This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library]

On: 02 November 2014, At: 14:45

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Central States Speech Journal

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rcst19

A pentadic analysis of ideologies in

two gay rights controversies
a
Barry Brummett
a
Assistant Professor in the Dept. of Communication ,
Purdue University
Published online: 22 May 2009.

To cite this article: Barry Brummett (1979) A pentadic analysis of ideologies in

two gay rights controversies, Central States Speech Journal, 30:3, 250-261, DOI:
10.1080/10510977909368018

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10510977909368018

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information
(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor
& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties
whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and
views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The
accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently
verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable
for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-
licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly
forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 A PENTADIC ANALYSIS OF IDEOLOGIES
IN TWO GAY RIGHTS CONTROVERSIES
Barry Brummett

"It is so easy to be beguiled by the devil in

unified and consistent despite a be-
show business." wildering multitude of themes. By exam-
. . . Anita Bryant
ining the implications of pro and anti
On the seventh of June, 1977, voters gay rights arguments, I hope to show one
in Florida's Dade County, which includes way of understanding that rhetoric.
Miami, overwhelmingly repealed an I shall focus on the rhetorical appeals
ordinance forbidding discrimination of both sides in the Miami and St. Paul
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014

against homosexuals in housing and campaigns because they were the first
employment. Massachusetts legislator repeal attempts in the two largest cities
Elaine Noble said, "If the Dade County as of this writing.
battle is won by Anita Bryant's pro- The gay rights arguments concern
ponents, it will not be long before they three intertwined issues: A) What does
turn up in key states . . . trying to do it mean to be sexual? In deciding how
similar things."1 On April 25, 1978, to deal with different kinds of sexuality
voters in St. Paul, Minnesota, repealed in society, the public needs to know
that city's gay rights ordinance.2 Sub- what sexuality is, how it is acquired, and
sequent repeals of similar ordinances in how it relates to other aspects of life. B)
Wichita and Eugene, Oregon indicate What does it mean to be political? The
that gay rights is a major national con- public needs to know how to handle
troversy. differences and strangeness in society
Understanding the rhetoric for and and how to devise standards for joint
against gay rights is difficult because the political behavior.
arguments seem to have no common In arguing what it means to be sexual
theme. In both Miami and St. Paul, "the and political, each side addresses a more
origin of this movement is puzzling." 3 basic issue. Each side is best understood
Many issues surfaced in the rhetoric of by its respective answers to a third issue:
both sides: human rights, morality, C) What does it mean to be human? The
vision each side holds of what it means
minority protection, children, education,
to be human is the core of an ideology*
majority rule, and decency. This essay
argues that the rhetoric of each side is 4 Edwin Black, in "The Second Persona,"
Quarterly Journal of Speech, 56 (1970), 112,
Mr. Brummett is an Assistant Professor in the argues that an ideology is "the network of inter-
Dept. of Communication at Purdue University. connected convictions that functions in a man
epistemically and that shapes his identity by
1 "Battle Over Gay Rights," Newsweek, 6 determining how he views the world." The con-
June, 1977, p. 16. cept of ideology was explored in two recent
2 Wayne Wangstad, "St. Paul Voters Kill Gay articles in the April, 1978 issue of the Quarterly
Rights," St. Paul Pioneer Press, 26 April, 1978, Journal of Speech, Volume 64: William R.
p. 1. Brown, "Ideology as Communication Process,"
3 "City Election," St. Paul Pioneer Press, 23 123-140, and Michael C. McGee, " "Not Men,
April, 1978, "Focus" p. 2; and Theodore Stanger, but Measures': The Origins and Import of an
"Only a Few Gays Filing Bias Complaints," Ideological Principle," 141-154. This essay in-
The Miami Herald, 30 May, 1977, p. 1A. tends no new theoretical explanation of ideol-
CENTRAL STATES SPEECH JOURNAL, Volume 30, Fall 1979
 ANALYSIS OF IDEOLOGIES
that generates each side's answer to issues
A and B, as well as immediate issues like
education and majority rule.
This study is justified in three ways.
First, this rhetoric is a textbook example
of how a ratio within Kenneth Burke's
pentad may be used in critical inquiry
to reveal and explain ideologies. As
noted above, the discipline of communi-
cation is increasingly interested in the
study of ideologies. Ideologies motivate
and guide political rhetoric and give it
purpose. This essay may serve as a
paradigm for analyzing ideologies rhe-
torically and may thus contribute to our
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014
discipline's knowledge of what an ideol-
ogy is and how it functions. Second, the
two ideologies studied in this essay are
central to the rhetoric of some other con-
troversies. Although my focus is the gay
rights dispute, I shall briefly mention
how the ideologies involved inform the
rhetorics of a few other conflicts. There-
fore, the essay will contribute to our
understanding of issues beyond gay
rights. Finally, the subject has intrinsic
interest. As noted above, gay rights has
received national attention and has been
a local issue all across the country. Some
critical insights into its many themes may
help to illuminate a major national con-
troversy.
Before reconstructing the symbolic
unity of each side's rhetoric, I shall brief-
ly turn to Burkean theory for a con-
ceptual framework.
IDEOLOGY AND THE PENTAD
Kenneth Burke argues that any situa-
tion may be understood by describing it
through the five terms of scene, act,
ogy, but will assume the meaning of the term
argued in those two essays. I take the term to
mean a complex of principles, values, and as-
sumptions that shape one's views and explana-
tions of reality. Any ideology will therefore give
answer to the question of what it means to be
human; the two ideologies studied here are
examined for their answers to subordinate issues
of sex and politics.
251
agent, agency, and purpose.5 In a public
controversy, people will try to define the
problem and change audience percep-
tions of the world by placing responsibil-
ity for the way things are with one or
more of those five terms.6 Indeed, a
controversy may be defined in Burkean
terms as a situation in which disorienta-
tion and confusion exist. Rhetoric is
called upon to clarify and define the
situation by orienting issues to one or
more terms of the pentad. Imagine two
speakers addressing the exigency of a
sharp increase in the cancer rate. One
speaker may argue that we face disaster
because we have violated God's plan.
Such a speaker defines the situation in
terms of purpose. Another speaker will
define the situation in terms of scene by
orienting the rhetorical situation to care-
less pollution of the environment with
carcinogens. Featuring one kind of term
or ratio between terms over another
creates different definitions of a situa-
tion.
5 Burke's pentad and its uses are discussed
throughout his works, but are introduced in
Chapter I, "Container and the Thing Con-
tained," of A Grammar of Motives (1945; rpt.
Berkeley: U. of California Press, 1962), pp. 3-20.
6 Robert Ivie, in his article "Presidential
Motives for Way," Quarterly Journal of Speech,
60 (1974), 337-345, shows that American Presi-
dents tend to explain the origins and challenges
of war to the public by fixing responsibility for
war's occurrence on one or more terms of the
pentad. In a different treatment of the pentad,
Jeanne Y. Fisher, "A Burkean Analysis of the
Rhetorical Dimensions of a Multiple Murder and
Suicide," Quarterly Journal of Speech, GO (1974),
175-189, probes the psyche of a murderer. Pro-
fessor Fisher's article attributes the man's actions
to motivations arising for him from certain
terms of the pentad insofar as they represented
points of symbolic ambiguity. Both these articles
show how rhetoric can be understood by using
the pentad as a guide to people's motivations.
In another example, suppose that one were fond
of fishing; where does one get that motivation
to fish? Perhaps from agency: one may be fond
of the hardware and tackle of fishing. Perhaps
from agent: one may enjoy fancying oneself
a fisherman with the aura attendant on that
image. Perhaps from scene: one may like the
great outdoors. For the individual or the group,
the terms of the pentad suggest possible sources
of motivation.
 252 CENTRAL STATES SPEECH JOURNAL

