Clint Eastwood and gay marriage: Political tipping point for conservatives?

Hollywood icon Clint Eastwood has joined a large group of Republicans arguing for same-sex marriage in the US Supreme Court. Prominent conservatives and many of the largest US corporations now favor gay marriage as well.

|
Charles Dharapak/AP
Actor Clint Eastwood addresses the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla., Aug. 30, 2012. Mr. Eastwood has joined other conservatives in supporting same-sex marriage.

Movie icon Clint Eastwood – who famously mocked Barack Obama at the Republican convention last summer – has joined the president in supporting same-sex marriage.

No, Mr. Eastwood – he of that empty chair used as a prop in Tampa, Fla. – has not shucked his generally conservative ways. But he has joined with more than 100 other conservatives and Republicans who recently came out for gay marriage, among them former governors, GOP administration senior officials, and prominent right-leaning pundits.

In fact, as Mike Flynn at Breitbart.com pointed out in first reporting Eastwood’s move, the actor and Oscar-winning director is as much a political libertarian as anything else.

But the news does indicate an important shift among conservatives on this hot-button social issue, particularly among younger voters for whom same-sex marriage is no big deal – a political demographic the GOP badly needs to woo. Or as the Pew Research Center puts it, “Millennials are almost twice as likely as the Silent Generation to support same-sex marriage.”

And if nothing else, it may signal a tipping point in public attitudes just as the US Supreme Court is about to decide two critical cases: the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8, banning gay marriage.

Polls indicate that the country is “evolving” on the issue at least as rapidly as Mr. Obama last year said he was. In California, a new Field Poll has California voters approving of same-sex marriage by a margin of nearly 2 to 1 (61 percent to 32 percent).

“This represents a complete reversal in views about the issue from 1977, when The Field Poll conducted its first survey on this topic, and is the highest level of support ever measured by the poll,” the organization reported this week. “Approval of allowing marriage between two people of the same gender includes majorities of men and women, voters in all racial and ethnic groups, and Californians living in each of the major regions of the state. The only subgroups where majorities remain opposed are registered Republicans and voters who classify themselves as conservative in politics.”

The Republicans who filed a friend of the court brief in the DOMA case before the Supreme Court examined their deeply held convictions about the basis for marriage. In the end, they concluded, “There is no legitimate, fact-based reason for denying same-sex couples the same recognition in law that is available to opposite-sex couples,” and they found that “marriage is strengthened, not undermined, and its benefits and importance to society as well as the support and stability it gives to children and families promoted, not undercut, by providing access to civil marriage for same-sex couples.”

One of those who signed on to the brief was David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush.

“As a conservative concerned with stabilizing families to rely less on government aid, I have been convinced: I've been worrying about the wrong thing,” he wrote this week on the Daily Beast. “Stopping same-sex marriages does nothing to support families battered by economic adversity. Instead, it excludes and punishes people who seek only to live as conservatives would urge them to live. Treating same-sex partnerships differently from husband-wife marriages only serves to divide and antagonize those who ought to be working together.”

Other elements of US society have weighed in similarly.

In their legal brief regarding DOMA, a group of some 200 businesses and government entities said the federal law “puts us, as employers, to unnecessary cost and administrative complexity” while also “[forcing] us to treat one class of our lawfully married employees differently than another, when our success depends upon the welfare and morale of all employees.”

The group includes such corporate giants as Amazon, Apple, Cisco Systems, eBay, Ernst & Young, Goldman Sachs, Google, Levi Strauss, Marriott International, McGraw-Hill, and Microsoft.

In a New York Times op-ed column last year, Institute for American Values founder David Blankenhorn (who had supported Prop. 8’s ban on gay marriage) explained his change in view.

“As a marriage advocate, the time has come for me to accept gay marriage and emphasize the good that it can do,” he wrote. “Instead of fighting gay marriage, I’d like to help build new coalitions bringing together gays who want to strengthen marriage with straight people who want to do the same.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Clint Eastwood and gay marriage: Political tipping point for conservatives?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/DC-Decoder/2013/0302/Clint-Eastwood-and-gay-marriage-Political-tipping-point-for-conservatives
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe