GOProud and CPAC

I don’t have much to add to the gist of National Review writer Daniel Foster’s article on the ongoing controversy about whether GOProud, a group that seeks to “represent[] gay conservatives and allies,” should be permitted to participate in CPAC. Foster argues, in short, that GOProud should be welcomed, a stance for which he provides five reasons, including the necessities of electoral politics, the group’s tendency to eschew LGBT identity politics (at least to a significant extent), and the need to change conservatism’s image of being intolerant.

I’ve only been to CPAC once, in 2011, and it was not a particularly pleasant experience overall. It was enjoyable to hear from many of the speakers, but my impression was of an event dominated by a loud, unpleasant debate between supporters of Ron Paul’s presidential campaign and backers of Gary Johnson’s over whose candidate was the more authentic libertarian. To me, for whom conservatism is as much about means and not just ends, neither group sounded terribly “conservative.” That’s OK, though — that’s part of the point of CPAC.

In that spirit, I’m particularly persuaded by the fourth of Foster’s five arguments:

“If there is significant internal disagreement among conservatives on any given issue, that disagreement ought to be represented at CPAC, which plays a unique role in the conservative movement. This is especially true in “wilderness” years such as this one. GOProud’s involvement in past CPACs caused a (relatively small) amount of controversy and disruption at the proceedings, and that may have been reason enough to ask them to stay home in 2012, a year in which conservative unity was especially important. But the election is over, and one of conservatism’s great intellectual strengths is that “conservatism” is a contested concept. If confabs like CPAC aren’t going to reflect the robust and vital internal debate about the present and future of conservatism, what are they good for?”

I couldn’t attend CPAC this year even if I wanted to, but this makes me want to attend far less. Moreover, my mind isn’t 100% made up about gay marriage, though I lean (increasingly strongly) toward supporting it; I find myself frustrated with the largely terrible argumentation on both sides. That, however, is not the point here; a much simpler one is: as Ronald Reagan knew, those who agree with us 80% of the time are friends, not enemies. (Living as I do in Massachusetts, I’m often willing/forced to settle for far less.) As far as I can tell, GOProud easily meets that threshold. They should be allowed to participate.

One final, completely unrelated note: I enjoy watching almost all sports, but the Boston Red Sox are by far my favorite team. That’s why I was very amused to see this article  appear almost simultaneously with the beginning of spring training games in the Grapefruit and Cactus Leagues last weekend.