Burke argues that people charac- group may accept or reject rhetoric
teristically do not define one situation addressing disarmament because that
with scene, another situation with rhetoric's controlling term is consistent
agency, another with act, etc. Rather, or inconsistent with the group's existing
the disposition to define most things in definition of terms in desegregation.
life with one term or ratio serves as the The two sides in the gay rights dispute
core of an ideology for most people.7 are anchored in two opposing ideologies.
Life makes sense for most of us as we These ideologies feature the same two
repeatedly explain experience to our- terms, yet they are diametrically op-
selves and others with one term or ratio. posed. In answering question C, "What
A system of values and beliefs forms does it mean to be human?" each side
around that core as people apply the stresses a ratio between act and agent:
controlling term or ratio to particular the world is the way it is, and people are
issues. Therefore, the terms or ratios of what they are and do what they do, be-
the pentad are motives for people to cause of the relationship between people
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014

make choices and take actions in con- and their actions. But supporters of gay
troversies. People are motivated to re- rights feature the agent: people are what
spond to arguments in the gay rights they are and must be dealt with on their
controversy within a set of specific issues. own grounds. Acts are derivative from
Because rhetoric that addresses many agents, people do what they do because
different issues may flow from one of the kinds of people they find them-
orientation, seemingly disparate issues selves to be. Opponents of gay rights
may be symbolically related by way of argue just the opposite. A person is what
their controlling term. One group's rhet- he or she is through his/her actions or
oric on school desegregation may be the actions of others. People are es-
consistent with another group's rhetoric sentially malleable. Therefore, actions
are primary and agents are derivative.
on nuclear disarmament because both
rhetorics define their situations in terms These two ideologies may inform the
of a shared conception of agents. One rhetoric of a number of issues: urban re-
clamation, farm price supports, detente.
7 In Part Two of A Grammar of Motives, This paper will trace those two ideo-
"The Philosophic Schools," Burke discusses logies as they are manifested in issues
philosophies and ideologies generated by each A and B—What does it mean to be
term of the pentad. Burke's analysis makes it
clear that one need not trace the motivations sexual and political?—and further into
given by every term of the pentad in every particular issues of minority protection,
criticism. The present essay, for instance, ignores
purpose, scene, and agency. I do not deny their morality, etc. Agent ideology or act
usefulness, but a critic strapped for space may ideology unifies the rhetoric for or
legitimately look at only a few terms and ratios
to reveal motivations located therein. against gay rights. Definitions of politics
8 Although neither term is entirely satisfac- and sexuality are inherent in specific
tory, I shall use "Anti" to mean those opposed
to ordinances protecting gay rights, and "Pro" issues; competing versions of the agent-
to mean those in favor of such ordinances. I do act ratio are most clearly seen by ex-
not intend to explain all the arguments of either
side in this paper; rather, I shall address some amining these particular problems. In
of the more central themes. Also, this essay the rest of the paper, first in "Pro" gay
does not claim that people approach gay rights
from only act or agent ideologies. However, the rights rhetoric and then in "Anti" rhet-
most vocal arguers seem to feature either act oric,8 I shall trace the rhetorical expres-
or agent. If the reader thinks of arguments that
seem to be informed by neither act nor agent, sion of act ideology or agent ideology in
perhaps that rhetoric is best explained by some three issues: 1) Standards for sex and
other ideology, and falls outside the scope of this
essay. politics: rights vs. morals, 2) Living with
 ANALYSIS OF IDEOLOGIES 253

