A Log Cabin Democrat

There is a recurring arguement on several diaries this morning that any and all criticism of Harold Ford for remarks he made  yesterday on the prospect of gay marriage/civil unions in NJ are not only counter-productive, but could actually cost the Dem. control of the Senate. The reasoning goes that such criticism will among other things diminish the enthusiam of those in Tennesee who are working tirelessly for his election.

Now I am sure you all would concur that if a Dem. candidate for Sen had stooped to calling someone of, say, South-asian descent by a racist sounding name, something like "maccaca", or had verbally accosted another candidate in a wheelchair suffering from MS, we would be all over him/her, and rightly so. But that, after all, is name-calling, whereas Ford's comment merely reflects policy to deny a minority equal rights that he enjoys - a minority, I might add, that has already cost us at least one election, or so I'm told in several comments read today.

So, properly chastised, I will cease and desist from further criticisms. In fact, I will go one better. I am forming the  LOG CABIN DEMOCRATS. Our mission will be to support and work for those Democrats who promise to deny us that same rights   enjoyed by the heterosexual community. I hope other gay members of dKos and our sympathizers will join me in this  endeavor.      

AN IMPORTANT POINT OF CLARIFCATION lest I be troll-rated out of dKOs existence. If I resided in Tennesee (I am currently less than a half hour away- so please no comments about what the South is like, I know all too well - ,writing appropriatly enough in a  log cabin) and the election were as close as it is, I would indeed be voting for Ford, though holding my nose is not a strong enough metaphor for what my feelings would be. Wearing a gas mask,maybe? I strongly urge all gays in TN to overcome any revulsion you may feel and do the same. It is that important to take control of the Senate.
 I do have two questions for Mr. Ford, while I'm waiting for dKos to finish maintainence: 1)Why is it morally wrong to discriminate on the basis of race, but not on the basis of sexual orientation? 2)If your religious convictions are based on your reading of the Old Testament, a Bronze Age text, in part, are you aware that the same work also condones slavery, and was in fact used by Southerners to justify its existence?

•  Despite viable objections, you are a realist....

  and there are times when we Dems absolutely must "hold our noses" and look beyone single issues toward the big picture. Good diary.

  by VolvoDrivingLiberal on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:26:06 PM PDT

  •  At the same time we must never

    forsake our principles by failing to criticize even, or especially one of our own candidates if he has earned our rebuke.

    by mr crabby on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:31:16 PM PDT

    •  No disagreement there....

      but we can't win elections and regain control of Congress if hindered by single-issue blinders.

      by VolvoDrivingLiberal on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:34:53 PM PDT

      •  Single issue blinders?

        Oh come on now.  So would you support the openly racist Democrat?

        by AUBoy2007 on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:36:37 PM PDT

        •  HA HA....hell no.

          I may be a Yellow Dog....who would vote for a dog over a Republican, but never a  racist dog.

          by VolvoDrivingLiberal on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:41:06 PM PDT

          •  Then why is this different?

            A racist person is hostile to african-americans and wants to deny them their equal share.

            Here we have people who are hostile to homosexuals and want to deny them their equal share.

            by AUBoy2007 on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:45:18 PM PDT

            •  One word: "Lifestyle"

              And here is where "nurture v Nature" comes into play.

              by Wharton on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:50:11 PM PDT

              •  Sigh

                That's another problem.  It's all about Nature.  It's all about who we are when we're born.

                Now I know you are simply stating a common argument.  But it's a falsehood.  It's not right.  It's not a "lifestyle" any more then any other in-born characteristic is.

                by AUBoy2007 on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:58:06 PM PDT

                •  New "nature v. nurture" study: it's nature.

                  A man's sexual orientation may be determined by conditions in the womb, according to a study.

                  Previous research had revealed the more older brothers a boy has, the more likely he is to be gay, but the reason for this phenomenon was unknown.

                  But a Canadian study has shown that the effect is most likely due to biological rather than social factors.

                  Here's the full story.

                  by HeyMikey on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 02:32:10 PM PDT

                  •  Weird...

                    since I have no older brothers.

                    by AUBoy2007 on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 03:59:28 PM PDT

                    •  It's just an odds-changer . . .

