No Matter Who Wins, Someone Else Loses

We know this much for sure: No matter who wins the election tomorrow there will be many, many people across the country who are uneasy about the next four years. I have absolutely no idea what will happen tomorrow. I only know that nearly half the country will be left disappointed. I take some weird kind of solace in this. Knowing that each election cycle we face this odd paradigm and yet, we carry on regardless of which side is left sullen and dejected. But I still have my pick. I still have my side of the story. I have no illusion whatsoever that I can possibly change anyone’s mind at this point. But maybe, just maybe it would be helpful to know why a possible Romney presidency is troubling to me.

First, let me say that I do not believe, nor have I ever believed that Barack Obama was some kind of messiah that would usher in a new era in American politics. From his election in 2008 I was cautious about the high expectations he’d set up for himself. Perhaps that’s part of the reason I don’t find myself disappointed by him. I don’t agree with everything he’s done. He could have done more for the environment and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) has its issues. Even so, he did block the Keystone Pipeline and my brother is able to afford health insurance for the first time since he came off of my parents’ insurance nearly 5 years ago. Add to that the death of Osama bin Laden and a complete and utter mess of an economy that was resurrected from the ashes as much as it possibly could have been in the span of 4 years (in my humble opinion) in addition to laundry list of other accomplishments and you have a pretty decent record. At least I think so.

And then there’s Mitt Romney. I didn’t know a whole lot about him when this campaign started way, way back in 2011. As far as I knew, he was a moderate Republican who served a term as Governor of Massachusetts. But watching him in the Republican primaries gave me pause. I found Romney to be willing to bend and alter his positions any which way to gain favor with the conservative base. Sure, almost all politicians will do that, but he seemed to bend over backwards. After the Republican National Convention in Tampa, FL, Romeny started to slide back toward the center. By the first debate he was rejecting some of his own policies. On top of that, he began throwing out spurious claims about Obama left and right including the latest whopper about Obama “selling Chrysler to Italians and moving production of Jeep to China”, a patently false claim he’s pushing in ads in Ohio. Again, these are things all politicians do to some dgree, Obama included. But Romney’s use of dubious claims has only increased as the campaign has worn on.

Given the widespread lying and flip-flopping, I’ve determined with a fair amount of certainty that Mitt Romney is not a man of great integrity. He comes off as a man more interested in having the job of president than doing the job of president and is willing to do and say whatever it takes to achieve that goal. And that brings me to perhaps my greatest fear of a Mitt Romeny presidency. To retain power, I believe Romney will kowtow to the GOP in any way he can.

I won’t mince words here. As much as I’m trying to be pragmatic and fair, I need to be honest about my feelings on the Republican Party of 2012. What the GOP has evolved into is deeply troubling to me. I view it as a party that is controlled by extremely wealthy businessmen who will do absolutely anything to protect their business interests. This includes funding far-right ideologues who appeal to deeply socially conservative constituents. I seriously doubt most of these businessmen -- and they are almost exclusively men -- care much about whether abortion and gay marriage are outlawed, but if that’s what it takes to keep their companies ridiculously profitable and often subsidized by the federal government, then so be it. Add that to the Supreme Court Citizens United ruling that allows unlimited spending to support political agendas and to do so anonymously and you have the modern GOP and its grafted limb the Tea Party.

My misgivings about Romney’s character lead me to believe that he will go out of his way to enable the right-wing, pro business GOP. I worry that Romney will placate the bigots and willingly infringe on the civil rights of women and homosexuals by imposing social conservatism by law. (This in spite of the “get the government out of my business” battle cry of the GOP.) I worry that he will continue to saber rattle and at the behest of the GOP, possibly taking us into more international altercations we'd be better off avoiding.

I also worry about vast deregulation resulting in environmentally devastating consequences not to mention continued consolidation of wealth away from the lower and middle classes. It's important to note that I believe in capitalism and free market principles but at the same time I believe that to make those principles work for everyone that you can’t stack the deck in favor of those who are already at the top of the food chain.

Then you have my pet issues of urbanism and transit. The GOP is openly hostile to both. In their party platform they decried "dense housing and government transit". This would be very bad news for the entire country, but my home of New York City in particular. And in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, I can see a great amount of resistance to helping us better prepare for the next massive storm, let alone taking steps to stem climate change in spite of the fact that this was an issue Romney once embraced.

Combine these concerns with Mitt’s promise to dramatically increase defense spending while cutting funding for the arts, social programs, and Planned Parenthood. Add to that a massive tax cut that will almost certainly primarily benefit the very wealthy and you have a recipe for bigger deficits in spite of Romney’s promises of fiscal responsibility.

Clearly, I’m impassioned about all of this. And I know there are some very smart, well-intentioned people who support Mitt Romney. I know this because some of them are my friends and family. And many of these people could challenge many of the things I’ve said here. But for me, the bottom line is this: The Republican Party I registered with in 2000 no longer exists. It has been replaced by a political machine hell bent on its way or the highway, everyone else be damned with Mitt Romney as their enabler-in-chief. I can’t get on board with that. And the prospect of it coming into power is disconcerting to me. And yet, with the election as close as it is I must be prepared for the possibility that they will do just that. Or maybe they won’t. Either way life must go on. And my conservative friends must remain my friends. Because to bury my head in the sand, to retreat to my own echo-chamber and to be so naive as to think that my way is the only will help no one. 

No matter the outcome of tomorrow’s race, I and everyone else must move forward, keeping the conversation going. I just hope, in all sincerity, that no matter who wins we remember this: A little less than half the country will have wanted the other guy to win. But at the end of the day, we still have to live in this country together. We’ll be a lot better off if we keep that in mind.