political and sexual difference: minority gays teaching children but equal rights
protection vs. majority rule, 3) Political for all minorities."11
and sexual education: bringing out vs. Pros specifically opposed their
putting in. standard of rights to the Antis'
standard of morality: "It, therefore, is
THE PRO GAY RIGHTS ARGUMENTS not a morality issue. . . ,"12 Ora Lee
Standards for sex and politics: rights Patterson of the St. Paul Human Rights
Commission put it most clearly: "This
An ideology dominated by the agent is not a moral issue. It's a human-rights
demands that people be taken on their issue."13 As we shall see later, morality
own terms. An agent should not be held is a term that features acts. In rejecting
accountable because he/she happens to moral standards for sex and politics,
be black, Jewish, or gay. For "black, Pros denied that the issue was one of
Jewish, or gay" are all conditions of acts. As gay activist Robert Kunst argues,
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014

being an agent. Therefore, Pro rhetoric "The ordinance has nothing to do with
strongly relies on the ultimate term of sex acts whatsoever."14
"rights," since rights adhere to agents.
We speak of "human rights." Indeed, it Pros argued that approval of the
is difficult to refer to rights and not mean agent's right to be gay ought to be
that some person has that right. One has separate from approval of his/her acts,
the right to do acts, but a person since the agent is primary and acts are
possesses that right. An implication of secondary. Bishop Herbert Chilstrom of
arguing for "rights" is that acts are de- the Lutheran Church in America sepa-
rivative from an agent. If the agent did rated issues of act and agent in arguing,
not have the right to act, the act would "We are not dealing with the question
not rightfully take place. of homosexuality, but the basic civil
When Pros sound the theme of rights, rights of some people who are homo-
15
the}' often do not specify the right to sexuals." Mayor George Latimer of St.
engage in a particular act. Pros stress the Paul attributed the ordinance's repeal
right to be gay and to be protected in to the fact that "we just were not able
that state of being from discrimination. to convey to people who abhor the prac-
Slogans in Dade County mocked Anita tice of homosexuality that they should
Bryant's orange juice commercials: "A set those feelings aside when it comes to
16
day without human rights is like a day granting them civil rights." A state-
9
without sunshine." Arthur Bell stri-
dently proclaimed that "the real fight is 11 Robert Bork, "Anti-Gay Groups Try to Ig-
nore Human Rights, Steinem Declares," The
between thinking people of all colors Miami Herald, 30 May, 1977, p. 18A.
and sexual persuasions and irrational, 12 St. Paul Citizens for Human Rights, "Re-
ill-informed women and men who refuse ligious Support of Human Rights in St. Paul"
(single-page leaflet distributed to homes in St.
to understand that the issue is one of Paul).
civil rights, not recruitment, pollution, and13Brenda Ingersoll and Debra Stone, "Pro
Con Gay-Rights Rallies Attract Many,"
10
or corruption." Vice President Arlie Minneapolis Star, 20 April, 1978, 4A (cont. from
Scott of the National Organization of 1A). 14 Arnold Markowitz, "Gay Rights Foes Do
Women held that "the real issue is not Song, Talk Lunch Debate," The Miami Herald,
30 May, 1977, p. 2B (cont. from IB).
15 Political ad by St. Paul Citizens for Human
9 Tom Davies, "750 Protest at Anita Bryant Rights, St. Paul Pioneer Press, 24 April, 1978,
Performance," The Minneapolis Tribune, 22 p. 24.
May, 1977, p. 2B (cont. from IB). 16 Wayne Wangstad, "St. Paul Voters Kill Gay
10 Arthur Bell, "Anita Bryant's Ire and Brim- Rights," St. Paul Pioneer Press, 26 April, 1978,
stone," The Village Voice, 4 April, 1977, p. 13. p. 1.
 254 CENTRAL STATES SPEECH JOURNAL
ment by the St. Paul Citizens for Human
Rights argued that "the issue is not
whether the people of St. Paul approve
of homosexuality. The issue is whether
the people who happen to be gay should
have the same basic rights afforded other
St. Paul citizens."" The St. Paul Post
Dispatch editorialized that the ordinance
"does not signify approval of homo-
sexual behavior"18 or actions; rather, it
guarantees rights to agents. And the Rev.
Dale Anderson urged support of the
ordinance by voters "regardless of how
they may or may not view human sexual-
ity."19
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014
