My new book “Debating Same-Sex Marriage” launches next week. Some early discussion up at Family Scholars.
Back in 2004, Thomas Franks wrote a famous book entitledWhat’s the Matter with Kansas? in which he lamented working class white people’s choices to vote their “values” rather than what (in his not-so-humble opinion) were their “genuine” economic interests. Why didn’t the working people of America identify as liberals and vote Democratic?
“You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years . . . it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion . . . as a way to explain their frustrations.”
From the National Catholic Register:
Maggie Gallagher, who leads the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, together with the psychiatrist Marcella Colbert and the canon lawyer Sister Maximillia Um, asked: “Does divorce make us happier?” In the wake of no-fault divorce, that question was rarely been asked, and struggling married couples were more likely to believe that divorce would cure their unhappiness.
Thursday in Memphis, the town where Rev. Martin Luther King gave his life for civil rights, a group of black church leaders, many of whom marched with Rev. King, met to make a stand on marriage.
More than a dozen pastors and civil rights leaders called on Pres. Obama to reverse his decision and to tell him gay marriage is hijacking the civil rights movement.
“I marched for civil rights and I can tell you: I did not march one inch, one foot, one yard, one mile for same-sex marriage,” said Rev. Bill Owens. “No right is a civil right if it’s not square with God.” (Bill Owens is also a liason to black churches for the National Organization for Marriage.)
Really guys, you can make up whatever you want, but you can’t make up what I think.
A reader asks Maggie Gallagher: What would you say to those who compare opponents of gay marriage to racists who oppose interracial marriage?
Video of Maggie rejecting the racist comparison.
On Politico: “GOP Leaders on Gay Marriage: The Sounds of Silence”
President Barack Obama’s embrace of same-sex marriage was viewed for so long as such a risky move that operatives in both parties expected it to drop like a bomb, handing Republicans a powerful wedge issue in an election year.
Instead, it’s landed like a feather.
Top Republican officeholders went out of their way Thursday to try to shift the conversation back to the economy. The GOP’s House and Senate campaign committees practically ignored it. And prominent Republican strategists are warning the party to steer clear of it.
One notable exception is Ed Gillespie, a top adviser to the presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney. Gillespie predicted on MSNBC that Obama’s support of same-sex marriage would become a significant campaign issue. And, signaling divisions within the party, cultural conservatives said Romney would be foolish not to capitalize on Obama’s announcement. But Romney himself made no mention of it Thursday during a fundraiser and public event.
Can Social Issues Win?
This was the week when social issues trumped the economy in the news.
Here’s a rough timeline: On Sunday, Joe Biden’s endorsed gay marriage on national TV. On Monday, the media started jumping on Pres. Obama, asking where he was on the issue. On Tuesday, 61 percent of people in a key swing state–the state which hosts the Democratic convention this year–solidly rejected gay marriage.
On Wednesday, Jay Carney got beat up by multiple reporters on where the President stands on marriage. The Washington Post published a story stating that one in six of Pres. Obama’s key “bundlers” (the guys who raise $500,000 or more) is openly gay. By Thursday, the heat from donors and the media was too much and Pres. Obama threw in the towel on the charade that he opposes gay marriage.
Pres. Obama did a high-profile interview on ABC endorsing gay marriage.
The wall of hatred now directed at anyone who opposes gay marriage or traditional understandings of sex and gender is worth mentioning. Because it tells us what gay marriage is about. Not pluralism, not live-and-let-live, but establishing a new public morality which will not be optional.