Log Cabin President Charles Moran claims Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are pandering to the LGBTQ+ community / Credit: Screen Capture
In early September Log Cabin Republican President Charles Moran wrote an opinion piece for Newsweek about Democratic candidates Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. In an apparent effort to dissuade voter support, Moran said the two were attempting to “reinvent themselves as moderate, pro-family, ‘not weird’ Democrats who simply stand for LGBT equality.”
In case you’re unfamiliar with the organization or you need a reminder, the Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) are an LGBTQ conservative group that came out of California in the late 1970s and early 80s. The group was inspired by President Ronald Reagan’s opposition of the Briggs initiative, a proposed movement by then Republican State Senator John Briggs to prevent gay and lesbian-identifying individuals from teaching in public schools. Since then, the LCR would go on to work behind the scenes in Washington to promote Republican initiatives for administrations from Reagan to former President Trump.
In the Newsweek op-ed, Moran suggests the Harris-Walz ticket is operating for the benefit of a “small but powerful cabal of the LGBT left, which wants to erase the concept of biological sex from society, expose young children to overtly sexualized and ideological content, and strip parents of their rights to make critical decisions about their children.”
Moran voices his concerns about multiple topics he claims are alarming to the majority of the LGBTQ+ community, as well as their straight counterparts.
For example, Tim Walz’s signing into law in Minnesota the protections for access to gender affirming care. Moran argues that the precedent for minors seeking gender-affirming care could mean anything from “hormone therapy and puberty blockers to irreversible surgeries,” calling the law an endorsement by the government to enact “dangerous and unproven treatments for children.”
In a FAQ published on the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) site, transitioning for children is explained as being entirely social, whether that means changes to pronouns, names, clothing, or even hairstyles. All of these things are expressly surface level, with no medical treatments being involved before puberty. Even after puberty, the types of treatments that may be available would only ever be considered through strict consultation between the youth, their families, and the health care providers.
“Gender affirming health care is safe, scientifically proven, and lifesaving,” Minnesota Lt. Governor Peggy Flanagan said in defense of the bill, which was signed into law last year on March 8, 2023. “When our friends and neighbors tell us that this care will help them feel safer, happier, and more themselves, it is our job to listen and believe them. Our number one job is to keep children safe. This executive order does just that. We are saying to our trans loved ones, friends, neighbors, and fellow Minnesotans: you belong here. You are safe here, and we want you in our community as your authentic selves.”
Moran also lists qualms with Kamala’s support, along with the current administration, in allowing for a core change to the language of Title IX, which prohibits discrimination based on sex within any educational program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. The argument by Moran states that by adding in “gender identity and sexual orientation” to the phrasing of the law, the change would “codify allowing biological men to compete in women’s sports and would force educational institutions to comply, resulting in dire consequences and lost opportunities for female athletes.”
As of now, the April 2024 language changes are being battled for, from the lower circuit courts up to the Supreme Court. If enacted, they would have a positive impact on transgender rights, furthering the addition of dignity, respect and self-determination to the life experiences of transgender individuals in America.
According to Moran and the LCR, extending any protections to the LGBTQ+ community is as wrong a choice as the Harris-Walz ticket.
While Newsweek explicitly states the views expressed in the commentary are the writer’s own, it does raise the question, why would such an established publication provide a platform for a minority fringe section of the LGBTQ+ community?