The argument that gays have no
choice over their condition is the clearest
indication that Pros emphasize agent
over act. As Catholic Archbishop John
Roach put it, "Some persons find them-
selves to be homosexual. . . ."20 The con-
dition of being that kind of agent comes
first; nothing gays have done causes them
to be gay. As Miami gay activist John
Campbell put it, "Why in the world
would anyone choose the anguish, heart-
break and discrimination of being
gay?"21 Or in the Avords of a St. Paul
citizen, "Nature plays a trick on certain
people and makes them homosexual."22
Gays do what they do because of the
kind of people they are. But they are not
that kind of people because of anything
they have done.
Living with political and sexual
difference: minority protection
Whether one emphasizes acts or
17 St. Paul Citizens for Human Rights, "Law
Works Well," St. Paul Dispatch, 21 April, 1978,
Election guide p. 5.
18 "Picking Our Favorites in St. Paul Election,"
St. Paul Dispatch, 19 April, 1978, p. 14A.
19 Dale Anderson, " T h e Gay Rights Proposal:
No," Minneapolis Tribune, 22 April, 1978,
Opinion p. 4.
20 St. Paul Citizens for Human Rights, "Re-
ligious Support of Human Rights in St. Paul."
21 "Battle Over Gay Rights," Newsweek, 6
June, 1977, p. 26.
22 John Ekholm, " T h e St. Paul Vote," Min-
neapolis Tribune, 29 April, 1978, p. 10A.
agents affects how one lives with differ-
ence. Pro rhetoric assumes that differ-
ences in the body politic stem from un-
chosen states of being rather than from
divisive acts. Given that assumption, the
wisest course is to accept the fact of dif-
ference and adjust policy to the agents
involved. An important theme in Pro
rhetoric compares the plight of gays with
other, more "established" minorities:
blacks, Jews, Indians, etc. Pros thus argue
that gays "find themselves" in that condi-
tion, as do blacks, and must be accepted
on those terms.
Pros typically argued, "Perhaps if we
just replaced the word 'gay' with Jew or
Latin or black. . . ,"23 One gay rights
activist declared that "Miami is our
Selma."24 Minnesota Pros asked, "Who
is next on the St. Paul citizens' list?
Jews? Blacks?"25 "If you can rationalize
withholding one group's rights, how
much harder can it be to rationalize
denying or repealing the rights of
others?"26 At one rally, Minnesota State
Sen. Allan Spear "equated the fight to
the right-wing attack against the rights
of poor women, affirmative action and
Indian tribal rights."27
A focus on the agent lies behind a
growing interest in ethnic identity. One
finds that one is black, Czech, or Jewish.
Ethnicity is a condition of being a per-
son. Because an agent ideology holds
that the world exists as the individual
perceives it, that the human mind and
character is the primary shaper of real-
ity, a stress on agents is relativistic. Such
23 Arnold Markowitz, "Gay Rights Foes Do
Song, Talk Lunch Debate," T h e Miami Herald,
30 May, 1977, p. 2B (cont. from 1B).
24 "Battle Over Gay Rights," Newsweek, 6
June, 1977, p. 16.
25 J. S. Katz, " T o T h e Editor," Minneapolis
Star, 28 April, 1978, p . 9A.
26 Robert Ferdinand, Jr., "Decision in St.
Paul," Minneapolis Star, 28 April, 1978, p. 9A.
27 Gloria Ohland, "2500 March to Support
Gay Rights," Minnesota Daily (University of
Minnesota campus newspaper), 20 April, 1978,
p. 15 (from p. 1).
 ANALYSIS OF IDEOLOGIES 255
a focus requires a pluralistic, decen- all: "The issue is not whether gay
tralized society, and it features tolerance teachers will be teaching our children."31
rather than control. Agent ideology can The Pro position on education is
also accommodate the exceptional in- similar to an agent focus in other con-
dividual. Special people, like different troversies. The growing emphasis on
social groups, need to be tolerated or bilingual, culturally sensitive education
celebrated. is a part of the rhetorical ideology that
features agents. Such education does not
Political and sexual education: stress giving children information which
bringing out they must learn. Instead, it deals with
children as they see the world. A child
Education is a central issue in the gay who does not speak English well or is
rights controversy. But it means very not from mainstream culture is educated
different things given an agent or act on his/her own terms; his/her potential
ideology. Pros deemphasize the creative is developed. A focus on agents pervades
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014

