Why Gay Activists Must Read Mary Cheney’s Book

Gay Patriot ^ | 5/20/06 | Gay Patriot West

[Sunsong]

I just finished Mary Cheney’s book Now It’s My Turn: A Daughter’s Chronicle of Political Life and recommend it as the most important book addressing a gay topic of the year, if not the past few years. Indeed, it is must-read book for anyone who wishes to talk honestly about the Bush Administration’s record on gay issues.

While I will not, at this time, write a complete review of the book, I expect this to be a continuation in a series of posts on the significance of the book — and what it reveals about the Vice President of the United States. I have already noted how it shows what a good man Dick Cheney is and how few gay leaders and activists are willing to acknowledge his positive record on gay issues.

Because he is our nation’s Vice President, widely respected in conservative circles, even by social conservatives who know about his relationship with his lesbian daughter, I wish to focus on what this book tells us about this good man and what its release shows about the narrow-mindedness of gay activists. Perhaps you will say that I have said this already. But, as the comments to my recent posts indicate, some of our critics don’t seem to be listening, so, in the words of André Gide, “it is ever necessary to start again.”

What emerges from reading Mary’s book is that the Vice President is an exemplar of how a parent should treat his gay child. When Mary first came out to her father, she writes, “the first words out of his mouth were exactly the ones I wanted to hear: ‘You’re my daughter and I love you and I just want you to be happy.’”

About fifteen years later, when then-Governor Bush, the Republican nominee for president in 2000, was considering Cheney as his running mate, the former Secretary of Defense talked with his daughter about what his selection might mean. Mary notes that he “was concerned that people would target me and my sexual orientation in an attempt to attack him. He wanted to make sure I understood exactly what this decision could mean.”

In order words, this man showed great sensitivity to how his career choice might affect his lesbian daughter’s life.

This is not the only example which shows the Vice President as an exemplary parent of a gay child. It’s clear as well from Mary’s narrative that Dick Cheney has welcomed Mary’s partner, Heather, into the family, treating her as he would a child’s different-sex spouse. Indeed, on Election Night 2004, Heather and Mary slept with him (though on different sofas and chairs) in his White House office.

Despite these stories of the Vice President’s relationship with his daughter, in their Washington Post column, Elizabeth Birch, former executive director of HRC and her partner Hilary Rosen, refuse to praise him directly for treating his child as we would want all parents to treat their gay children. Perhaps they didn’t even read Mary’s book.

Instead they focus on how her coming out might impact political battles. To be sure, I share their delight that “timing of the book’s release is a welcome boon to the effort to defeat (for the second time) the . . . Federal Marriage Amendment.” In their column, however, Birch and Rosen fail to reference the content of Mary’s book, a sign that they are unwilling to let Mary tell her story even as they applaud her “leap onto the national stage.“

So much have these two activists spent inside the Beltway that they remain focused on legislative (& judicial) solutions to the concerns of our community. They have apparently long since lost sight of the real goal. Perhaps were they to read Mary’s book and focus on the Vice President’s relationship with his daughter, they might discover it once again.

Reading this book would expose them to a side of the Vice President different from the one they are accustomed to hearing in the liberal circles in which they travel. They would see how much Mary loves her parents even though she occasionally disagrees with them on matters of policy. They would see how loving a father Dick Cheney is to his daughters and that Mary’s coming out did not cause him to love her any less.

As they read her story, they might realize once again that we all wish our parents would react as did Dick and Lynne Cheney. Not only that. They would see the impact of a child’s coming out on a parent’s attitudes toward gays. Mary’s coming out didn’t make Dick Cheney any less conservative, but it surely caused him to speak out in favor of tolerance for gay couples and in opposition to a constitutional amendment defining marriage.

Birch and Rosen (and their allies on the left) may be upset that Mary’s coming out didn’t cause Dick Cheney to switch parties. (Heck, her coming out didn’t cause her to become a Democrat either.) But, once they let go of their expectation that coming out makes one liberal, they might have the sense to praise this good man and his wife as exemplars of how parents should treat their gay children. And praise the Vice President as a model of political courage, willing to defy part of his political base to speak up for what is right.

Mary Cheney’s book shows what a good man her father is. And in describing their relationship, she helps us focus on (what should be) the real goals of the gay movement.

That we can live freely and openly as gay individuals in our families and in American society.

And yet, Birch and Rosen, like so many other gay leaders and activists commenting on Mary’s book, focus more on the political implications of Mary’s coming out than on the actual contents of her book. It’s too bad they prefer their own fictional narrative about the Vice President to his daughter’s own true story.

