It may seem anathema to write a DKos diary about applauding a Republican.
But I think it is worth making the case that when a Republican publicly supports something that only Democrats normally publicly support, we should applaud and commend that.
It'll be a challenge, I know. I am prepared for the outcry that this subject will probably attract. So here we go.
A lot of the coverage of the decision of Ohio Senator Rob Portman to come out in support of gay marriage because of the revelation that his son is gay has been a message of illustration of the relative lack of empathy that Republicans have until it hits close to home.
For the most part I agree. At the same time, I feel the larger message should be that we want people like Portman to show themselves and should encourage it.
This is a common theme in all of the social issues. People oppose abortion until someone they know needs one. People oppose unemployment and the minimum wage unless they find themselves reliant on it. People oppose gun control until someone they know is affected by gun violence.
I say people instead of Republicans because it's not just a Republican feature. It's human nature.
This is about accepting human nature. Both the good qualities and the flaws.
So are we supposed to wait until more Republicans are affected by gay marriage to change their stances on it? Or should we take more actions to encourage them to change sooner?
If lacking empathy is one of the flaws that human beings share, one of the good qualities is the ability to change our minds.
So, when someone is wrong, we want them to be able to say, "I feel one way, but after hearing the arguments that you've made, I have since changed my mind. Which means that I was wrong." But another aspect of human nature is that it's harder to do this when people are going to ridicule you even when you change their mind.
And ultimately, being able to see human beings for what they are, flawed and irrational and selfish at times, is one of the many things that distinguishes Democrats and Republicans. So as a Democrat, we should be willing to accept that Republicans are also human, and prone to the same imperfections. Situations like this give us a chance to showcase this aspect.
In America, the trend of Americans in support of legalizing gay marriage has been continuing to increase. It was not very long ago that a large majority of American's opposed it. So in practical terms, what does that really mean?
Simply put, it means there are Americans changing their minds. It means people who used to oppose gay marriage now support. To a small extent, it's old people dying out. The majority though, are people who change their mind. Sure, some of them are changing their minds for some shallow reasons. Maybe it's because someone they know or care about is gay, or maybe it's because they simply don't want to seem old-fashioned. They may not have good reasons for changing their minds, but isn't the large argument that they didn't really have many good reasons for opposing gay marriage in the first place?
And isn't that what we want? People who used to oppose gay marriage to change their minds and support it? Isn't that what the fight for marriage equality is all about?
So if the fight for gay marriage means that we want people to change their minds, it means using people who have changed their minds, like Rob Portman, to encourage others who haven't changed their minds yet, because another aspect of human nature is that it's easier to do something when you know that someone else has done it already.
Ultimately, we don't want a country where everyone all supports the same ideals and have the same values. Realistically, that means someone imposing their own values onto others, and that is not the pursuit of democracy. That means we shouldn't expect everyone to share all of the values that we want them to share, but at least the ones that are in the interests of everyone. Again, another aspect that distinguishes Democrats from Republicans.
We can also look at a similar but slightly different situation: when Obama came out in support of gay marriage. It was in the run up to the 2012 election, and he had also previously opposed it, and while some people applauded Obama for his courage to stand up for gay marriage, some saw it as a mistake for Obama to do this, and risk turning off some supporters.
His admonition though did not coincide with the revelation of a gay son. Some would argue that this makes Obama's decision over Portman's decision more commendable and selfless. On the other hand, some would argue that this made his support seem less genuine.
But ultimately, it was the right thing for Obama to do. And it's the right thing for Rob Portman to do. And while we may not approve of the motivations behind why Portman came out in support of gay marriage, it was still the right thing to do. So should we really continue to commend Obama for rightly supporting gay marriage but at the same time ridicule Portman for also rightly supporting gay marriage?
And when Republicans come out in support of something that we should all support, we should applaud them, which isn't to say we ignore all the other horrible things they say and do, but at least give them credit for what they do get right. Because in their party, it is far too easy, in many cases rewarded, to just simply continue opposing all the things that we should all support.
We can't expect changes in American ideologies to happen quickly. But when there are people who do change, we need them to be the torchbearers for the people who are still reluctant, but are willing to change. Some just aren't willing to change. But those that are willing, often need someone to show them that it's ok.
It seems like especially in American politics, far too often we get the kind of politicians who don't easily change their minds. This is also largely a product of human nature.
When people are given two options, Politician A who says, "I know the problems that we face are complex and serious and we need to look for serious and complex solutions. And I don't know what those solutions are right now but if you elect me I will bring in a lot of experts on these issues and go over all the facts and come up with a solution that comes the closest to being the best for the most number of people," and Politician B who says, "I know the answer to these problems and if you elect me I will fix these problems no matter what." we usually end up with Politician B in office. Even when the problems we face call for someone who sounds more like Politician A, because it is human nature to prefer someone who has all the answers for us, whether it's believable or not.
We need to confront the flaws in human nature that are in all of us.
So when something like this happens, when a Republican who previously opposes gay marriage now comes out in support of it, or of women's rights, or of stricter gun laws, I think the appropriate response should be, "Thank you for changing your mind." Because it's far too easy to elect officials who won't, under any circumstances.
Because we are all human, Democrat and Republican alike, and that means none of us are perfect.