A Place for Gay People in Conservative Politics?

When the libertarian think tank The Cato Institute decided to hold a panel asking the question "Is There a Place for Gay People in Conservatism and Conservative Politics?", they invited three prominent figures to respond: the Obama-supporting, anti-GOP conservative Andrew Sullivan; leading same-sex marriage opponent Maggie Gallagher, head of the National Organization for Marriage; and openly gay UK Conservative politician Nick Herbert.  (Cato's vice president, David Boaz, served as moderator.)

As one might expect from any event where Sullivan and Gallagher were placed in the same room and asked to discuss gay issues, the debate grew extremely heated at times, often leaving Herbert on the sidelines.  Nonetheless, it was a fascinating and lively discussion -- even if any answer to the Institute's question remained frustratingly elusive.

So without further ado, here are several key moments and things I observed when attending the panel. The first part looks at how conservatives in the UK have made some significant advances when it comes to supporting LGBT constituents. Part Two will address comments made by Maggie Gallagher, as well as the role of gay voters in American conservatism.

Nick Herbert's eloquence, and ambivalence, about LGBT equality

As the first panelist, Herbert gave an often moving speech about the role of gays in the current Conservative Party (whose members are colloquially referred to as Tories).  He emphasized the transformation his party has undergone from its homophobic roots, arguing that a successful political party "should be open to all and ought to look something like the country it seeks to govern," and noting that party head David Cameron has apologized for the Tories' past support of Section 28, a 1988 law which banned schools from teaching "the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship."

Much of the pro-gay Tory agenda Herbert outlined (including civil partnerships for gay couples, hate crime laws, and anti-bullying legislation) would be anathema to American conservatives; in fact, both Sullivan and Gallagher subsequently excoriated Herbert for his support of hate crime legislation, with Sullivan calling such laws an "appalling" attack on individual freedom.  But there was also a streak in his speech that even Gallagher could appreciate; Herbert commented that "the best parental arrangements are represented by a father and a mother," despite his stated support of gay adoption.  After a Cato intern questioned him on this statement, Herbert stood by it, chalking it up to his underlying social conservatism.  It was troubling for me to watch the man who had so eloquently defended gay rights regardless of political ideology, as he essentially admitted his inferiority as a parent due to nothing more than sexual orientation.

Herbert wasn't asked about a recent gay-focused interview with Cameron conducted by UK newspaper The Independent, in which (among other things) the Tory leader refused to recant his defense of a notoriously anti-gay Polish politician as "not homophobic."  Still, it was readily apparent that the Tories are far ahead of the GOP when it comes to supporting the equality of their gay constituents.

(Part Two will be posted later tonight, and will include comments made by Maggie Gallagher, as well as thoughts on gay voters in American conservatism.)

Photo by Matthew Bisanz, via Wikimedia Commons