In addition to labeling conservatives and Republicans "anti-woman" (for opposing government-mandated free contraception), "anti-black" and "anti-Hispanic" (for advocating photo identification for voting), and "anti-science" (for skepticism regarding the belief that man-made carbon emissions will destroy much of the planet), Democrats now regularly label Republicans "anti-gay" (for opposing same-sex marriage).
All these charges are demagogic. But when it comes to the "anti-gay" charge, conservatives need to clarify to themselves as much as to the general public where they stand.
As an opponent of the most radical redefinition of marriage in history (more radical than outlawing polygamy), I have argued for the Defense of Marriage Act before Congress and have written and spoken on behalf of amending state constitutions to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. I believe that the ultimate aim of the LGBT movement and the rest of the cultural left is nothing less than to end gender distinctions
But I am not anti-gay. Proponents of same-sex marriage may conflate opposition to same-sex marriage with being anti-gay. But conservatives must not.
Those of us who fear the consequences of redefining marriage -- asking children if they hope to marry a boy or a girl when they get older, banning religious adoption agencies from placing children first with a married man and woman, denying the importance of both sexes in making families, choosing boys to be high school prom queens, and girls to be high school prom kings, and much more -- must make it clear that we regard homosexuals as fellow human beings created in God's image just as heterosexuals are.
This issue has most recently arisen with regard to Richard Grenell, a foreign policy aide to Mitt Romney, who resigned shortly after his appointment. It is not yet clear why he resigned, but many assume that he did so because he is a gay man who is an outspoken proponent of same-sex marriage, and as such, not a good fit for the Romney campaign.