Great Article!
In the desperate days before a significant election, the liberal establishment has chosen to refocus attention on social issues like embryonic stem cell research (with a sad, exploitative TV spot featuring Michael J. Fox) and same sex marriage (with a sweeping, outrageous new court decision in New Jersey - a decision which the judges chose to announce just days before America votes).
On both these divisive issues, liberals use lying language - habitually, deliberately, shamelessly. Concerning stem cells, the mainstream media regularly suggest that conservatives want to “ban stem cell research.” Aside from ignoring the essential distinctive between research involving adult stem cells (research that’s never been controversial) and science involving embryonic stem cell experimentation (which has always inspired sharp controversy), the talk of a “stem cell ban” hides the even more important difference between government permitting - and government promoting - a course of action. Conservatives don’t want stem cell research banned - but we don’t want our tax money used for that purpose. If Michael J. Fox and his friends want to raise private funds for the medical research they desire, then there’s no legal or political block to this undertaking. The money invested in his manipulative TV spot opposing Senator Jim Talent of Missouri (and distorting his record) easily could have gone directly to research on embryonic stem cells. I don’t want to ban that research - any more than I want to ban handguns (to cite another controversial issue of personal choice). But I’d strongly oppose a government program to buy revolvers for private homes - because people can do it themselves, and many (if not most) American taxpayers don’t want their money used that way. The stem cell issue isn’t a debate over scientific freedom - it’s a debate of governmental subsidies.
Similarly, the media moguls refuse to give up on the term “gay marriage bans” in reference to the eight ballot propositions before voters on November 7th. In most cases, these initiatives (like previous defense of marriage efforts) ban NOTHING. They merely define marriage as limited to one man and one woman. Such state constitutional amendments (like the Federal Marriage Amendment) could just as easily and accurately be described as “polygamy bans.” They have become necessary because of irresponsibly activist courts like New Jersey’s, that suddenly gives the legislature a 180 day ultimatum and orders the elected representatives of the people to fall into line when it comes to determining government support for intimate relationships. As with stem cells, the real issue isn’t an attempt to ban or restrict any sort of private behavior: it is, rather, a crucial argument over government policy. The fact that I don’t want government promoting gay relationships (with tax breaks, welfare benefits, legal privileges of all kinds) doesn’t mean that I want government to prohibit those relationships. As with stem cells, the proper governmental approach should be strict neutrality - not outlawing, and not endorsing gay intimacy.
The secular liberal establishment wants you to believe that such issues actually show the “extreme religious right” in an effort to impose our values on everyone else. This is, to put it directly, a pernicious lie. It’s our opponents who want to impose their values on the nation at large - by forcing the government that represents all of us to endorse, promote, sanction and pay for behavior which, though permitted as a matter of private choice, remains highly questionable as a priority for public policy.