power of education. They believe that a the "human potential" movement.

person's essential character is given. Edu- Esalen, EST, and other "pop" psychol-
cation is an act that develops the po- ogies seek to develop the potential of the
tential which is already in agents, a "whole" person. They urge acceptance
potential which cannot be implanted by of the individual on his/her own terms
action. Education brings out of students and reject changing the person radically
their best possibilities. to what he/she is not. These issues are
Rosalynn M. Carroll, black chair- the rhetorical cousins of Pro arguments.
woman of the St. Paul School Board, To the extent that mainstream America
stated the Pro view of education most is suspicious of minorities, of bilingual
clearly when she denied that gay and culturally sensitive education, of the
teachers could make children gay: human potential movement, then Pro
"That's the same as telling me that if a rhetoric may be rejected because of its
white person teaches a black child, all rhetorical family connections as well as
those beautiful black children would for its own content.
miraculously turn white. . . ."2S A per-
son's sexual orientation is a condition THE ANTI GAY RIGHTS ARGUMENTS
of being, just as much as is one's race, Standards for sex and politics: morals
and education cannot change that orien-
tation. "The Human Rights Ordinance Opponents of gay rights legislation
does not make other people gay," argue define a person's sexual or political
the Pros, because people are already gay character by his/her acts. A person is gay
29
or heterosexual. In denying that gays because he/she does something; perhaps
he cooks, or she smokes a pipe. A key
could teach a child to be gay, the Min-
ultimate term in Anti arguments is
neapolis Star editorialized that "homo-
"morals." Morality is a concept which
sexuality begins at an early age, before
attaches itself primarily to acts. We
a child enters school."30 Some Pros
speak of "immoral acts." When we refer
denied that education was an issue at
to agents as immoral we justify ourselves
by naming some act which the person
28 Ibid.
29 St. Paul Citizens for Human Rights, "Re-
ligious Suppoit of Human Rights in St. Paul." 31 Dale Anderson, "The Gay Rights Proposal:
30 "Gay Rights In St. Paul," Minneapolis Star, No," Minneapolis Tribune, 22 April, 1978,
21 April, 1978, p. 10A. Opinion p. 4.
 256 CENTRAL STATES SPEECH JOURNAL
does which makes him/her immoral. If
the act is repented, the person's standing
will usually change back to "moral." An
immoral agent is created by immoral
acts. An act ideology assumes that agents
are responsible for who they are, that
people make themselves through their
actions. An act-centered rhetoric there-
fore will say much about what people
should and should not do.
Thus one finds the term "moral" in
Anti arguments. In an article by Michael
Novak of only two ten inch columns, we
find the word "moral" or some form of it
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014
eleven times.32 In a one-half page single
column article by the St. Paul Citizens
Alert for Morality, one finds "moral" or
"immoral" ten times.33 Anita Bryant's
husband, Bob Green, congratulated St.
Paul citizens on "the stand you're taking
against the immoral forces that are con-
tributing to the breakdown of this
country."34
The link between morality and act is
clear in the wording of much Anti rhet-
oric. Gayness is usually referred to as an
"act," a "lifestyle," or "behavior," rather
than as a condition of being: "The
homosexual act is just the beginning of
the depravity."35 Nobody put it more
clearly than Anita Bryant: "I don't think
a homosexual is a homosexual until he
commits the act."36 A St. Paul citizen
complained that "those who practice
perverted acts are trying to force us to
accept their immorality," and in his
three paragraph letter the words "act"
or "action" appeared six times.37 Other
32 Michael Novak, "Miami and the Homo-
sexuals," T h e Minneapolis Star, 3 June, 1977,
p. 9A.
33 St. Paul Citizens Alert For Morality, "Gays
'Immoral,'" St. Paul Dispatch, 21 April, 1978,
Election guide p . 5.
34 Brenda Ingersoll and Debra Stone, "Pro
and Con Gay-Rights Rallies Attract Many,"
Minneapolis Star, 20 April, 1978, p. 1A to 4A.
35 "Playboy Interview: Anita Bryant," Playboy,
May, 1978, p. 76.
36 Ibid., p. 85.
37 V. L. Vauter, "Mockery," St. Paul Dispatch,
17 April, 1978, p. 4A.
Antis complain that gays "want the
ordinance to give moral sanction, legal
protection for their unnatural acts."38
Novak links morality and action, declar-
ing that "many believe that homosexual-
ity represents a deficient form of emo-
tional and moral life," and refers to
"homosexual acts."39 George F. Will
fears for the loss of "old moral moor-
ings" because of the "homosexual sub-
culture, based on brief, barren assigna-
tions."40 The wording is important, for
this immorality is based on actions
rather than resulting in them. Note the
link between acts and morality in
Anita Bryant's statement, "Homosexuals
should not ask for a special-privilege
ordinance to give community sanction
to an act that God says is immoral."41
In stressing actions, the Antis often
specifically deny that rights are an issue.
A St. Paul student argues that "gay
rights have nothing at all to do with hu-
man or civil rights;" rather, "the gay
rights issue is a question of morality—it
is just that simple."42 Anita Bryant
agrees in arguing that "it's not a po-
litical issue. It's a moral one."43 And
again, "It is not a civil rights issue be-
cause anyone could be defined as a
legitimate minority."44 Mike Thompson
agrees: "There is no human right, no
civil right to corrupt children."45 Antis
38 St. Paul Citi'ens Alert For Morality, "Gays
'Immoral,'" St. Paul Dispatch, 21 April, 1978,
Election guide p. 5.
39 Michael Novak, "Miami and the Homo-
sexuals," The Minneapolis Star, 3 June, 1977,
p. 9A.
40 George F. Will, "How Far Out of the
Closet?" Newsweek, 30 May, 1977, p. 92.
41 (Associated Press), "Anita Bryant Debates
