But consider for a moment the bizarre reality a liberal-minded American like me faces these days. Those who we're told pose this dire threat to traditional marriage are June fucking Cleavers -- all they want is to make a good, loving home and have a life far too dull for me to even contemplate. And here we have these other folks who have anointed themselves the defenders of traditional marriage, and fought like Hell to keep June Cleaver from making that nice home for Ward and the boys (or Wanda and the boys, as the case may be), and they turn out to be a bunch of depraved bullies bent on nothing but their own, often perverse gratification. And year after year, scandal after scandal, they just seem to leave behind an almost endless string of broken homes and smoking wrecks of marriages.
The dissonance is so great that perhaps it's time to ask ourselves if we should keep calling these people "hypocrites." The charge is premised on the idea that religious conservatives are, in fact, "pro-family" in the first place. Given how frequently we hear of these tales of "hypocrisy," perhaps it's time to consider the possibility that being an amoral libertine is simply a facet of modern social conservatism -- a feature, if you will, rather than a bug.
The dissonance is so great that perhaps it's time to ask ourselves if we should keep calling these people "hypocrites." The charge is premised on the idea that religious conservatives are, in fact, "pro-family" in the first place. Given how frequently we hear of these tales of "hypocrisy," perhaps it's time to consider the possibility that being an amoral libertine is simply a facet of modern social conservatism -- a feature, if you will, rather than a bug.
No comments:
Post a Comment