annual Values and Beliefs survey, was conducted in May and was published on Wednesday. The data was collected through telephone interviews from a sample of more than 1,000 adults living in all 50 states and D.C. using random digit dialing.
It highlights declining attitudes surrounding LGBTQ issues in multiple areas — from support for same-sex marriage to views on gender identity and the morality of one’s sexuality.
One of the most striking findings was that support for marriage equality fell six points from its 2022-2023 high.
The survey also found that 62 percent of Americans view gay and lesbian relations as morally acceptable, the lowest level since 2016 just after same-sex marriage was legalized nationwide by the U.S. Supreme Court.
One newer question on the poll found that the perceived morality of changing one’s gender has dropped eight points since 2021, indicating the American public is less supportive of transgender people.
The data attributes much of the decline to shifting Republican views alongside the party itself. Conservative leaders have pushed back against diversity, equity, and inclusion programs that were intended to foster greater acceptance of LGBTQ people and other historically disadvantaged groups.
President Donald Trump has been a guiding force behind waves of anti-LGBTQ sentiment, particularly when it comes to trans rights. The president has enacted multiple executive orders, including Executive Order 14168, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” which mandates that gender be defined by one’s sex assigned at birth. He also signed Executive Order 14183, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” which barred qualified trans applicants from joining the military and led to the removal of trans service members already serving in the armed forces.
Additionally, he signed Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” which prohibits trans female athletes from participating on women’s and girls’ sports teams.
In February, Gallup found that an estimated 9 percent of Americans identified as part of the LGBTQ community in some form.
The organization also found that 23 percent of adults under age 30 identify as LGBTQ, compared with 10 percent of those ages 30 to 49 and 3 percent or less among those ages 50 and older.
Congress
Ogles faces bipartisan backlash over anti-gay social media post
Tenn. congressman blamed the comment on staffer
U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.), who represents Tennessee’s 5th Congressional District, is facing backlash from LGBTQ advocates and fellow Republicans after a social media post declared that “homosexuality has no place in America.”
“Homosexuality has no place in America. Happy Nuclear Family Month,” the congressman wrote in a post on X that was later deleted.
According to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law, an estimated 6.3 percent of U.S. adults identify as LGBTQ.
Following widespread criticism, Ogles removed the post and blamed it on a staff member.
“The post was stupid, hurtful and a complete distraction from my America First focus. The employee has been reprimanded,” Ogles said in a statement.
The Washington Blade reached out to Ogles’s office for comment but did not receive a response by press time.
Among those condemning the message was U.S. Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), who called it “absolutely idiotic” in a social media post.
“Homosexuality exists. In America,” Lawler wrote on X. “In fact, Andy, you have family, friends, neighbors, colleagues, and constituents who are gay and lesbian. It doesn’t make them less than or somehow unworthy of being an American.”
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) also criticized Ogles’s remarks.
“For all of recorded history, homosexuals have been a part of humanity,” Cruz told TMZ DC. “I think the behavior of consenting adults is their business.”
Chris Sanders, the executive director for the Tennessee Equality Project and Tennessee Equality Project Foundation provided a statement to the Blade about Ogles’s comment.
“The Tennessee Nuclear Family Month resolution has really backfired on conservatives by ensnaring Congressman Ogles in scandal. He used the resolution as a pretext to say that our community doesn’t belong in America, resulting in incredible backlash from across the partisan divide,” Sanders said. “It is a good opportunity for him to pause and reflect on whether it’s time for him to resign. Fighting one’s own constituents is not the purpose of serving in Congress.”
Human Rights Campaign Senior Press Secretary Jarred Keller provided a statement to the Blade regarding Ogles’s comments.
“LGBTQ+ people are woven into the fabric of America, and any politician who questions that is severely out of touch with reality. When so many people are worried about whether they can afford gas to get to work or groceries for their families, the last thing we need is right-wing Republicans targeting marginalized communities with hateful attacks,” Keller said. “Representative Ogles should spend less time attacking LGBTQ+ people and start addressing the issues that actually matter, because last I checked, our community isn’t the reason families are struggling to make ends meet.”
The controversy comes as Tennessee continues to advance legislation affecting LGBTQ residents. The state already has several laws on the books that LGBTQ advocates have criticized, including the Adult Entertainment Act, enacted in 2023, which restricts certain “adult cabaret performances.”