Homosexual on Rights," T h e Minneapolis Star,
28 May, 1977, p. 4A.
42 Paul Westman, "Gay Rights Have Nothing
T o Do With Human Rights," Minnesota Daily,
2 May, 1978, p. 7.
43 Arnold Markowitz, "Gay Rights Foes Do
Song, Talk Lunch Debate," T h e Miami Herald,
30 May, 1977, IB.
44 Arthur Bell, "Anita Bryant's Ire and Brim-
stone," The Village Voice, 4 April, 1977, p. 13.
45 Arnold Markowitz, "Gay Rights Foes Do
 ANALYSIS OF IDEOLOGIES
argue that rights can be surrendered by
acts, and they claim that gays have done
so. The St. Paul Citizens Alert for
Morality argue that "if a person is dis-
covered in a crime and apprehended, he
no longer has full, unrestricted rights
like a moral person. Because of his act
of immorality, he now has restricted
rights."48 A St. Paul citizen argued: "I
would be enraged if a moral person had
any of his access to the five basic human
privileges, or rights, restricted. Hoxvever,
an immoral person by his own actions
restricts his access to basic human
rights."47
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014
Anti speakers separate agents and acts
by arguing that they "love the sinner
but hate the sin."48 St. Paul Antis
claimed they "did not hate anyone."49
Evangelist Jack Wyrtzen says "I want
you to know we don't hate homosexuals.
We hate homosexuality. We love homo-
sexuals, we love lesbians."50 By hating
the act but not the agent, Antis make
the act primary. If the agent were pri-
mary and Antis hated the act, they must
hate the causative agent as well.
Anti rhetoric judges agents by their
sexual and political acts. Sexually,
agents' actions may make them
"sinners." Politically, agents' actions may
make them "criminals." Anti rhetoric
argues that to be sexual or political is to
engage in actions that may save or damn
the agent.
A sin is an act, and committing sin
defines the agent as a sinner. Anita
Song, Talk Lunch Debate," T h e Miami Herald,
30 May, 1977, 2B (from 1B).
46 St. Paul Citizens Alert for Morality, "Gays
' I m m o r a l , ' " St. Paul Dispatch, 21 April, 1978,
Election guide p. 5.
47 V. L. Vauter, "Mockery," St. Paul Dispatch,
17 April, 1978, p. 4A.
48 "Playboy Interview: Anita Bryant," Playboy,
May, 1978, p. 232.
40 Wayne Wangstad, " 'Army' Recruited to
Battle Gay Law," St. Paul Pioneer Press, 20
April, 1978, p. 1.
50 Miguel Perez, "10,000 Rally for Repeal of
Metro's Anti-Gay Law," T h e Miami Herald, 23
May, 1977, p. 18.
257
Bryant's position is clear: "The Bible
clearly says homosexuality is an abomi-
nation."51 In both Miami52 and St.
Paul,53 Antis called for an "army of
saints" to combat the sin of homosexual-
ity. Evangelist Jack Wyrtzen, who has
never owned a pet, moralistically asserts
that "homosexuality is a sin so rotten,
so low, so dirty that even cats and dogs
don't practice it."54 One caller on a
Miami radio call-in show argued that
"homosexuality is an abomination. I
don't know where it says it in the Bible,
but I feel it in my heart. I feel Jesus
Christ said it." Another observed that
"Jesus Christ wasn't gay. There were no
gay bars in his time. Jesus don't go to
no gay bar."55
If gayness is an act of sin, then it can
be repented. To be truly repentable,
gayness must be freely chosen. Anti
rhetoric features choice as a component
of sexuality. Will, for instance, bases
much of his argument on this supposi-
tion: "To the extent that homosexuality
is, in some sense, a 'choice' of character,
as many homosexuals insist. . . ,"58
Novak, referring to "gay alliances," re-
marks that "homosexuality . . . is a fully
moral choice... ."57 Bryant protege Mike
Thompson also claims "These guys have
a choice."58
If sexuality is based on chosen acts,
then some acts can justify a person
sexually. The character of the agent is
51 "Gay Rights Showdown in Miami," Time,
13 June, 1977.
52 "God's Crusader," Newsweek, 6 June, 1977,
p. 21.
53 Wayne Wangstad, " 'Army' Recruited to
Battle Gay Law," St. Paul Pioneer Press, 20
April, 1978, p. 1.
54 "Battle Over Gay Rights," Newsweek, 6
June, 1977, p. 22.
55 Arthur Bell, "Anita Bryant's Ire and Brim-
stone," The Village Voice, 4 April, 1977, p. 13.
50 George F. Will, "How Far Out of the
Closet?" Newsweek, 30 May, 1977, p . 92.
57 Michael Novak, "Miami and the Homo-
sexuals," T h e Minneapolis Star, 3 June, 1977,
p. 9A.
58 "Battle Over Gay Rights," Newsweek, 6
June, 1977, p. 26.
 258 CENTRAL STATES SPEECH JOURNAL
derived from acts which protect him/her
like a talisman. Reporters approaching
Anita Bryant, for instance, are asked if
they are married.59 Marriage is an act by
which the agent can establish his/her
sexual character. Once married there are
other acts which reinforce a good agent.
Schoolteacher Inez Wilcox energetically
declared, "I don't know what the Bible
says about gay people, but I do know
that Jesus said go out and have children.
I believe in the word of God so I went
out and had ten. Could a gay couple
follow the word of God like that?"60
The political corollary of sin is crime.
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014
Anti rhetoric argues that the act of
sexuality is subject to legal standards.
Such a definition of sexuality could only
result from an act focus. One cannot be
criminal for a condition of being.
Anita Bryant equates homosexuality
with murder,61 and argues that it should
be considered a felony.62 A group called
the National American Party for Man-
hood distributed fliers backing capital
punishment for homosexuals.63 One St.
Paul citizen said "I'm against homo-
sexuals. The Old Testament says they
will be stoned to death."6' And a Miami
sticker advocates the punishment, "Kill
a Queer for Christ."65
The violence expected from gays is an
interesting indication of their alleged
criminality. Bryant's husband expects his
wife to die at the hands of "some
militant homosexual."66 Bryant herself is
59 "God's Crusader," Newsweek, 6 June, 1977,
p. 21.
60 "Battle Over Gay Rights," Newsweek, 6
June, 1977, p. 22.
61 "Playboy Interview: Anita Bryant," Playboy,
May, 1978, p . 79.
62 Ibid., p . 89.
63 "Battle Over Gay Rights," Newsweek, 6
