News
Republicans ignore LGBT issues at CPAC
Log Cabin criticizes organizers for exclusion from ‘outreach’ panel

Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-La.) speaking at the 2014 Conservative Political Action Conference. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — Amid growing support for LGBT rights and following a string of court victories on marriage equality, high-profile Republican speakers avoided those subjects at the first day of the 2014 Conservative Political Action Conference.
Although many of the speakers have previously articulated their opposition to same-sex marriage — with some going as far as supporting a Federal Marriage Amendment — none took the opportunity while speaking before an estimated 8,500 conservatives in attendance to attack gay rights or made statements against the many recent judicial rulings in favor of marriage equality.
Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-La.) most closely approached LGBT issues when he defended his earlier statement supporting Phil Robertson of “Duck Dynasty” for controversial comments equating homosexuality to sinful behavior.
“But the reality is this: I stood up for their right to speak up and articulate their beliefs because I’m tired of the left,” Jindal said. “I’m tired of the left that claims they’re tolerant, claims they’re for diversity — and they are — they are tolerant and they are for diversity except for when you dare to disagree with them.”
Jindal made the reference to “Duck Dynasty” after criticizing the Obama administration for supposedly impinging on the religious liberties of Americans.
Another veiled reference to LGBT issues came up when Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) praised the restaurant chain Chick-fil-A — despite the company’s history of anti-gay donations and controversial comments in opposition to same-sex marriage by owner Dan Cathy.
You would have to look off stage at CPAC to find anti-LGBT sentiments. According to Right Wing Watch, the ultra-conservative Catholic group Tradition, Family, and Property distributed fliers at the event depicting the gay conservative group GOProud as a rainbow-colored beaver, explaining “Why GOProud Does Not Belong at CPAC.”
“Why is GOProud a welcomed and official guest at CPAC, when it advocates the legalization of same-sex ‘marriage,’ thus undermining the votes and dreams of millions of God-fearing Americans?” the flier reportedly says.
Ross Hemminger, co-director of GOProud who helped the group regain its guest status at CPAC after two years of being banned, responded to the flier succinctly.
“I think it’s hilarious,” Hemminger said. “We will proudly be the rainbow beavers.”
Even though no one on stage at CPAC took the opportunity to oppose LGBT rights, no one speaking on stage said anything in favor of them either.
That absence was most acute during a panel titled “Reaching Out: The Rest of the Story,” which looked at the ways the conservative movement can expand into minority groups.
On the panel, moderated by Revolvis Consulting partner Jason Roe, was Republican U.S. Senate candidate from Virginia Ed Gillespie; Robert Woodson, president of the Center for Neighborhood Enterprise and Elroy Sailor, CEO of J.C. Watts Companies.
Although the panel talked at length about the Republican Party entering the black and Latino communities to win over those heavily Democratic constituents, not once did any mention of LGBT outreach come up, nor was the word “gay” even uttered.
Gregory Angelo, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, attended CPAC as a guest and criticized the lack of LGBT outreach on the panel in an interview with the Blade.
“The silence is deafening there, as least as far as I’m concerned,” Angelo said. “This is a constituency that the conservative movement needs to reach out to and formally acknowledging that in some capacity is something I think it needs to do.”
In the wake of GOProud’s readmission as a guest to CPAC, Angelo penned an op-ed piece for The Daily Caller saying Log Cabin had sought “meaningful” participation at CPAC, such as a seat on the outreach panel, but was “rebuffed.” The American Conservation Union, which hosts CPAC, didn’t respond to a request for comment.
“Our ask was that we have a voice at the conference — that’s it — whether that was introducing speakers, introducing panelists, or being part of a panel,” Angelo said. “From our perspective, that was a simply non-controversial proposal that would have shown the country that gay conservatives are a meaningful part of this movement, in a vehicle that wasn’t all about ‘gay policy issues.'”
While remaining silent on LGBT issues, a number of prominent Republicans who spoke on stage at CPAC — many of whom are seen as Republican presidential contenders — addressed other relevant issues of the day, often attacking President Obama.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) talked about the importance of the “three-legged stool” of the conservative movement — social issues, fiscal issues and national security issues — that Republicans say led to Ronald Reagan’s wide victories during presidential elections in the 1980s.
“When we say that we’re pro-life, and that we’re proudly pro-life, that doesn’t mean that we’re pro-life just when that human being is in the womb,” Christie said. “It means we have to be in favor of an educational system that’s accountable, so that child, as they grow, can have a world-class education. It means that we have to be in favor of a society that creates opportunity and jobs for them — not one that has the government control what they think is good or fair in our society.”

Gov. Chris Christie (R-N.J.) speaking at the 2014 Conservative Political Action Conference. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
Amid concern over Russia’s military incursion into Ukraine, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) derided the Obama administration for what he said was allowing the growth of totalitarian regimes in North Korea, Iran, China and Russia.
“All the problems of the world, all the conflicts of the world are being created by totalitarian regimes who are more interested in forcing people to do what they want them to do than truly achieving peace and prosperity and respect for the rights of others,” Rubio said.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), another rising Republican star, enumerated several policy items he wanted to achieve, including repeal of Obamacare and Dodd-Frank financial reform, abolition of the IRS and the establishment of the flat-tax.
