Conservatives prevail when the economy is the issue — but not when it comes to what used to be called “social issues.”
(Page 2 of 2)
In Marriage and Caste in America: Separate and Unequal Families in a Post-Marital Age, Kay Hymowitz reported that “it is largely low-income twenty-somethings who are having a baby without a wedding ring.” The women forgoing husbands “are precisely the ones who can least afford to do so.” She also said that “virtually all” children whose families earn more than $75,000 a year “are living with both parents.”
The culture war presses on with undiminished zeal. The FRC’s “Index” has not been reported by the major media, who focus obsessively on “the drop in teen births.” It is not the age but the marital status of parents that matters-but try telling that to Rob Stein of the Washington Post.
FOR SOME YEARS, there has also been an organized pretense that male/female differences are more acculturated than real. With good training and propaganda it is imagined that such differences can be eliminated. Hence the push to house college students without regard to gender — not just on the same dorm but in the same room. The earlier goal, to thrust women into combat, was similarly motivated.
The feminist ideologues will certainly fail in their campaign to homogenize gender. Male and female will remain starkly differentiated, as always. It’s remarkable, though, that the attempt has been made, showing the fanaticism of the feminists. They have gone so far as to play into the hands of promiscuous men who have long embraced sex without consequences, otherwise known as the Playboy Philosophy. With a few exceptions, feminists have reinforced the sexual revolution rather than countered it. They see inequality of any description as an abomination and as something that must be stamped out.
Homosexual activists show a comparable fanaticism. They won’t rest until their goal — moral approval by the pope — has been achieved. Feeble as the Catholic hierarchy has been since the Second Vatican Council, especially on sexual matters, such a surrender in Rome is not in the cards. The repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” may itself have unintended consequences. Some of those who engage in homosexual activity fear being “outed” by other gays more than they fear “straight” disapproval. The pretense is that “openness” is the desideratum where gays are concerned, but the whole subject remains fraught with taboos. We’ll see what happens. It may well be that not much will happen, as those urging DADT repeal have said. The inborn male-female attraction is so strong that those who do not experience it at all are few — certainly far less than the touted 10 percent of the population. Homosexuals may well pose more of a threat to each other than to society at large.
The agenda of some culture warriors seems to be to apply the principle of consent to all human action. Exchange by consent — goods for money, or goods for other goods — is the great free-market principle, and the unstated social goal of non-socialists in the West now may be to reduce all relations to the principle of consent: divorce by consent (omitting the children of course, because they are likely to be under the age of consent); military service by consent, suicide by consent, sodomy by consent; abortion… well, wait a minute, that’s unilateral because the little critter inside the womb isn’t a human being yet so doesn’t have to be consulted.
To the godless, all things may seem possible without God, but Western Civilization will not be possible. We’ll get a different God, and Mohammed is his prophet.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?