June, 1977, p. 17.
64 "Anti-Gay Rights Voters Hold Slight Edge;
Many Undecided," St. Paul Dispatch, 21 April,
1978, p. 1.
65 "Gay Rights Showdown in Miami," Time,
13 June, 1977.
66 Ken Kelley, "Cruising W i t h Anita," Play-
boy, May, 1978, p . 232.
shocked at "the viciousness or vindictive-
ness of the homosexual community."67
The Rev. Jerry Falwell claims that "so-
called gay folks would just as soon kill
you as look at you."68 A St. Paul citizen
warns that "extending the hand of
tolerance to the gays, San Francisco has
found, ends with their hands at your
throat."69
Living with political and sexual
difference: majority rule
Pro rhetoric stresses the importance of
tolerating difference and perpetuating a
pluralistic society. Anti rhetoric stresses
majority rule and the importance of
voting. I shall argue that such an argu-
ment is consistent with an ideology of
action.
Antis argue that majority rule creates
properly moral standards for society.
Therefore, society should be molded by
decisions rendered through majority
voting. Differences should give way to
moral standards dictated by the major-
ity. A revealing statement in a political
ad argues, "Yes, the majority can still
determine the difference between right
and wrong."70 The ambiguity of "de-
termine" is important: it can mean dis-
cern or fiat, or both. Other Anti rhetoric
complains, "A small group of gay
activists and their friends pushed
through the amendment over the objec-
tions of a much larger majority of
citizens."71 Bob Green congratulates St.
Paulites on the same theme: "You see,
you've awakened a sleeping giant. The
67 "Playboy Interview: Anita Bryant," Playboy,
May, 1978, p . 88.
68 "Battle Over Gay Rights," Newsweek, 6
June, 1977, p. 22.
69 W. McPheron, "How Gays Took Over San
Francisco," St. Paul Dispatch, 17 April, 1978,
p. 4A.
70 Political Ad in St. Paul Pioneer Press, 24
April, 1978, p. 13.
71 W. F. McPheron, " T h e Gay Rights Pro-
posal: Yes," Minneapolis Tribune, 22 April,
1978, Opinion p. 4.
 ANALYSIS OF IDEOLOGIES
vast majority of the American people is
coming awake and taking a stand."72
And elsewhere, he argues, "The heart-
beat of this country is turning conserva-
tive, and one day we'll see the heartbeat
break through. The majority is no longer
apathetic."73
In celebrating the resurgence of the
majority, Antis find a convenient target;
the expert, the powerbroker, the in-
dividual in charge. Such a target is
especially appropriate since the ordin-
ances in question were passed by power-
ful city or county legislative bodies after
lobbying by special interest groups. Bob
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014
Green is therefore moved to complain,
"We're being run in this country by a
small group of very active people."74
Other Antis agree: "A small group of
militants has been dictating to the ma-
jority in the United States. . . ."T5 Some-
times that small group is described as
"experts," know-it-alls who claim sci-
entific evidence in support of gay rights:
"Is there anyone who will claim things
are not getting even worse? Of course
there is. Some 'expert,' somewhere, will."
But these experts are suspect: "You can
dig up an expert to take any side of any
controversial issue." And the result of
expert opinion: "No room for the peo-
ple in a democracy anymore."76
A majority vote against gay rights is
often defined in Anti rhetoric as a
"message" sent to the rest of the nation.
St. Paul Councilwoman Rosalie Butler
argues, "I think the people of St. Paul
72 Brenda Ingersoll a n d Debra Stone, "Pro
and Con Gay-Rights Rallies Attract Many,"
Minneapolis Star, 20 April, 1978, 4A (from 1A).
73 Kate McCarthy, "Anita Bryant Sick;
Husband Urges Repeal of Gay Rights," Min-
nesota Daily, 20 April, 1978, p. 15 (from p. 1).
74 Brenda Ingersoll and Debra Stone, "Pro
and Con Gay-Rights Rallies Attract Many,"
Minneapolis Star, 20 April, 1978, 4A (from 1A).
75 Wayne Wangstad, " 'Army' Recruited to
Battle Gay Law," St. Paul Pioneer Press, 20
April, 1978, p. 1.
76 Paul Westman, "Gay Rights Have Nothing
T o Do W i t h H u m a n Rights," Minnesota Daily,
2 May, 1978, p . 7.
259
gave a very positive message: that they
will support candidates who stand up for
decency and morality."77 Just before the
St. Paul election a political ad promised,
"Tomorrow, you will be able to show
the nation that parents are important;
that the family unit is sound."78 And
shortly after the election, a St. Paul
citizen hoped that the vote would be-
come a message: "I hope that the vote
to repeal the Gay Rights amendment to
the St. Paul ordinance (and the Miami
vote) tells members of legislative bodies
something concerning how the people,
those whom they are to represent, feel
about this matter."79
When Pros describe the ideal body
politic as one that protects minorities
and individuals, that argument is clearly
consistent with an agent focus. But does
the Anti rhetoric of majority rule, vot-
ing, denigration of experts, and "send-
ing a message" express an act ideology?
The values of voting and majority
rule are closely connected, since votes
determine majorities. But voting is an
act rather than a state of being. People
go to the polls to assert themselves, and
by their actions things happen. The
corporate agent of the United States is
derived from that act, we are what we
make of ourselves at the polls. An act
ideology defines correct sex and politics
through voting. The majority really does
determine the difference between right
and wrong. In such a view of the body
politic there can be no room for the
expert. For an expert is a highly trained
agent, distinguished for what he/she
knows rather than for what he/she does.
The act of voting is the active trans-
mission of a message, and that is why
77 Brenda Ingersoll, "St. Paul Repeals Gay-
Rights Protection," T h e Minneapolis Star, 26
April, 1978, p . 1A.
78 Political Ad in St. Paul Pioneer Press, 24
April, 1978, p. 13.
79 J. W. Remund, " T h e St. Paul Vote," T h e
Minneapolis Tribune, 29 April, 1978, p. 10A.
 260 CENTRAL STATES SPEECH JOURNAL