                      . . . not an on-off switch.  There are undoubtedly many straight guys with several older biological brothers.

                      by HeyMikey on Fri Oct 27, 2006 at 07:03:21 AM PDT

            •  Simple...

              do you really believe that gay rights will better be served by a Republican as opposed a Democratic controlled Congress? I certainly don't.

              I am not a fan of Ford either, because of his stances on many issues, especially on reproductive issues and gay rights (which he sadly does not realize is THE civil rights issue of this generation). That said, he does vote with the party 88% of the time.

              If lived in TN I would hold my nose and vote for him because I want to see the Senate in Dem hands.

              by VolvoDrivingLiberal on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:51:45 PM PDT

              •  So would I.

                I only ask because it kills me.  It kills me more then just about any other issue.  But in the end, I'm resigned to voting for people like Nelson (my Senator), because I have no choice.

                by AUBoy2007 on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:56:32 PM PDT

                •  Florida Nelson or OK Nelson?

                  supporting either must be painful, although OK Nelson is far worse.

                  by VolvoDrivingLiberal on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 02:19:56 PM PDT

                  •  Fl Nelson

                    And it's NE not OK, just so ya know.

                    by AUBoy2007 on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 02:25:26 PM PDT

                    •  I'm slow today...was talking to a bud in Tulsa

                      when I was typing  earlier that so I had Oklahoma on my mind. My brain usually gets disoriented this close to cocktail hour.  :)    Yes, the NE Nelson is certainly a blight on progressivism in the party.

                      by VolvoDrivingLiberal on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 02:39:28 PM PDT

•  Bravo!

  I got my head handed to me today for agreeing with Kos about Ford.

  Yeesh.  I'll sign up as a Log Cabin Democrat!

  by jlamkin on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:27:12 PM PDT

  •  Good , I was afraid i'd be lonely in that cabin.

    by mr crabby on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:38:32 PM PDT

    •  Can you believe how some people

      managed to completely miss the point of your diary?

      Like the point that the name "Log Cabin" is already taken?

      Wow...no wonder Dems keep losing.

      by jlamkin on Fri Oct 27, 2006 at 03:45:26 AM PDT

      •  That was a bit disheartening -

        I figured either they must have read it too quickly - or maybe I was being too subtle(?)

        by mr crabby on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 11:45:27 AM PDT

•  This is a positive and well-considered idea

  I applaud you.  I am very wary of gay marriage as a political issue.  But we need to find a way to get people their rights.  

  Your idea is just excellent.

  But the name - can't you come up with a better name?  "Log Cabin" - it's already taken.

  by centerdem on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:30:41 PM PDT

  •  What about the "Stonewall Democrats"?

    This group already exists.  Why not talk to them?

    I like that name better. Plus, it will attract Southern sympathizers and Gay members of the "long gray line"!

    by centerdem on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:36:04 PM PDT

•  Log Cabin Democrats Auxiliary?

  for straight people who find Ford's position hypocritcal and antiquarian, ethically weak and totally politically motivated?  As if that last were a legitimate reason.

  by Limelite on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:41:38 PM PDT

  •  I actually think his position is probably sincere

    I not sure which is worse.

    by mr crabby on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:49:42 PM PDT

•  A Buffalo Tipi Democrat?

  Or maybe it doesn't have to be a style of dwelling... What can we call this thing?

  by droogie6655321 on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:42:47 PM PDT

  •  A house of cards?

    by mr crabby on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:48:44 PM PDT

•  Nicely stated

  It's like Arrianna Huffington said, "You don't start rebuilding your house while it's burning down."

  We need control of Congress to fix the immediate problems (war, debt, corruption); not that I don't think equal rights for all are not a TOP priority, I do  very strongly, but people dying takes a slightly higher preference for me.

  by cohenzee on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 01:45:47 PM PDT

•  are log cabins eco-friendly?

  

  by naufragus on Thu Oct 26, 2006 at 02:41:51 PM PDT