Threats

Have you noticed that the concept of "the majority rules," which the right is so fond of when it comes to stripping marriage rights from gays, doesn't apply when it's a matter of getting something they want -- or stopping something they don't want -- in the legislative process? I'm thinking of the Stupak amendment, in particular, but also the Catholic hierarchy's threats in D.C. over the marriage bill there. Granted, the shenanigans in Congress are open to other interpretations, but it's the area where horse-trading turns into open threats: if you don't allow our measure, which upsets established public policy, establishes our personal religious beliefs as the law of the land, and essentially abrogates women's right to personal autonomy, then we'll defeat a bill that stands to benefit millions of people. It's more blatant in the Senate, where the goal is simply obstruction, pure and simple. (Yes, I know Stupak is supposedly a Democrat. Prove it.)

The Church is the most blatant of all: if you grant equal rights to gay and lesbian citizens, we'll pull the plug on our social service work -- which, by the way, according to its own PR, is an essential concern of the Church. They wonder why they are losing adherents. Perhaps their flock has discerned the sharp disconnect between what they say and what they do. Most of us call it "hypocrisy."

Funny how that works.

Update: If you think I'm overstating my case, note this comment from one of Sullivan's readers:

I'm truly at a loss for words at this story. I was raised Catholic my whole life, but was between parishes when it came time to make confirmation in middle school. I took charge of my religious life in high school and college and decided to finally be confirmed earlier this year because I cannot live my life any other way except by the tenants (sic) of the Gospel. This "threat" is so contrary to everything I've learned about service through the Church that I'm just completely numb.