majority vote as message is featured in "When I started this, I was just one
act-dominated Anti rhetoric. mother, trying to help her children," as
82
"Send them a message" suggests a po- Anita Bryant said. In St. Paul, the
litical relative, the rhetoric of George Citizens Alert for Morality merely "want
Wallace. "Send them a message" was the to keep perverted and immoral people 83
slogan of his Presidential campaigns. from close contact with their children."
The act focus as manifested in majority Recruitment is a persistent theme,
rule, voting, etc., is also akin to the with Mike Thompson charging that "re-
pioneer myth in this country. Nameless cruit they will. In our schools, by
individuals, the faceless masses, came to foster children, by becoming adoptive
84
these shores to make a new land. They parents." Bob Green charged that gays
made new people of themselves as well. "do much of their recruiting among
85
A person was what he/she made of him/ children." A St. Paul citizen envisioned
herself through acts. Whether born a serf "subtle" appeals by gay teachers to the
or aristocrat, that made little difference "trusting innocents" in their charge and
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014

on the Oregon Trial. What counted was claimed that "gay teachers in high
what one could do. And so the impor- schools can be counted on to happily
tance of actions in defining who one is deliver 'enlightening' presentations on
has been an enduring American value. sex. . . ,"88
Why are children focused upon so in-
Political and sexual education: tently by Anti rhetoric, and what does
putting in that reveal about the role of education?
A child is innocent and malleable. He/
Pro rhetoric stresses the role of edu- she may be made into a particular kind
cation in developing the potential that of agent through certain actions. Chil-
already exists in agents: education draws dren are demi-agents, neither sexually
possibilities out of people. Anti rhetoric nor politically complete. Antis fear that
stresses the role of education as an active their children will be recruited by gays.
process of putting information into They believe that sexual character can
agents; education is an act that molds be molded by acts of recruitment. There-
pliable agents. Anti rhetoric features the fore, what a child is taught in school
active role of gays in educating children. is far more important than the child's
Anita Bryant voices the typical argu- character upon entering school.
ment: "Since homosexuals cannot re- The idea of education as an act that
produce, they must freshen their ranks molds agents has currency in the wider
Avith our children. . . . They will use political scene. A resurgence of the
money, drugs, alcohol, any means to get "three R's," of traditional education in
what they want."80 Mayor Latimer of St.
Paul felt that the defeat of that city's 82 T o m Davies, "750 Protest at Anita Bryant
ordinance was due to this concern: Performance," T h e Minneapolis Tribune, 22
May, 1977, p. 11A (from 1A).
"What if he (a gay) is teaching my 83 St. Paul Citizens Alert For Morality, "Gays
81
children?" Many Antis became in- ' I m m o r a l , ' " St. Paul Dispatch, 21 April, 1978,
Election guide, p. 5.
volved through fear for their children: 84 Arnold Markowitz, "Gay Rights Foes Do
Song, Talk Lunch Debate," T h e Miami Herald,
30 May, 1977, p. 2B (from 1B).
80 "Heaven Is On Her Side, Says Anita Bryant, 85 Kate McCarthy, "Anita Bryant Sick;
And There's No Sympathy U p T h e r e For Gays," Husband Urges Repeal of Gay Rights," Min-
People, 6 June, 1977, p . 36. nesota Daily, 20 April, 1978, p. 15 (from p. 1).
81 Brenda Ingersoll, "St. Paul Repeals Gay- 86 W. F. McPheron, " T h e Gay Rights Pro-
Rights Protection," T h e Minneapolis Star, 26 posal: Yes," Minneapolis Tribune, 22 April,
April, 1978, p . 19A (from 1A). 1978, Opinion p. 4.
 ANALYSIS OF IDEOLOGIES
which information is put into agents to
make them better people, is consistent
with a focus on action. Amis' suspicion
of a pluralistic society may also lead to
a distrust of difference in education.
Thus, children may be made to learn
Standard English no matter what their
culture or condition upon entering
school. Because of the power of edu-
cational action, learning standard truths
is supposed to mold agents to the norms
determined by majority rule.
CONCLUSION
In this essay I have tried to present
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 14:45 02 November 2014
the arguments for and against gay rights
in Miami and St. Paul as consistent and
unified. Each side is informed by power-
ful, unifying ideologies that feature
either agents or acts. One's ascription of
causative, defining power in the world
will be different depending on an agent
or act ideology. That ideology will de-
261
termine one's position on what it means
to be human, political, and sexual.
Edwin Black argues that rhetoric offers
to its audience a view of who they are.87
Implicit in every argument is the state-
ment, "A certain kind of person likes
this argument; agree to the propositions
of this rhetoric, and you will be just
such a person." Within the scope of this
paper I am unable to argue whether an
individual consenting to Pro or to Anti
rhetoric is "better" or more ethical. But
let the reader consider the implications
of either camp: tolerance, pluralism,
relativism, and a willingness to celebrate
difference—or—moralism, tyranny of the
majority, and an eagerness to impose
norms. The choice is not merely which
ordinances we will have, but what kind
of people we will be.
87 Edwin Black, "The Second Persona,"
Quarterly Journal of Speech, 56 (1970), 109-119.