Culture Warriors category archive

Via Job’s Anger.

What does one wear to a shotgun wedding: A morning suit or hunter’s orange?

It was right there, but I didn’t twig to it at all. Adam Lee saw it, though:

Even before landmark rulings like Obergefell, religious groups were engaging in this massive-resistance strategy. Catholic charities have shut down in both the US and the UK, ending services like adoption assistance and foster care, so as not to have to give benefits to same-sex partners of employees or consider same-sex couples as prospective parents. Catholic schools are also notorious for firing popular gay teachers and principals in the face of protests by students – and some are responding by making their morality clauses even more draconian.

These tactics echo the civil rights era, when some municipalities shut down their public schools entirely, as well as other public accommodations like pools, rather than desegregate them. In the same way, today’s religious conservatives are so determined to continue discriminating against women and LGBT people that they’re willing to deprive everyone of rights and privileges rather than grant equal treatment to people who, in their eyes, don’t deserve it.

Follow the link to see why he thinks this might be a good thing.

Republicans’ pervy fascination with the sex lives of others fuels an active fantasy life.

Shorter Bill Cosby (and many many others): “But she really wanted it.”

Yeah, Bill (and many many others). Keep telling yourself that.

I’m not big fan of Amanda Marcotte. I think that she often sacrifices truth to polemic. My scrupulous efforts to remain neutral in these electrons should indicate the degree to which she tickles my skeptic bone.

Nevertheless, I think she is on to something in her attempt to make sense of the embrace by Rand Paul, self-styled sort of glibertarian, of the right-wing religious politics of pervy preoccupation with the sex lives of others. Here’s a bit from her piece at TPM:

In their pure, ideological forms, libertarianism and Christian conservatism do seem at odds. In theory, libertarians should have a hands-off approach when it comes to social issues, not wanting to tread on the individual’s right to get gay-married or have an abortion if he or she wants. In practice, however, many so-called libertarians like Paul are just as rabidly anti-choice and anti-gay rights as their conservative Christian brethren. But politics is often more about optics than policy, and Paul is struggling to gain the trust of evangelicals whose enthusiasm for bringing the government boot down on the neck of gays and women understandably makes them wary of the word “libertarian.”

This problem is made all the more difficult by the fact that Paul is still running a campaign trying to convince younger voters that he’s out to protect their civil liberties, a message that’s hard to convey when you’re simultaneously pandering to religious right voters who want said liberties stripped from gays and women. Paul’s attempts to thread that needle have been largely incoherent, telling religious-right audiences that he’s totally on their side and then turning around and telling others that he doesn’t see attacking abortion or gay rights as a priority.

Then there’s the other, simpler explanation, the one I favor:

A “Libertarian” is a Republican who’s ashamed to admit it.

Some persons wrap their prejudices in the flag; others wrap theirs in the cross. Some use both as packaging. When you see such packaging, though, it’s a fairly safe bet that truth-in-labeling has naught to do with it.

Look closely and you can peer through the camouflage. Neil Elliott, responding to an article in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, does just that. A snippet:

Pence (the writer of the column to which Elliott responds–ed.) would, I presume, be shocked — shocked! — to find himself compared to racist groups. After all, he counts himself among the benevolent white Christians who “sent clergymen to march­— and then . . . federal troops to protect” after the racist bombing of a church that killed four black girls in Birmingham, Ala., in 1963. But perhaps he forgets that the Birmingham bombers were themselves Christian extremists, disaffected from the Ku Klux Klan, who felt empowered by a righteous cause, one of them invoking “the Lord” and “Judgment Day” at his sentencing.

The unreflective racism is just beneath the surface. Pence writes of our nation’s “Christian heritage,” but is especially concerned to excoriate President Obama for not galvanizing Americans to holy war. He wants us to unite with “black Christian nations”: Are we, then, a white Christian nation? He writes of “us” finding common cause even with “the brown-skinned neighbors who have been growing our food and roofing our houses for the last half-century.” In his mind, do all of us who are neither Christian nor white just cease to be American?

Via Kos.

Badtux cuts to the quick:

In the end, there are no nation lines on the globe when you look at it from outer space. Nations are an invention of Man, not of God, which makes it hilarious that there are so many patriotic “Christians.”

Follow the link.

Thom looks at why “sanctuary cities” came to exist in the first place.

Michael Smerconish, who from time to time displays a level of common sense that belies his label as a “conservative commentator,” explains how Bill Cosby shot himself in the foot through his own hectoring moralizing. Here’s a snippet.

Beyond the legalese, that was the true predicate on which Judge Eduardo C. Robreno based his decision to unseal documents related to a civil suit filed against Cosby 10 years ago.

“This case, however, is not about defendant’s status as a public person by virtue of the exercise of his trade as a televised or comedic personality,” wrote the judge in his 25-page opinion. “Rather, defendant has donned the mantle of public moralist and mounted the proverbial electronic or print soap box to volunteer his views on, among other things, child-rearing, family life, education, and crime.”

Citing precedent, Robreno concluded that Cosby had “thrust himself into the vortex of these public issues” and had “voluntarily narrowed the zone of privacy that he is entitled to claim.”