So, I suggest that before they criticize the Vice President, they read his daughter’s book. It confirmed to me that I’ve been right to look up to this man for as long as I’ve been involved in politics. They may not share his politics as do I, but they will at least come to respect him as a man and look up to him as the type of father we all wish we had. (And that some of us do have.)

[Sunsong]

You are just another hater in this world. Part of the problem - not part of the answer.

[Sunsong]

DBeers is anything but hateful.

You are wrong. And it seems to me that you are blind to the hate around here. It's real. Where is the *caring* about adultery - the proposed amendment to the constitution to ban adultery? Where is the *caring* about malice? about greed? Where is the *caring* and proposed amendments about:

Being filled with all manner of iniquity, fornication, bitterness, malice, extortion, murder, strife, deceit, evil thoughts, slanderers, backbiters, haters of God, revilers, proud boasters, inventers of evil things, the weakminded, those disobedient to their parent

For if all you are trying to *care* about is what other people do in bed - when all of these are listed as being as bad as homosexuality - then it is clear this is not about something spiritual - but something that is not at all admirable.

There is not going to be a fed marriage amendment this year. There is no way this Congress will pass it.

And most Americans don't want a government obsessed with people's sexual practices. That's just creepy.

It's time to get about the business of reducing the size and scope of government and get out of people's bedrooms.

[Sunsong]

What a great picture! I'm impressed. And yes, I agree, The AP would NEVER want to give even the impression that Dick Cheney is a loving and tolerant man.

[txrangerette]

You're correct that is Scooter.

[DBeers]

Where is the *caring* about adultery - the proposed amendment to the constitution to ban adultery? Where is the *caring* about malice? about greed? Where is the *caring* and proposed amendments about:

What does that have to do with the conservative values Mary Cheney advances?

You post a truly leftist argument here. The real purpose of your postings comes through loud and clear between the moral relative arguments and cries of falsely premised indignation...

No one is arguing against starting an adultery agenda ping list or whatever other flavor of ping list you feel necessary -go for it!

Meanwhile -using Mary Cheney in an attempt to advance the homosexual agenda will continue to be frowned upon....

[peggybac]

Great post. It seems Birch and Rosen are the ones with the problems.

[Sunsong]

I ask again:

Where is your ping list and proposed federal amendment to the US Constitution for adultery?

Where is your ping list and proposed federal amendment to the US Constitution for malice?

When you can show me those instead of name-calling and hatred, then I might begin to take you seriously.

[Sunsong]

It seems Birch and Rosen are the ones with the problems.

For sure! They are completely rigid in their thinking.

[gidget7]

"For if all you are trying to *care* about is what other people do in bed - when all of these are listed as being as bad as homosexuality - then it is clear this is not about something spiritual - but something that is not at all admirable. "

First off, all those things you lister are indeed sins. Homosexuality is an abomination.

Second, we DO NOT CARE, not one bit, what people do in their own beds, IF no one is hurt by it. We DO CARE what people do in public, where children will be exposed and the public put at risk. We DO CARE that decency standards, which have long held regarding heterosexuality, also hold to homosexuality! We DO CARE that the public and children in that public, not be unsuspectingly forced to witness parades that are simply sexual in basis in cities across our nation. We DO CARE that this "special rights" group, based solely on how they attain their orgasms, not be allowed to usurp the constitution and the rights of all other Americans. Ones rights stop where they infringe on the rights of many.

We DO CARE that BASIC human rights not be denied anyone. SPECIAL rights are wrong and unconstitutional, and they do serious harm to any society.

There is no problem for most people, with contracts to protect property, inheritance, medical proxy, etc, which are already accessible and legal. Sex is a private issue between the participants, and that is where it should stay. Not on Main Street, not on television, not in schools, not in library's, restrooms, parks, etc.

It isn't hate, it's is concern for public health and even the health of participants of this lifestyle, concern for those who enter this lifestyle and become so distressed they use meth and become suicidal. This agenda is doing these folks no favors. They are deserving of the truth about the lifestyle.

[Irish Rose]

I think you're misunderstanding the marriage amendment. It is about - ahem - marriage. It is meant to protect society's most basic, most vital institution. Marriage has, for thousands of years, been regarded as a complete, lifelong union between one man and one woman. It has always been regarded as a union between the sexes, and not within one sex. We don't want homosexuals to rewrite the definition of marriage. We don't want them to junk what marriage has been in this country, in the West, in religion, in history, in legal and moral tradition.

