California is a trend setter for all sorts of movements that have swept across our nation from no-fault divorce to the tax-cutting Proposition 13. Now the California Republican State Central Committee meeting on March 9-11 will set the stage for another trend-setting decision, one that may determine the future of the Republican Party.
The Democratic Party has made a calculated political decision to make itself hostage to two strident special-interest groups: the homosexuals and the abortionists. Not only are both groups welcomed as voters; the Democratic Party is committed to affirmative action for them within the Party and is pledged to implement their special-interest agenda as federal, state, and local policy.
For example, Rule 5C of the National Democratic Party states: “With respect to groups such as… lesbians and gay men… each state party shall develop and submit party outreach programs for such groups identified in their plans, including recruitment, education and training, in order to achieve full participation by such groups in the delegate selection process and at all levels of party affairs.”
The California Republican Party will be asked to choose between “me-tooing” the Democrats or staking out a different mission, namely, the high moral ground and an outreach to those who uphold traditional marriage and respect for life. The question is, will the Republicans offer the voters a choice not an echo?
The platform of the National Republican Party since 1980, as well as the policies of our popular Republican Presidents, Ronald Reagan and George Bush, have made a strong appeal to higher values: respect for each individual’s inalienable right to life and respect for traditional marriage and family integrity. California Governor George Deukmejian is cut from this same mold, repeatedly vetoing bills to grant special privileges to homosexuals and repeatedly opposing tax-funded abortions.
But the Duke is not running again, and his retirement has left an open seat. The anointed Establishment candidate, Senator Pete Wilson, who would become the titular leader of the California Republican Party if elected, is making noises that he wants to go down the same abortion/homosexual road the Democrats are traveling.
A group of conservative Republicans headed by Congressman William Dannemeyer has circulated a letter asking the State Central Committee to keep the Party on the course that produced a spectacular national and California election victories of thee 1980s. The Dannemeyer group has focused its proposals in seven resolutions.
Four of them pertain to the abortion issue. They would put the California Republican Party on record as opposing taxpayer funding of abortion, abortion for purposes of sex selection or contraception, and as supporting parental consent for abortion by minors.
The other three resolutions pertain to the homosexual issue. They would ban thee chartering of clubs organized exclusively for homosexuals, call on the California Medical Association to support the American Medical Association’s recommendations to require reporting and contact tracing of HIV infection, and call on the Governor to list HIV among the reportable diseases as recommended by the AMA.
The background for these resolutions is that the American Medical Association recently adopted resolutions calling for confidential mandatory reporting of HIV infection and contact tracing, but the California Medical Association was one of only two entities to oppose these resolutions at the AMA convention in Hawaii.
The signatories of the Dannemeyer letter are making their stand now so that California will not follow the example of Wisconsin, the first state to pass a gay rights statute. The letter describes a case that illustrates the foolishness and offensiveness of this law.
Three women shared an apartment. When one suddenly announced that she was a lesbian, the other two asked her to move. The lesbian filed a grievance with the local Human Rights Board and won. The result was that the two roommates were required to pay the lesbian $1,500 in “damages,” send the lesbian a public letter of apology, attend a two-hour “briefing” on homosexuality conducted by homosexuals, and submit to having their living arrangements monitored by the city for two years.
The Dannemeyer group believes that their seven resolutions are not only the right way to go, but they are smart politics, too. Of the 28 state legislative elections held since the Supreme Court’s Webster decision, 21 have been won by pro-life candidates and 7 by pro-abortion candidates.
Three recent referenda in California are even more impressive in identifying where the American majority stands today. In Irvine, Concord, and even in avant garde San Francisco, the voters by ballot decisively overturned special privileges for homosexuals which had been put in place by the city counsels.
