Move over, glitter bombs.The gays have found a new — and I would say more effective — way to make their point. They’re just being themselves. And the sooner politicians catch up with the rest of the United States to realize that gay men, lesbians and their families deserve respect rather than demonization, the better off we’ll all be.
All kinds of right-thinking folks continue to register their displeasure with what Jennifer Rubin calls Rick Perry’s “ham-handed play for the religious right vote.” That’s the “Strong” ad, where the Republican Texas governor says something’s wrong when children can’t celebrate Christmas but gays can serve in the military. At last look, the number of people clicking “dislike” on the ad stood at 661,330.
And then you have those who calmly make it clear that they disapprove of the disapproval of the candidates. In today’s Post, Sandhya Somashekhar and Philip Rucker recount the various low-key confrontations. An 8-year-old South Carolina boy told Michelle Bachmann, “My mom is gay and she doesn’t need fixing.” An Iowa high school student debated the Minnesota congresswoman on gay rights.
The best example was Bob Garon, a Vietnam veteran having his daily breakfast with his husband in a diner in New Hampshire, where same-sex marriage is legal. When Mitt Romney plopped down in their booth, Garon asked, “New Hampshire right now has some legislation kicking around about a repeal for the same-sex marriage. And all I need is a yes or a no. Do you support the repeal?”
“I support the repeal of the New Hampshire law. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. That’s my view,” so saith Romney. “If two men get married,” Garon continued, “apparently a veteran’s spouse would not be entitled to any burial benefits or medical benefits or anything that the serviceman has devoted his time and effort to his country, and you just don’t support equality in terms of same-sex marriage?” Romney repeated his no.
Garon was none too pleased. Nor should he have been, especially when Romney tried ro shield his opposition to marriage equality in the Constitution. “I think at the time the Constitution was written it was pretty clear that marriage is between a man and a woman,” he said, “and I don’t believe the Supreme Court has changed that.” And the moment the Supreme Court does change that, Romney will blast it as a coven of activist judges legislating from the bench. Just a hunch. But I digress.
After Romney fled Garon’s booth, Garon told reporters, “The guy ain’t going to make it.” When asked why not, Garon said, “Because you can’t trust him. I just saw it in his eyes. I judge a man by his eyes.” Yep, and for me, Romney’s eyes are those of a haunted man running away from his past positions as he runs for president — again.
But I’ll give Romney this much, at least he was honest. Still, it takes a special kind of nerve to not only tell someone to their face that you’d take their rights away but to also not be moved by the concern expressed by the questioner.