"My support for gay adoption will surely be met with hostility and, no doubt, charges of RHINO’ism by many of my colleagues, but the Grand Old Party is at a crossroads and now is not the time for an echo chamber. Homosexual demagoguery is not the answer to the Party’s woes, particularly when gay men and women represent the only demographic in which John McCain bested President Bush (27% to 19% based on exit polling). And as Daniel Blatt notes, gay-hostile rhetoric no longer resonates in suburban areas with soccer moms, many of whom have gay friends or family members, and plays even worse with young voters, 61% of which voted against stripping gay couples of the right to marry.

To my dissenters, let me be clear, I am not advocating some sort of radical “judicial activism.”

I maintain that judicial resolution to these matters (adoption, marriage, etc) typically leads to protracted and bitter legal battles, but, what is perhaps equally as distressing is our collective failure as a Party to hold a candid discussion on the emerging role of gays in the Party and society at large – not as outcasts, but as equals." - James Richardson, RNC Online Communication Manager for the 2008 Presidential cycle.

Perhaps the most remarkable fact in our politics is that the Republican party does not simply oppose marriage rights; it opposes any recognition of gay couples at all, whether under the rubric of civil union, domestic partnership, or any formal relationship that offers gay couples any protection or respect. This position is, at this point, held by a fast-shrinking proportion of the electorate. And yet the GOP cannot actually propose something positive for gays to appeal to the middle. They cannot even back civil unions. There is only one reason for this, and it's the Christianist veto.

(Hat tip: Hot Air)

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.