[Sunsong]

I think you're misunderstanding the marriage amendment. It is about - ahem - marriage.

Well a piece of advice here. Get involved in the states because there will be no federal *marriage* amendment. It's not going to happen.

[Sunsong]

First off, all those things you lister are indeed sins. Homosexuality is an abomination.

Oh come on, now you splitting hairs. Do you want me to list all the things that are considered *abominations* in the Old Testament and ask you why you are not obsessed with them? I think I remember someting about touching pig skin being an abomination.

Where are your efforts to stop people from playing football?

I read your words - but you know what? I think there is an obsession with other people's sexual pratices here. And that, to me, is just creepy. If you want to change the way children are taught in public schools - then that is something I could support. I see no reason for young children to be taught about any kind of sex.

But when you cross the line and start up an obsessive, hate-filled campaign that invades people's private lives - then, for me, that reflects on you and says that maybe you can't tell the difference between what is your business and what is not your business.

[twippo]

Why does it escape the gay community that the Communist/far-left governments are the ones that persecute homosexuals the worst?

[Sunsong]

Why does it escape the gay community that the Communist/far-left governments are the ones that persecute homosexuals the worst?

How do you figure that? I'm thinking that Iran, Saudi Arabia etc treat homosexuals the worst and that they do ok in Sweden,France, Germany etc.

I would agree with you if you said that the democrat party in America does nothing for gays but I'm not seeing that far left governments like Europe treat them badly.

[gidget7]

"cross the line and start up an obsessive, hate-filled campaign that invades people's private lives - then, for me, that reflects on you and says that maybe you can't tell the difference between what is your business and what is not your business."


You have the dem/lib/progressive/communist talking points down to a tee, don't you?

It IS NOT ABOUT HATE!! Truly isn't. As I said before we could care less what people do privately, in their own homes, in their own bedrooms. I refer you BACK to my previous post to you, those are the thing we do care about.

While there are indeed many sins, and we are all sinners, we do not all have parader's to celebrate those sins, we do not insist society proclaim those sin not to be sins, we do not insist schools teach our sin to children as healthy and normal, and even in some instances wonderful and preferable!, We do not push our govt to pass laws that make those of us who sin, in whatever way, a protected class, and laws that prevent others from even voicing an opinion about our sin.

Example, let us say for the sake of an example, my good friends wife or husband is committing adultery. I do not hate the sinner, but nor do I condone their sin, celebrate it, tell a captive audience that it is healthy and normal, have decadent parades to celebrate that persons sin, and proclaim pride that they had the courage to boast about it.

Nor do we sinners regardless of which sin you might choose to use for an example, expect that decency laws do not apply to us.

I pray all sinners will do what they know in their hearts they should do. What most of us do, and that is to confess and go and sin no more. Especially those who are living such dangerous lifestyles, so no more have to die. The sadness is unmeasurable at those senseless deaths.

[Sunsong]

I’m sorry but it is about hate. Hate and fear. And some kind of perverse obsession with other people’s sex lives. You have not answered me as to where are the organized efforts against other abominations, like shrimp for instance. Shrimp, as I’m sure you know, is an abomination. What about pig skin? Pride? All abominations. Where is the consistency in your effort?

God hates shrimp

Leviticus – 11/11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.

”Shrimp, crab, lobster, clams, mussels, all these are an abomination before the Lord, just as gays are an abomination. Why stop at protesting gay marriage? Bring all of God's law unto the heathens and the sodomites. We call upon all Christians to join the crusade against Long John Silver's and Red Lobster. Yea, even Popeye's shall be cleansed. The name of Bubba shall be anathema. We must stop the unbelievers from destroying the sanctity of our restaurants….”

You don’t answer because you can’t. You are not consistent. This is about hatred of a particular group of people who are different from you and whom you hate. And this is an obsession with other people’s sex lives. It’s creepy.

I don’t know where you live, but I live in Utah and, though we have gay pride parades here, they are NOT offensive.

Perhaps you need to move or get your own state and local area changed?

And yes, adulterers DO celebrate their adultery and ask society to proclaim it not a sin (did you miss the whole Clinton/Monica/Jay Leno thing) and shrimp eaters DO celebrate their shrimp eating and ask society not to proclaim it an abomination and football payers DO celebrate their football and demand that society not proclaim it a sin. And so with the greedy and the prideful and the haters and the condemners and the liars.