Lawmakers have also introduced additional measures this legislative session, including the “No Pride Flag or Month Act,” which would prohibit state employees, volunteers, and agents from displaying Pride flags or participating in Pride observances while acting in an official capacity.
Another proposal, the “Banning Bostock Act” would seek to limit the application of state anti-discrimination protections based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County. Tennessee lawmakers have also passed other measures restricting LGBTQ rights and access to gender-affirming health care.
U.S. Military/Pentagon
Federal appeals court rules White House illegally banned trans troops
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says Pentagon will appeal to SCOTUS
A panel of federal appeals court judges ruled that President Donald Trump’s policy banning transgender troops likely violates their constitutional rights.
The three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 that Trump’s Executive Order 14183, also known as “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” was created with the intent to exclude people from the military based on their gender identity.
The policy argues that trans people are inherently incapable of meeting the military’s “high standards of readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,” citing a history of or signs of gender dysphoria as the cause. According to the Defense Department, this creates “medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on [an] individual.”
The policy states that, regardless of the physical or intellectual capabilities of each applicant, it views trans military applicants as a monolith, considering them less qualified than their cisgender peers.
Despite the panel’s majority opinion issued on Monday, the first day of Pride Month, the ban remains in effect. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Pentagon to enforce the policy last year and will continue to allow it to remain in place as litigation proceeds.
The panel’s new ruling will prevent the military from discharging current service members named in the lawsuit, but it does not allow new transrecruits to join.
The policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Judge Robert Wilkins, a Democratic appointee of President Barack Obama wrote for the majority.
Judge Justin Walker, the author of the dissenting opinion and a Republican Trump appointee, argued that the authority to determine military policy does not rest with the courts. Instead, he wrote, the Constitution grants that power to Congress through legislation and to the president as commander in chief of the armed forces.
“We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks. The Constitution assigns that authority to Congress and the commander-in-chief,” Walker wrote.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated that an appeal is in the works, posting, “See you at SCOTUS” on X on Monday in response to the ruling.
Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, which has led the litigation since last November, applauded the decision.
“Today’s decision is a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs’ extraordinary courage and unwavering commitment to their country,” Levi said.
The Washington Blade spoke with Second Lt. Nicolas (Nic) Talbott of the U.S. Army, the lead plaintiff in the case, and Levi from GLAD Law back in November.
While discussing the case and his experiences as a trans service member, Talbott said his identity is an asset rather than a hindrance, particularly when it comes to identifying problems and finding solutions, regardless of what others may think or say.
“Being transgender is not some sad thing that people go through,” Talbott told the Blade. “This is something that has taken years and years and years of dedication and discipline and research and ups and downs to get to the point where I am today … my ability to transition was essential to getting me to that point where I am today.”
He also discussed the impact of removing qualified and dedicated service members from the military, arguing that the consequences will be felt long after Trump leaves office.
“When we’re losing thousands of those qualified, experienced individuals … those are seats that are not just going to be able to be filled by anybody,” he said. “[That’s] military training that’s not going to be able to be replaced for years and years to come.”
“Every person who puts on the uniform is expected to make a tremendous amount of sacrifice,” Talbott said. “Who I am under this uniform should have no bearing on that … We shouldn’t be picking and choosing which veterans are worthy of our thanks on that day.”
Levi characterized the policy as overtly cruel and legally indefensible to the Blade.
“This policy and its rollout is even more cruel than the first in a number of ways,” Levi explained. “For one, the policy itself says that transgender people are dishonest, untrustworthy and undisciplined, which is deeply offensive and degrading and demeaning.”
She also argued that the administration’s cost justification is flawed, saying that removing and replacing trans service members is more expensive than retaining them.
“There’s no legitimate justification relating to cost … it is far more expensive to both purge the military of people who are serving and also to replace people … than to provide the minuscule amount of costs for medications other service members routinely get.”
Gallup finds LGBTQ support among Americans is dropping
Ogles faces bipartisan backlash over anti-gay social media post
First gay underwear party? How to have fun nearly naked
D.C. Latinx Pride celebrates culture and heritage
Fighting ‘Rainbow Panic’ in museums
Books for a pre-Pride celebration
Barney Frank’s powerful legacy for LGBTQ federal employees
Claudia López comes up short in Colombian presidential election
PHOTOS: Hagerstown Pride