Following his speech, Cruz took a shot at former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whom many see as the likely Democratic presidential nominee in 2016, when asked about her candidacy.
“I’m less concerned about Hillary Clinton than I am about the direction this is country is going,” Cruz said. “We will have had eight years of a failed economic agenda that is resulting in a lack of leadership across the world. It is allowing Russia and China and Iran to expand their spheres of influence and make the world a much more dangerous place, and at home people are hurting. We’ve got the lowest labor force participation since 1978. Let me tell you, we can’t afford eight more years of this: Hillary Clinton would continue the failed Obama economic agenda.”
It should be noted Cruz is an opponent of marriage equality and has introduced in the Senate the State Defense Marriage Act, which would prohibit the federal government from recognizing same-sex unions in states where they’re illegal.
Rehoboth Beach
BLUF leather social set for April 10 in Rehoboth
Attendees encouraged to wear appropriate gear
Diego’s in Rehoboth Beach hosts a monthly leather happy hour. April’s edition is scheduled for Friday, April 10, 5-7 p.m. Attendees are encouraged to wear appropriate gear. The event is billed as an official event of BLUF, the free community group for men interested in leather. After happy hour, the attendees are encouraged to reconvene at Local Bootlegging Company for dinner, which allows cigar smoking. There’s no cover charge for either event.
District of Columbia
Celebrations of life planned for Sean Bartel
Two memorial events scheduled in D.C.
Two celebrations of life are planned for Sean Christopher Bartel, 48, who was found deceased on a hiking trail in Argentina on or around March 15. Bartel began his career as a television news reporter and news anchor at stations in Louisville, Ky., and Evansville, Ind., before serving as Senior Video Producer for the D.C.-based International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union from 2013 to 2024.
A memorial gathering is planned for Friday, April 10, 11:30 a.m.-1:30 p.m. at the IBEW International Office (900 7th St., N.W.), according to a statement by the DC Gay Flag Football League, where Bartel was a longtime member. A celebration of life is planned that same evening, 6-8 p.m. at Trade (1410 14th St., N.W.).
Puerto Rico
The ‘X’ returns to court
1st Circuit hears case over legal recognition of nonbinary Puerto Ricans
Eight months ago, I wrote about this issue at a time when it had not yet reached the judicial level it faces today. Back then, the conversation moved through administrative decisions, public debate, and political resistance. It was unresolved, but it had not yet reached this point.
That has now changed.
Lambda Legal appeared before the 1st U.S. Court of Appeals in Boston, urging the court to uphold a lower court ruling that requires the government of Puerto Rico to issue birth certificates that accurately reflect the identities of nonbinary individuals. The appeal follows a district court decision that found the denial of such recognition to be a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
This marks a turning point. The issue is no longer theoretical. A court has already determined that unequal treatment exists.
The argument presented by the plaintiffs is grounded in Puerto Rico’s own legal framework. Identity birth certificates are not static historical records. They are functional documents used in everyday life. They are required to access employment, education, and essential services. Their purpose is practical, not symbolic.
Within that framework, the exclusion of nonbinary individuals does not stem from a legal limitation. Puerto Rico already allows gender marker corrections on birth certificates for transgender individuals under the precedent established in Arroyo Gonzalez v. Rosselló Nevares. In addition, the current Civil Code recognizes the existence of identity documents that reflect a person’s lived identity beyond the original birth record.
The issue lies in how the law is applied.
Recognition is granted within specific categories, while those who do not identify within that binary structure remain excluded. That exclusion is now at the center of this case.
Lambda Legal’s position is straightforward. Requiring individuals to carry documents that do not reflect who they are forces them into misrepresentation in essential aspects of daily life. This creates practical barriers, exposes them to scrutiny, and places them in a constant state of vulnerability.
The plaintiffs, who were born in Puerto Rico, have made clear that access to accurate identification is not symbolic. It is a basic condition for moving through the world without contradiction imposed by the state.
The fact that this case is now being addressed in the federal court system adds another layer of significance. This is not a pending policy discussion or a legislative proposal. It is a constitutional question. The analysis is not about political preference, but about rights and equal protection under the law.
This case does not exist in isolation.
It unfolds within a broader context in which debates over identity and rights have increasingly been shaped by the growing influence of conservative perspectives in public policy, both in the United States and in Puerto Rico. At the local level, this influence has been reflected in legislative discussions where religious arguments have begun to intersect with decisions that should be grounded in constitutional principles. That intersection creates tension around the separation of church and state and has direct consequences for access to rights.
Recognizing this context is not an attack on faith or religious practice. It is an acknowledgment that when certain perspectives move into the realm of public authority, they can shape outcomes that affect specific communities.
From within Puerto Rico, this is not a distant debate. It is a lived reality. It is present in the difficulty of presenting identification that does not match one’s identity, and in the consequences that follow in workplaces, schools, and government spaces.
The progression of this case introduces the possibility of change within the applicable legal framework. Not because it resolves every tension surrounding the issue, but because it establishes a legal examination of a practice that has long operated under exclusion.
Eight months ago, the conversation centered on ongoing developments. Today, there is already a judicial finding that identifies a violation of rights. What remains is whether that finding will be upheld on appeal.
That process does not guarantee an immediate outcome, but it shifts the ground.
The debate is no longer theoretical.
It is now before the courts.


