A political party is a coalition for people with generally shared, but not identical views. For each of us some issues are of high importance, others less so. There often are some issues with which we disagree with the majority of our party, and we realize the necessity of compromise in order to advance the larger agenda. So if the party puts emphasis on Social Security while our major concern is the Iraq War, we still understand the necessity of the big tent.

There are couples of issues, however, that are different – and intensely personal. This seems difficult for some to understand, so I want to use an example that everyone will claim is over-the-top, but please bear with me for a moment.

In your state, the Dems have just selected a Senatorial candidate who is scion of a well-known political family, has large name recognition and is eminently electable. On Social Security and Medicare and labor and, in fact, most issues he is impeccable – there is only one small problem.

As a lifelong KKK member, he opposes equality for blacks, and you are a black voter.

Now, please ask yourself  – if you were in this position, how would you react to this choice by your party?

Even more to the point, how would you react to the constant complaints from your fellow “progressives” that you were being an extremist, a selfish “single issue” voter, for failing to put your single-issue aside for the good of the party?

You see, all single-issues are not equal.

Two such issues are the right of a woman to own her body, and the right of a gay person to equality under the law.

YOU may see the issue as a trade off, yourself, but when you insist on party unity to the person that you are proposing to oppress for political gain, it is time that you realize how personally insulting you are being when you tell that person that they are a single issue extremist.

0 0 votes
Article Rating