Evolving Views on Gay Marriage

This week, North Carolina voted in favor of Amendment 1, a state constitutional amendment that strictly defines marriage as being between “one man and one woman”. The result was predictable. Conservatives across the country claimed victory while progressives were stirred into a fury. The very next day, President Obama came out in support of gay marriage and the same two groups reacting in the inverse. A lot of rhetoric gets stirred up in this debate. Opponents of same-sex-marriage are dubbed “bigots” and “hateful” while proponents are deemed “immoral” and “going against God”.

I’ve seen a conservative state bluntly, “Marriage is between one man and one woman, period!” offering no further explanation as to why his particular view ought to be enshrined in law. And I’ve seen a liberal claim, “I’m pretty sure your gay friends hate you!” in response to a gay marriage opponent who claimed to indeed have gay friends. But what do these polarizing arguments really accomplish? Is anyone being swayed one way or the other? You can ask that question about any topic in our current political climate, but I think this one is particularly valid. Some issues are a bit more simplistic. But this one I find more nuanced. Probably because I’ve found myself in different places within it.

As I’ve noted in earlier blogs, I was once a Republican. Ten years ago, if you’d asked me my take on the gay marriage debate, I would have been unequivocally against it. I felt that marriage was indeed between a man and a woman and that it transcended religion into nature and society. (I give myself credit for at least knowing enough to not back up a political position with religious doctrine.) To allow gay marriage was to change the definition of the word.

A lot has changed in ten years. Being a creative professional in New York City will do that. Most of my friends are left-leaning, if not outright liberal. But moreover, living among such a diversity of people will change your take on life. Not all at once of course. But over time it has an impact. Knowing people who are gay will chip away at your preconceived notions. Having friendships with them will start to jackhammer at them. And your brother coming out not only as gay but in a committed relationship with a really good guy will demolish them and force you to re-examine just about everything you thought you knew about human sexuality.

When you see a group of people who oppose your views as “THEM”, it’s easy to hang on to preconceived notions. When you actually get to know “THEM” you may find there to be some cognitive dissonance. What you thought you knew often turns out to be wrong and those views you held don’t seem to hold up quite as well. That certainly happened to me.

And so my view on this subject has evolved. For a time, I felt that gay couples should be able to share the same rights and privileges as straight couples. But I remained uncomfortable with sharing the term “marriage”. I felt that civil unions for homosexuals and marriage for heterosexuals was an appropriate compromise. As a self-proclaimed moderate, I value compromise. I also felt it appropriate for states to make their own laws on this matter. But, as I noted, the relationships around me had an impact. Seeing two people of the same sex in a loving relationship finally gaining some degree of acceptance and recognition as a straight couple and the joy they experience in that is profound. This is not a perversion or a choice but who they are as human beings. My faith also had an impact. For some, Christian faith is the reason for being staunchly against any form of gay marriage. But mine made me question my opposition. Above all else, my faith emphasizes love for one another. I determined that it is not loving to use my personal preferences as a justification for laws that limit another's choices. And while I do wrestle with the notion of same-sex marriage within the church, my qualms with it in the civic space have consistently eroded over time. Moreover, I came to the conclusion that any qualms that do remain are mine to deal with and should not be used to deny someone else the opportunity to live their life.

I’m not alone in having evolving views on same-sex marriage. The views of a large portion of the country have changed as well. Less than ten years ago, two thirds of the country opposed gay marriage. Today, that number is slightly less than half. Some of this can be chalked up to generation Y coming of age and being generally more open minded. But considering the short span of time, it’s also reasonable to assume that there are many who have “evolving opinions” like the President’s. But if that’s true it means there are a great many people who are caught in the middle. They don’t despise gay people and do want them to have equality. But at the same time they struggle with the evolving culture and find altering the contemporary notion of marriage to be at least a bit jarring. That’s where I was and, if we’re being honest, still find myself to a degree. But people who feel that way aren’t bigoted or hateful. Getting used to changes can take time. No one should be demonized for having to process that. And I would argue that, ultimately, it hurts the cause to do so.

On the other side of the fence, I believe Christians of all kinds would be better served by changing their focus. Rather than spending huge amounts of time and energy trying to pass laws that are arguably strongly rooted in religious beliefs, why not seek out injustices in the world and work against them? Poverty, hunger, and homelessness are all pervasive in this world. Allowing these things to continue unabated poses a much greater threat to faith than does the civil observance of same-sex marriage. And moreover, what about the conservative principle of limited government? If conservatives feel that the government should not be responsible for charity and aiding the needy -- an undeniable Christian principle -- then how can they possibly argue that it should be responsible for determining who should be able to get married, a principle that there is much debate on even within the Christian world?

Polarization has been the name of the game in recent years. But in the end we do have to coexist, whether we like it or not. In that, creating laws based on our personal beliefs rather than the greater principles of free will and live and let live is dangerous territory. And the notion that one political ideology should prevail in a country as large and diverse as ours is absurd. But so is the notion that “you’re either with us or you’re against us”. Cultural evolution takes time and patience is needed to enact real change. In the grand scheme of history, a couple of decades isn’t that long, especially considering that the human race only began broadly embracing equality in the last century. If that eroding number of Americans who oppose gay marriage is any indication, it may not be long before we see the overwhelming majority of the country coming to the conclusion that they don’t want to stand in the way of someone else’s happiness in defense of their own ideals. And moreover, the conclusion that that’s really all it is.