People who object to efforts on behalf of gay rights often refer to the “gay agenda.” Well, my beloved columnist Dan Savage has an intriguing idea about settling this “gay agenda” debate once and for all.
In a New York Times Opinion Pages contribution, Dan Savage shared his view of “A Gay Agenda for Everyone” recently. Knowing that President Obama is becoming increasingly supportive of the gay rights movement, but tempering that progress with a Republican-controlled House of Representatives, Mr. Savage had this to say:
Gay Americans are eventually going to win on marriage just like we won on military service, the president should tell Congress, so why not save everyone on both sides of the debate a lot of time, trouble and money by approving the entire gay rights agenda? Send the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the Student Non-Discrimination Act, the Uniting American Families Act and the repeal of the odious Defense of Marriage Act to his desk for his signature.
Knowing that social conservatives have been fighting against these pieces of gay rights legislation for quite awhile, Mr. Savage brilliantly offers some unique insight into why this development would actually be good for the people that disapprove of homosexuality and people flagrantly living their lives as open gays and lesbians.
If the eventual passage of these laws is inevitable, reasons Savage, the next best thing would be to keep these issues from disturbing social conservatives’ values and daily lives.
Social conservatives long to raise their children in a country where they don’t have to hear about homosexuality every time they turn on the news. I’d like raise my son in a country like that too. And guess what? In countries like Canada — where the fight over gay rights is essentially over, where there is gay marriage, open military service and employment protections — homosexuality hardly ever makes the front pages of newspapers. There’s nothing much to report.
It’s an odd argument, perhaps: give gays and lesbians what they want, and they’ll stop getting in your face about it. But there’s actually some interesting truth to the idea, isn’t there?