WCP has always stood both with the All-Baseball Family and apart, willing to go far afield in topics. One of the core values here is allowing everyone a free voice for issues they feel called to speak about. Our latest post from Alex Ciepley is one of the most important we have had. We welcome guest submissions from inside and outside A-B on any and all topics, based on quality, not content.

"We're all God's children.  And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was. She's being who she was born as. I think if you talk to anybody, it's not a choice."
-John Kerry, at the third presidential debate

Ask this gay guy what he finds offensive in Kerry's mention of Mary Cheney, and he'll tell you, "nothing".  I am, however, furious at how this story has played out in the media.

Mary Cheney is an out lesbian.  She's been in charge of gay outreach for Coors, for cryin' out loud. She's also very much a public figure, running operations in Cheney's campaign headquarters.  The Republicans (and media at large, I might add) have gleefully tried to paint Kerry as using slander to get votes.  I don't see this at all.

more after the jump
Kerry's comment has been spun two different ways.  On one hand, you have the Gary Bauers who believe Kerry brought it up specifically to rile up homophobic Republicans who might vote for David Duke or the like just because the Veep's daughter digs chicks.  Then you have the Kerry campaign's own weak response to the issue, where Kerry says he was "trying to say something positive about the way strong families deal with the issue." 

I don't believe Kerry was just trying to play nice, but I also think his real strategy (and I wish he would have just said it) is far from a dirty trick.  What Kerry was doing was revealing the deep hypocrisy of the administration on gay rights.  If Bush doesn't know if sexuality is a choice, why doesn't he just ask his V.P.'s daughter what she thinks?  If Bush really does believe in "family values", why does he insult Cheney's family with his rampant anti-gay policies?  How can you, with a straight face, have a Party platform that wants to deny gay people hospital visitation and inheritance rights when your Vice President's daughter is a lesbian?

Andrew Sullivan came up with a couple good examples of how this issue should have been treated: "[I]t's no different than, say, if a candidate were to mention another candidate's son in the Marines. Or if, in a debate on immigration, a pro-immigrant candidate mentioned Kerry's immigrant wife."  Indeed.  If Bush was against, say, interracial marriage, and Cheney's daughter were married to a black man, wouldn't this be relevant?

What's homophobic is the way Kerry's words have been twisted.  What's homophobic is to treat someone's sexuality as a dirty word.  What's homophobic is to accuse Kerry of "attacking" Cheney's daughter (As Dick recently did) by simply noting her sexuality.  What's homophobic is to treat Mary as an embarrassment, just because of who she loves.

Lynne Cheney, Mary's mom, has always seemed deeply ashamed of her daughter.  In 2000 she refused to acknowledge that Mary was a lesbian (responding to a question instead, "Mary has never declared such a thing"), and now she lashes out against Kerry: "This is not a good man. What a cheap and tawdry political trick."  With this response, Lynne crystalized her opinion of her daughter's sexuality: Mary's sexuality is a weakness.  Elizabeth Edwards was spot-on when chastizing Lynne, saying Mary's mother had "overreacted to this and treated it as if it's shameful to have this discussion."  Lynne is the embarrasment in this whole mess.

To think Kerry's statement is a low blow, you have to be coming from a place of hatred.  You have to think that gayness is an evil, an immorality, a scourge.  You have to think that mentioning it is like accusing someone of child molestation.  Kerry didn't hone in on the real issue -- the Republicans' hypocritical use of gay-bashing to drive a wedge between voters, which is a shame.  But the real shame in the whole debate is the unacknowledged acceptance that being gay is still a net minus.  Until the mentioning of an openly gay person is no longer seen as an "accusation" or a "dirty trick", the public debate over gay rights will always be muddied.