I'd like to continue the conversation begun in my previous post "How the GOP Could (and Should) Come Back". In that post, I argued that:

There's no reason the GOP couldn't win by taking policy stands more or less the same as those that won elections for Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, but by offering an approach that rhetorically emphasizes precisely the opposite values. In short, Republicans might offer a style of governing that emphasis different priorities than the Democrats while offering essentially the same program.

It seems that most of the comments focused on a different issue than that raised by the post: whether or not the Republican party is likely to adopt a post-ideological, post-partisan, pragmatic approach. And few think that the GOP in its current incarnation will do so, and I wholeheartedly agree with that assessment. It's right that the GOP is in a wilderness; but it remains to be seen just how dark and deep the forest is, and when they will find a clearing or exit.

One commenter expressed the sentiment:

What you are saying is this: GOP could be basically Democrats but pretend that they are republicans. Nice dream but fat chance.

That's part of it (hey it worked for Bill Clinton, didn't it?), but it's not quite right because it takes a shortsighted view of politics. I'm not merely suggesting GOPs become "stealth Democrats"; I'm saying that if they become more pragmatic and less rigid, then they can see how their core principles (not ideology, but core values) can be applied in fresh ways that lead to new policy opportunities and priorities.

Let's look at an issue that's dear to my heart as a staunchyly pro-same-sex marriage Democrat and an author of two books on gay culture, politics, and philosophy. Same-sex marriage could be a winning issue for both political parties; however, both parties would be attracted to different values that the policy embodies.

Progressives embrace same-sex marriage primarily as a civil rights issues and freedom of choice, a position that puts them in the position of being seen as taking an "anything goes", relativistic stand. Conservatives embrace same-sex marriage because it's pro-family, and it expands who's included in the definition of family by recognizing gay and lesbians are part of families and need to be included in society's traditional institutions.

Therefore, Republicans could strongly embrace same-sex marriage as a pro-family issue, and simultaneously oppose laws that weaken traditional marriage (e.g., domestic partnership legislation). They could become advocates of same-sex marriage because of its conservative virtues, essentially encouraging responsibility and an end to non-marital sexual activity across the board.

So, the GOP could couple their pro-family agenda with fresh ideas about using government to discourage divorce, and make an anti-divorce campaign central to their politics. For example, the GOP could promote voluntary "covenant marriage laws" (laws that give soon-to-be-married couples the option of selecting a form of marriage that makes divorce much more difficult). Taking a firm stand against DIVORCE could be the hot new issue with which they rally their Religious Right base.

An anti-divorce politics would probably resonate with their base, perhaps even more so than an anti-gay agenda in the long-term, while perhaps winning converts from culturally conservative Democrats. I don't know that there's any polling on the younger generation's attitudes towards divorce, but it's quite possible that youth raised in an age where Brittney Spears and other celebrities have trivialized marriage could be attraced to a pro-family policy agenda that isn't just a mask for homophobia.

Over the long-term there will be a viable opposition party to the Democrats whether it's the GOP or an up-and-coming new party, and this will be a healthy development for democracy. The question, I think, is whether they can move from clinging to old, out-of-touch issues to new both-and approaches that emphasize conservative values without prejudice.