Monday, August 15, 2011

New Right in 2012 could pose anti-gay threat

Although AlterNet articles can sometimes sound hysterical, Amanda Marcotte has an interesting perspective on what seems to be coming down the pike from the far Republican right in the election year in terms of social conservatism and anti-gay positions, link here

The first point, emphasizing anti-contraception rather than just anti-abortion, may be the most telling. It’s pretty obvious how that used to play into anti-gay attitudes decades ago when we had sodomy laws. But today the “new right” is sometimes using a new-old argument, “demographic winter”, claiming that the economically well off (read “white”) don’t have enough babies to replace their population. I’m surprised Marcotte didn’t get into this point more, or discuss the so-called “natural family” movement.

Another corollary could be that states, strapped for Medicaid funds to pay nursing home bills, will start to enforce filial responsibility laws against adult children, which could be especially punishing to the childless.  We could see the “culture wars” take a nasty right turn.

Would a Perry or Bachmann administration try to undo the repeal of “don’t ask don’t tell” (or maybe even go back to asking and forced outings?)? That’s an obvious risk. Romney I’m not as concerned about, because his behavior in public sounds a lot more temperate, and he says he will keep his religion out of his policies.  Perry wears his evangelical Christianity on his sleeve (although I do support his “loser pay” proposals for tort reform), and we all know about Bachmann’s husbands and the reports of reparative therapy at his clinic. 

Of course, I've seen some of this before. I lived in Dallas for most of the 1980s, and listened to the Moral Majority harp all the time, and then we had to fend off a horrible proposed extension of the Texas sodomy law in 1983 after the AIDS crisis broke into the media.  People who lived there probably remember the "Dallas Doctors Against AIDS".  I sure do.

Update: Aug. 16

The New York Times blogs, in a piece ("The Caucus") by James Dao, explains how a President Bachmann could reinstate the "old ban" (mandatory asking) by fiat, here.  And the Huffington Post has an article by SLDN's Aubrey Sarvis, "Somebody should tell Bachmann: Our military leaders ended DADT", here.  "Perhapth" with some arm twisting. A deeper point seems to be that someone with the irresponsibility of Bachmann should not be in office at all.  Someone who think's it's OK for the country to stiff people on due bills is a bit unpredictable.


No comments: