The Worm Turns. As for my earlier, moderately encouraging posting about California GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon, I can only say one thing: Never mind. After reports that Simon had made some positive responses to a Log Cabin Republicans questionnaire, the candidate has run scared. Seeking the good graces of the Rev. Lou Sheldon of the fiercely anti-gay Traditional Values Coalition, Simon disavowed the LCR questionnaire, which he now claims he never saw.
As the AP reports, on the questionnaire Simon (or someone
authorized to respond on his behalf) had pledged to declare a Gay
Pride Day if elected, said he supported "domestic partnership" laws
if they're not based on sexual orientation, and promised to uphold
a variety of gay-friendly laws and regulations. He also supported
adoptions by gay couples.
But reportedly "under intense pressure from the religious right,"
he caved. In a letter from Simon that's posted on the Traditional
Values Coalition website, the candidate seems to oppose gay
adoptions, is against a pride proclamation, and otherwise takes
pains to let the religious right know he's one of them.
Now, to be fair, the letter is not full of hateful rhetoric, and in
some ways seems deliberately vague. Simon believes:
"the best family environment for a child is a home with a mother and father".We know that there is a good supply of such homes waiting for children"Also, I oppose legislation imposing sexual orientation training guidelines for foster parents."
But, of course, there are children that remain unwanted, unloved, and unadopted (most of those upstanding heterosexual couples Simon reveres only seem to want healthy white newborns). Would Simon seek to outlaw gay adoptions -- he doesn't exactly say so.
And as for gay marriage, Bill Clinton was against that, too. And
while I think annual pride proclamations by government officials
can promote inclusion and respect, equal treatment under the law
should be a far higher priority than symbolic esteem-boosters.
Simon's letter also said he'd "hire the most qualified," presumably regardless of sexual orientation, and that he had no objection to private companies having partnerships.
However, I"m not letting Simon off the hook. Kowtowing to Lou
Sheldon is just as bad as a liberal kowtowing to Al Sharpton. Simon
had a chance to be a leader, to show that a believer in less
expansive government, and an opponent of excessive regulation and
taxation, could also be progressive on gay issues (and, by the way,
I consider all those views to be progressive, in that they emphasis
individual liberty and personal choice). Instead, Simon is seeking
to placate the most reactionary forces in the party. He has, so it
seems, chosen to embrace the past at the expense of the
future.
--Stephen H. Miller