Bil Browning

DC Republican Party Adds Gay Inclusion to Platform

Filed By Bil Browning | June 29, 2012 3:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Marriage Equality, Politics
Tags: DC Republican Party, gay inclusion, Log Cabin Republicans, party platform

One thing I've learned about living in DC is that the Democratic Party controls the city's politics. Election Day here is really when the primary elections happen, because Republicans rarely win at the ballot box.

Another thing I've noticed is that while Indiana Democrats are really just Republican-lite for the most part, DC Republicans are a lot more liberal than their counterparts nationwide. Confirming this for me is this press release from the Thumbnail image for Pink ElephantDC chapter of Log Cabin Republicans about the DC state party's inclusion of gay people in their platform - and it's positive!

Yesterday, the DC Republican Committee (DCRC), the DC equivalent of a state party, became the first Republican state party to insert inclusive language into its party platform leading up to the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida.

Under the heading of 'Family and Marriage,' the DCRC added, "We, the Republicans of the District of Columbia support the belief that all individuals, without regard to sexual orientation, are entitled to full and equal protection under the laws and the Constitution and that everyone has the right to be treated with dignity and respect."

Robert Turner II, President of the DC chapter of Log Cabin Republicans and a newly elected member of the DCRC praised the work of the committee saying, "We are excited to be a part of a state party who understands that inclusion wins! Marriage equality is settled law here in the District. All citizens, including LGBT citizens should be treated equally." Turner testified before the Platform Committee earlier this month and offered language that was similar to what was officially adopted. "We didn't get the exact wording we had hoped for, but we are extremely happy with the outcome. We commend Chairman Bob Kabel on his efforts in putting this document together," Turner concluded.

I have to admit, I'm curious what the rejected language was. What did it say that went too far?

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.