Sunday, January 16, 2005

Bush's Moral Collapse?

After all the fuss made by "religious conservatives" and their loyalty towards Bush in the recent election, I was wondering if they felt duped with the latest revelations about the newly re-elected president's nonchalance toward the two issues held most dear to the voters who cast ballots based on "moral issues": gay marriage and abortion (see below articles' excerpts.). The hypothesis pointed out in pre-election emails, from ideas broached by Thomas Franks in his book What ever Happened to Kansas?, is that right-wing politicians do not want to actually resolve these problems associated with lifestyle; they would rather be divisive during election season and get the evangelicals in a lather for voter turn-out, but then back-burner these issues after the election in order to save them for the next election cycle. Like clockwork, every election they drag out the gay issues, the abortion issues, etc., to get the wanted turnout at the polls, but predictably Bush is now distancing himself from these moral crusades.
Now, are evangelicals miffed that Bush has tabled the gay marriage ban and has appointed an AG who thinks kids should have abortion without parental approval? Where's Jerry Falwell when you need him? At least one person I know voted for Bush solely for his "moral issues" stances, and actually had called Bush a "loose cannon" on foreign policy. Do we now have the worst of all worlds? Just wondering if you feel used?

From CNN: "As a Texas Supreme Court justice, Gonzales' rulings implied he does not view abortion as a heinous crime," said Judie Brown, president of the American Life League, in a written statement.... As a member of the court, Gonzales ruled with the majority that some teenage girls should not be required to get parental permission for an abortion.

From MSNBC/Washington Post: 'No push on marriage amendment. On the domestic front, Bush said he would not lobby the Senate to pass a constitutional amendment outlawing same-sex marriage.
While seeking reelection, Bush voiced strong support for such a ban, and many political analysts credit this position for inspiring record turnout among evangelical Christians, who are fighting same-sex marriage at every juncture. Groups such as the Family Research Council have made the marriage amendment their top priority for the next four years.
The president said there is no reason to press for the amendment because so many senators are convinced that the Defense of Marriage Act -- which says states that outlaw same-sex unions do not have to recognize such marriages conducted outside their borders -- is sufficient. "Senators have made it clear that so long as DOMA is deemed constitutional, nothing will happen. I'd take their admonition seriously. . . . Until that changes, nothing will happen in the Senate."
Bush's position is likely to infuriate some of his socially conservative supporters, but congressional officials say it will be impossible to secure the 67 votes need to pass the amendment in the Senate.'

No comments: