Pride & Opinions

We could really change the country. That’s what political activist Mark Dann thinks will happen, if Pennsylvania State Treasurer Bob Casey, a Democrat, defeats incumbent U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum in the 2006 midterm election. Dann voiced his hope in a story in the Advocate’s Oct. 24 issue.

Replacing Santorum with Casey, it seems, wouldn’t bring about much change. Advocate writer Allison Stevens described Casey as a “social conservative who opposes same-sex marriage.” Looking at his positions on gay rights, Casey reminds me of Sybil.

According to ontheissues.org, Casey supports the Defense of Marriage Act. But he doesn’t support a constitution ban on gay marriage, but opposes legalizing it. But Casey has said he supports civil unions. Apparently, his views change when the wind direction does.

To his credit, Casey supports allowing gay couples to adopt and share employment benefits and increased penalties for sexual orientation hate crimes. While that’s commendable, I wonder how long that support would last in a political pinch.

The only difference, it seems, between Casey and Santorum is that the incumbent has been more public about his antigay views. But, then, he was given a bully pulpit. Santorum has used that pulpit to denounce homosexuality in outrageous fashion.

“If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual [gay] sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything,� Santorum said in a 2003 Associated Press interview.

Someone that ignorant doesn’t deserve the kind of power he wields. But putting Casey in the Senate would just be giving a different homophobe a bigger, better soapbox.

Those mobilizing to oust Santorum have let emotion cloud their judgment. I’m no fan of his, but he’s a known commodity. I think a healthy fear of Casey’s unknown qualities and potential stands on issues is good. It seems his gay and lesbian supporters aren’t willing to consider they could end up out of the frying pan and into the fire.

That’s because they’ve missed the big picture and have been consumed by a myopic attitude.

Wanting to “stop Santorum now” is good in theory. Putting Casey in the Senate isn’t the answer. If the people supporting him really wanted to stop Santorum, they should’ve pushed the Democratic party to find a better candidate. Voters–especially gay and lesbian voters–shouldn’t settle, when it comes to picking their leaders.

Santorum should be sent packing, but only when a worthwhile opponent is there to challenge him.