The Observer, September 23, 2005
Volume XXXVIII, Issue 4
Conservative ideals changed by Christian Right; more intrusion less conservation
In the past five years we have seen the insurgency of religion into the political realm. For the sake of discussion, I will focus here on the Christian Right. Many of us know people who fit in this category, and we all know politicians who sometimes – at least when it is politically savvy. These people tend to associate with the Republican Party, and are also called Christian Conservatives, which is an oxymoron. Conservatives believe in what the name suggests: conservation, specifically of personal property, whether that be money, land, power, etc. The Christian Right has, in the past five years, managed to take away large amounts of power and personal responsibility from the people and hand it to the government.
One example of the attempts of this group to cede personal responsibility to the government can be seen in the proposed "Covenant Marriages" or "super-marriages" being discussed by the Ohio General Assembly. This optional form of marriage would require that couples go through pre-marital counseling, crisis counseling if there is the potential for divorce, and a forced waiting period for divorce, the length depending on whether the couple has children. The proponents of this effort, in this case a Christian coalition, said it would help prevent divorces. This is an example of certain religious individuals in society saying that they want to have the option of having the government enforce their sacred bond, and have the government set the rules that they will live by in their everyday personal lives.
Another example, also involving marriage, is the recently passed state amendment to limit marriage to one man and one woman. This amendment also says that state and local political entities cannot recognize anything that even mimics the likeness of marriage for those outside its criteria. There are, of course, obvious reasons why this new regulation, and others like it, will have no positive effects. Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people will still exist. They will just be unmarried. They will not be able to share certain rights and responsibilities heterosexuals take for granted. They will not be able to adopt children from a system that is overstressed, and they will not be protected by the same domestic violence laws that apply to heterosexuals. Here, Christians who claim to be conservative allow the state to dictate the way that persons live their private lives and the way they choose to relate to others. Many cannot now get benefits for a same-sex spouse from their state jobs. As a result, the state has more control over who can wed legally, how children can be raised, and with whom one may share personal benefits. Just a few decades ago, people who were not heterosexual were considered to be mentally ill. Then-Surgeon General C. Everett Koop said that "[t]he government has a perfect right to influence behavior to the best of its ability if it is for the welfare of the individual and the community as a whole." Here, the Christian Right appears to be adopting the same logic. The only difference is in the term "influence." Today, the Christian Right is more likely to use the word "coerce." This belief is hardly conservative by any definition of the word.
The GOP has allowed this to occur on its watch, and through its efforts, for the past few elections. It is time for the real conservatives in the GOP to wake up and join the moderates and liberals in questioning and criticizing the ever-expanding power of the government over individuals' lives. It is not federal spending on education, attempts at universal health care, or the federal anti-discrimination laws that threaten individual freedom and prosperity. Instead, it is the incessant attempts of the Christian Right and others like them to force their faith-based beliefs on society using the very power that they and society agree should be limited.
