This is progress? No gay-bashing during the RNC convention?

[question everything]

An op-ed in the WSJ from last week, by James Kirchick:

The GOP Should Kiss Gay-Bashing Goodbye

Political conventions are memorable not only for what the party grandees say, but for what they leave out. What was noticeably absent from last week's Republican gabfest? Gay-bashing. This is not an insignificant development for Republicans. In 2004, gays featured prominently at the Republicans' convention and in their rhetoric.


(snip)

So it was refreshing to see that gays were not part of the agenda this year. Indeed, the only speaker to make mention of them was the former Arkansas governor and Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee, and he did so only tangentially, stating that Mr. McCain "doesn't want to change the very definition of marriage from what it has always meant throughout recorded human history."

(snip)

The absence of antigay rhetoric has much to do with Mr. McCain; he is comfortable around gay people, and his old-fashioned sense of honor proscribes against making them pariahs for political gain. He also has a better record on gay issues than most of his Republican colleagues, having courageously stood up against his party by opposing the FMA. Partly for that stand, he won the endorsement last week of the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay GOP group that declined to endorse Mr. Bush in 2004 over his demagoguing gay marriage.

(snip)

At a time when our country faces such perilous threats from abroad, attacking gay people who wish to serve their country in the armed forces is not just cruel. It weakens our national security. And while the Democrats running Congress have yet to move forward on the promises they've made to gay voters, the party is far more welcoming to gays than the GOP. Mr. Obama did refer to "our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters" in his acceptance speech.

(snip)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122091977807312715.html?mod=todays_us_opinion

[Fearless]

1. Not so long as DOMA etc. is supported