I have to admit that the critics have a point and the selective treatment being dished out to Larry Craig should be applicable across the board by the party of "family values." That Craig is receiving different treatment shows the hypocrisy of the GOP - and "Values Voters" - when it comes to consistently supporting moral conduct. Here are a few highlights from a Raw Story article (http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Craigs_quick_condemnation_shows_hypocrisy_in_0830.html). Glenn Greenwald's analysis is most telling:
Less that 24 hours after he expressed regret for pleading guilty to disorderly conduct after an undercover cop said the Idaho Republican propositioned him, Craig was ousted from his committee posts in a decision Senate leaders said was "in the best interest" of the chamber. Meanwhile, it has been 52 days since Craig's GOP colleague David Vitter acknowledged the "serious sin" of soliciting a call girl, yet the Louisiana senator has not budged from his committee posts. Where Craig faced condemnation, Vitter received words of encouragement from colleagues -- or at the very least, silence.
Salon's Glenn Greenwald outlines some other possible explanations for the different treatment of Craig's and Vitter's sexual escapades. For one thing, Craig's vacant seat would be filled by a Republican governor, whereas Vitter would be replaced by a Democrat, further tipping the balance of power in the Senate. But Greenwald goes on to observe that attacks on gay Republicans have "no political cost" because they condemn none of the "values voters" upon which the party relies. Conversely, heterosexual perversion, divorce, and out-of-wedlock childbirth are substantial problems, especially in the very regions of the country where Republican support is highest, so the party is unwilling to lead moral crusades against those sins, Greenwald argues.
"The only kind of 'morality' that this movement knows or embraces is politically exploitative, cost-free morality," he says. "That is why the national Republican Party rails endlessly against homosexuality and is virtually mute about divorce and adultery: because anti-gay moralism costs virtually all of its supporters nothing (since that is a moral prohibition that does not constrain them), while heterosexual moral deviations -- from divorce to adultery to sex outside of marriage -- are rampant among the Values Voters faithful and thus removed from the realm of condemnation."
1 comment:
I think the GOP approach is summed up best by a former coworker (this is before I was out.) She said something about how she didn't see how gays could call themselves Christian to which I said the same way straight people who live together before marriage and have sex before marriage call themselves Christian. Her response, "Well, at least, that's natural." Bottom line is bigotry doesn't need rationality.
Post a Comment