One thing is clear about the presidential debates: LGBTs are invisible and it's a disservice to viewers and the candidates. Some of the moderators and questioners themselves are gay, but instead of raising the topic of discrimination and LGBT rights, we've heard about the size of Donald Trump's dick ("no problem"), and Bernie Sanders "shushing" Hillary Clinton.
Gay CNN anchor Anderson Cooper, and his gay colleague Don Lemon, were just the most recent examples. They didn't even raise the issue when questioning Clinton and Sanders during Sunday's Democratic. Both candidates, to their credit, are supportive of LGBT rights, but it would have been nice to hear them say that in a context that wasn't a stump speech.
Rachel Maddow, an out lesbian, Bay Area native, and darling of the liberal media, muffed her opportunity at a Democratic debate on MSNBC last month when she failed to ask an LGBT-specific question of Sanders and Clinton. Sanders didn't even talk about gays during the feisty two-hour exchange. At least Clinton mentioned LGBT rights at the beginning and end of her comments.
Maddow and Cooper could have asked the candidates about discrimination and the need for federal legislation such as the Equality Act. On marriage equality, Clinton, who now embraces same-sex marriage, could have been asked to explain her evolution, which many, many people in this country can relate to. Sanders could have been asked to clarify his long-standing support.
On the Republican side, such questions are crucial, and they should be direct, like the one posed by a gay man in New Hampshire. When Marco Rubio was campaigning there ahead of that state's primary, he went into a diner and approached a table occupied by Timothy Kierstead, his husband, and his mother. Kierstead used the occasion to ask Rubio, "Why do you want to put me back in the closet?"
"I don't," replied Rubio, according to a story in the New York Times. "You can live any way you want." Kierstead told Rubio he thinks Rubio's positions treat Kierstead and his husband as if "we don't matter."
Trump, Rubio, Ted Cruz, and John Kasich should all be asked directly about their policies and how they would affect the LGBT community. Such questions tie in to national discussions on immigration reform, race (yes, there are LGBTs of color, it's not all wealthy white gay men), and violence against trans people (again, something that significantly affects trans people of color, especially women). In other words, LGBT issues are not limited to questions on same-sex marriage.
But you certainly don't have to be gay to ask about LGBT issues and we call on future debate moderators to step it up in this regard. Voters across the country definitely need to hear all the GOP candidates challenged on their anti-gay positions, Trump's say-something-to-anyone habits notwithstanding. We want the GOP candidates on the record justifying their support for discrimination. Gays can get married on Friday and fired on Monday in 29 states �" that's more than half the country. Why is that acceptable to them? Would they rather have someone collect public assistance than be gainfully employed just because of who they love? The candidates need to be asked about the proliferation of so-called religious freedom laws and bathroom access, which are quickly becoming the next battleground for LGBT equality.
The March 3 GOP debate on Fox News was the same week that Caitlyn Jenner, who is a Republican, said she'd like to be Cruz's trans ambassador (whatever that is). Could she get Cruz to support our issues? The debate was a missed opportunity to ask Cruz what he thought of that �" and, of course, his views on trans people. Alas, that didn't happen.
On immigration, the candidates need to be asked about their support for policies that break up families �" gay and straight. What is their position on refugees and why are they opposed to helping people from Middle Eastern countries, who are often escaping horrific conditions brought on by the conflicts the U.S. started? Gays are killed in some of these places. According to the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, and Intersex Association, there are 75 countries with criminal laws against sexual activity by LGBTIs.
And these questions should be scattered throughout each future debate, not just saved for one "gay debate." At every one we hear about Wall Street, big banks, ISIS, who'll be tougher, the list goes on. LGBT issues must be added to the rotation, and queries need to go beyond the simple "Do you agree with the Supreme Court decision?" That's been asked and answered. And while it gives us a chance to hear the candidates' personal views, it doesn't get to the substance of policy questions and discrimination.
So let's demand that LGBT issues be heard in a wider context in future presidential debates.