Bundle This

Via AMERICAblog.
'
Having finally gotten home (I had a babysitting gig after work) and gotten to my home computer to read my Bloglines, one of the first things I read was this.
It seems that EMILY's List, a pro-choice Democratic women's PAC that helps elect pro-choice woman to Congress—through a fundraising practice called "bundling"— is supporting a South Carolina woman for the Senate, who happens to support the anti-gay marriage amendment.

John Aravosis of AMERICAblog said of this,

Tenenbaum just so happens to support the anti-gay Federal Marriage Amendment, but EMILY's List doesn't care because, apparently, EMILY's List only cares about sexual and reproductive freedom for straight women.

As a gay man who has always strongly supported women's reproductive freedom, I have to admit that it stings just a little. It makes me wonder to what extent gays and lesbian are going to be left twisting in the wind in this years elections, because it illustrates how easy a choice is is for non-gay voters to make.

One of John's commenters defended the decision of EMILY's List, saying that that if he or she were a South Carolinian he or she would vote for the FMA supporter and then work hard to get her to change her mind. Assuming the commenter is heterosexual, is occured to me that he or she has that luxury because a vote for Tenenbaum is not a vote against his or her equal citizenship. A gay voter does not have that luxury because a vote for Tenenbaum is a vote for his or her second class citizenship.

It makes no tangible difference to a heterosexual voter wether Tenenbaum or another candidate like her has a change of heart, because Tenenbaum's potential vote on the FMA does not change the legal status of a heterosexual voter's relationship. For a gay or lebian voter, odds are that Tenenbaum will be one more vote towards deying us and our families equality under the law.

I hate to sound like a Johnny-one-note, and I guess I risk that because I continue to beat the drum on gay and lesbian issues no matter what else is at stake. I've been told, in many situations, that I ought to be willing to "set that aside"—in reference to the issue of gay & lesbian equality—when there are other (to some people) more important isues at stake. But frankly, I've been told to set it aside so often in the last few years that I'm beginning to run out of sides. Soon I won't be able to set it aside because I just won't have anywhere to put it.

A lot of ink has been spilled and bandwith employed in the discussion of the deep poltical divides in this country and whether it is possible for Americans to reach out to one another and unite across those divides. Stuff like this makes me think that's just not possible. How can I reach out to someone who supports making me and my family second class citizens? How can I unite with someone who supports people who would vote me and my family into second class citizenship? Right now, I just don't think I can.

It's safe to say there won't be any donations to EMILY's list coming from this household, and probably from a few more gay households. Why should be support them anymore?

Comments

[Tim Who?]

Everytime someone asks me to "set it aside" it only makes me work harder.
I used to have a big 6inch pink button that said
"I'm here I'm Queer get used to it"
And I would always tell those people that said set it aside, here you wear this for a week and then come back and tell me to set it aside.
Nobody ever did it. They said they didn't want to deal with the bullshit. I reminded them to just "set it aside" because there was more important things going on.
I don't know if I changed any hearts or minds but the look of horror on their faces was enough for me.

[Katharine]

Seems to me those folks who hope she'll change her mind after she's in office have their head in the clouds. Why would she be inclined to change after she's already achieved her election?

I suspect the group behind Emily's List may be trying to support the "lesser of two evils," depending on who Tenenbaum is running against. (Judging from the information on VoteSmart, I'm wondering if Hollings is stepping down?) I mean, if her presumably-Republican opponent is worse on stances than she is, then Democratic voters don't have much of a choice.

It makes no tangible difference to a heterosexual voter whether Tenenbaum or another candidate like her has a change of heart, because Tenenbaum's potential vote on the FMA does not change the legal status of a heterosexual voter's relationship.

It makes plenty of tangible difference to me. I have been totally pro-gay rights all of my life. However, outside of my ideological support, I can break it down into tangibility. Denying gays equal treatment under the law hurts my pocketbook as a taxpayer, in certain respects. There are a lot of children who need homes through adoption, as you well know. Denying gay couples the opportunity to adopt means that those children have to be subsidized by the state, and that means the taxpayers pay for them. That's tangible, for sure.

Whenever someone suffers an assault in a gay crime, not only is it inherently wrong, but again, it costs taxpayers money to bring the case to trial and then incarcerate the wrongdoer. Hate gets expensive that way. I could go on with additional examples, but no need for me to take up that much space in your blog. ;)

Have faith, my friend: there are some het voters who would do just about anything in the world to see our friends and colleagues given the respect and equal treatment they deserve. There are those who will never turn a blind eye to injustice and indignity, whether it butters their political bread or not. Gay rights = human rights, in my humble opinion. I just hope that if Tenenbaum is victorious, her constituents can make her realize that.

[shaded-lily]

I've supported EMILY's List in the past, and I suppose I've been guilty of tunnel vision, because I never troubled myself to inquire what any of the candidates they supported thought about anything other than reproductive rights. I think I can understand how you feel -- if I heard of a gay-rights organization supporting some anti-choice candidate, I'd feel annoyed and disappointed by that failure to consider MY rights. On the other hand, it's the refusal to accept the lesser of two evils that has people saying they'll vote for Ralph Nader, knowing that in doing so they may put George Bush back in office. So I don't really know what I think!