My internet and facebook friend, Alex Cohen, has written an open letter to me, entitled “A Question to the CPAC Boycotters.” Here is my response.
Dear Alex,
- I didn’t attend CPAC. However, it does not follow that the Ruth Institute or I boycotted CPAC. Ruth Institute is a c3 organization that has never gone to CPAC. I generally try to avoid political events. I live as far away from DC as is possible while remaining the Continental US.
- NOM, the parent organization of Ruth Institute, did boycott CPAC. You may be interested to know that Brian and Maggie do not consult me on their political decisions and strategies.
- The article by Star Parker that you found offensive is one of many articles that we post at the Ruth blog. I thought it interesting. It did indeed generate interesting discussion. This is sufficient reason for posting something.
- I don’t know why you think I “appeared to endorse” it. The only person associated with the Ruth Institute who commented on it (at least last I looked) was our guest blogger, Ari. Ari disagreed with Star Parker. Among the issues Parker’s article poses are the definition of “conservative” and the definition of “gay.” Both are serious questions, open to multiple interpretations. These questions deserve to be discussed, not dismissed with charges of “bigotry.”
- As near as I can make out, the issue surrounding the boycott was whether GOProud is in fact a conservative organization. I have insufficient data to evaluate this claim. It is in any event an important enough question that a) reasonable people can disagree about it and b) it deserves better than to be dismissed as “bigotry.”
- Your argument that they are conservative rests on their position that “same-sex marriage is a question for the states; it opposes amending the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. This is an impeccably conservative position.” I do not share your evaluation of this position. That argument might have been credible 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago. But events have overtaken this so-called conservative federalist argument. Events, including the federal lawsuits against Prop 8 and DOMA, have shown that states are in a very weak position to control their own marriage law. I don’t think federalism is a serious position for conservatives. Again, this is something worth discussing, and worthy of better than a dismissive charge of “bigotry.”
- I find it charming that you feel a need to defend me. Thank you. However, I find it odd that you think I need defending over something I’m not really a part of (namely the CPAC boycott) and something someone else said (namely Star Parker’s article.)
- Bottom line: there are substantive questions, factual questions, and philosophical issues on the table here, about which reasonable people can disagree. Charges of bigotry are completely out of line. Such charges change the subject and divert attention away from these substantive issues. The tone of your friend’s comment is slightly unhinged. CPAC boycotters think “gay people are icky?” Really? That is an astonishing leap. Completely illogical. Unworthy of you, and of him too, I’m sure.
Your friend,
Dr Morse