Here is more about abominations:

…Sexual sins of any kind are considered "abominations" to the Lord. See Leviticus 18: 18 - 30, paying particular attention to verses 27 - 30, which refer to "all these abominations" -- after various kinds of sexual activities apart from marriage have been mentioned. A similar list is repeated in Leviticus 20, concluding that God's people ought not to do these things "after the manner of the nations which I cast out before you." We find that the levitical laws also forbade remarriages of divorced couples, calling such an act an "abomination." Leviticus 24: 1 - 4. When we consider that Christ amplified these laws to include the lustful thought, who is without sin to cast the first stone?

Dishonest business practices are named as an "abomination" in Deuteronomy 25: 13 - 16, Proverbs 11: 1 and Proverbs 20: 10. It seems that scrupulously honest business practices are required of any professing to be the Lord's people. Do our practices pass the careful scrutiny of the Omniscient One?

Oppressive treatment of others and a haughty attitude are considered as "abomination" in Proverbs 2: 31 - 32, and a "froward heart" is again mentioned in Proverbs 11:20. I wonder if some of the actions of conservative Christians towards gay people might not fall into these categories of "abominations."

A list of six "abominations" are also given in Proverbs 6: 16 - 19:

These six things doth the LORD hate:
yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
A proud look, a lying tongue,
and hands that shed innocent blood,
An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations,
feet that be swift in running to mischief,
A false witness that speaketh lies,
and he that soweth discord among brethren.

Who can claim innocence from all these "abominations"? Are all the sure dispensers of judgments on gay people free from a "proud look" or "false witness"? (Who can be sure that words repeated are absolutely true?) Or sowing discord in God's congregation?...

gladventist

[gidget7]

No it isn't, but no need to be sorry.

I have twice explained in detail what makes this particular abomination worthy of outcry. It is not the sin itself, but the agenda driven praise and declaration of pride in this particular abomination. NOT what people choose to engage in the privacy of their own homes.

None of those of us against homosexual marriage, celebrate other sins. And we will not this one either.

[MHGinTN]

Frankly, Mary shows class ... she has a very high profile potential yet she doesn't shove her sexual proclivities in our face; she's no one's pawn. Her sexual proclivities are private and she makes that clear and that's classy. I suspect God is working on Mary ... and that's between her and Him, also. BTW, I'm very 'socially conservative', so I recommend we pray for Mary.

[Sunsong]

You are contradicting yourself now. Earlier you said to me:

First off, all those things you lister are indeed sins. Homosexuality is an abomination.

Meaning that the reason you are going after homosexuals with such passion is because they are worse than sinners, they practice that which is an abomination. But when confronted with the truth that you do not really care about what the Bible says…you do not really care about what the Bible calls abominations…now you change your story [ wouldn’t that be bearing false witness:-) ]

Now you say:

It is not the sin itself, but the agenda driven praise and declaration of pride in this particular abomination.

So now you are saying that it is the celebration and encouragement of sin/abomination that sets you off. Yet what are doing about Las Vegas – Sin City? It would be a lie to say that Las Vegas does not have “agenda driven praise and declaration of pride” in their sin. I mean even their slogan, “what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas” encourages and celebrates sin. And not just gambling – but fornication and adultery, drunkenness, lying, cheating, the list goes on and on.

Show me your work to create a Constitutional Amendment banishing Las Vegas from the United States!!

What about those who live together and have sex – without marrying. Surely you agree they celebrate their sin and want it accepted by society? What about single mothers?

Where is your consistency?

Obviously, I am working hard here to get you to be real honest…perhaps more honest than you are used to being. There is some reason that you and your cohorts are obsessed with homosexuality and not with sin or with abomination or with those who celebrate their sin and want it accepted by society. All of those are just pretense. They are NOT the real reason for your obsession or you would be consistent with all abominations, sins and those who are proud and demanding praise for their sins.

Can you be honest with me? What is the real reason for your obsession with homosexuality?

[gidget7]

No contradiction whatsoever. Sin is not necessarily an abomination, but an abomination, is also a sin. My comments have been consistent, and spin them as you will, very clear.

Again, the sins you pull out of every aspect of life do not relate to the thread, nor are they even applicable. DU might be more pleasing for your reading, as FR does not and will not promote your point of view.

Calling mine hateful, as well as the majority of people in this country, is not a stand. It's an excuse and a way to end the debate. And it is indeed that stand which is hateful, not wanting to end the moral degradation of the country.