LGBT Party Representatives Advocate for Candidates

With three weeks left until Election Day and less than one week since the reversal of Connecticut’s ban on gay marriage, prominent members of the gay community visited Harvard yesterday for “An Open Discussion on LGBT Issues and the Candidates.”

Organized as a debate between two prominent national LGBT advocacy groups—the Log Cabin Republicans and the Stonewall Democrats—the night’s discussion centered on gay marriage, “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” federal AIDS funding, and other issues central to LGBT communities nationwide.

“It was meant to be an exposition of the issues on both sides, to get people excited about this election,” said Clayton W. Brooks III ’10, one of the debate’s organizers.

Jeffery Kwong ’08-’09, Brooks’s co-organizer and former Harvard Republican Club president said that his personal experience motivated him to help sponsor the event.

“I’m a gay republican,” Kwong said.

“The party is changing, and I want that perception to be there, that the Republican Party is slowly becoming more and more accepting of LGBT issues.”

Patrick Sammon, president of the Log Cabin Republicans, made similar comments prior to the debate.

“In the Republican Party the social conservatives are a strong and vocal segment that uses scare tactics to try and keep other Republicans from being more supportive,” Sammon said. “But they probably only represent one in four Republicans.”

Both Sammon and Stonewall Democrat President Jon Hoadley said that they saw eye-to-eye on LGBT issues but held differing viewpoints when it came to the current presidential election.

Sammon suggested that while the Democratic Party has a history of pro-LGBT promises, the inaction of Democratic candidate Barack Obama on issues such as gay marriage should make his party less attractive to members of the LGBT community.

“I’m not sure he’s proven that he can deliver on anything more than his words,” Sammon said.

Hoadley countered Sammon by citing the voting records of each presidential candidate and the necessity of holding candidates accountable for their actions in the past.

“Are we rewarding a party that has been by and large with us or a party that’s been working against us?” he said.

Students’ responses to the debate were as varied as their reasons for attending.

Lisa J. Miracchi ’09 came to the event looking for reassurance of her current political views. “I am a queer person oncampus and a firm supporter of Barack Obama, but I’ve been really disappointed in him on this issue,” she said of gay marriage. “I wanted to hear a defense of him because I don’t think he has been as forward as he should be.”

Current Harvard Republican president Colin J. Motley ’10 said he was satisfied with the event. “I thought it was a substantial debate. I thought it easily could have devolved into name-calling, and instead it was a critical look at the issues.”

—Staff writer Nayeli E. Rodriguez can be reached at nrodrig@fas.harvard.edu.