"Joy and pleasure are as real as pain and sorrow and one must learn what they have to teach. . . ." -- Sean Russell, from Gatherer of Clouds

"If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right." -- Helyn D. Goldenberg

"I love you and I'm not afraid." -- Evanescence, "My Last Breath"

“If I hear ‘not allowed’ much oftener,” said Sam, “I’m going to get angry.” -- J.R.R. Tolkien, from Lord of the Rings

Tuesday, July 12, 2016

Parsing the GOP (Update; and Again)

Portions of the draft Republican platform have been leaking out, sort of like when meat goes bad andd starts oozing, and they're pretty awful -- but then, what does anyone expect when the likes of Tony Perkins are on the subcommittees?

This, via Box Turtle Bulletin, is a case in point:

  Fortunately, the New York Times has reprinted the draft language in full:
The data and the facts lead to an inescapable conclusion: that every child deserves a married mom and dad. The reality remains that millions of American families do not have the advantages that come with that structure. We honor the courageous efforts of those who bear the burdens of parenting alone and embrace the principle that all Americans should be treated with dignity and respect. But respect is not enough. Our laws and our government’s regulations should recognize marriage as the union of one man and one woman and actively promote married family life as the basis of a stable and prosperous society. For that reason, as explained elsewhere in the platform, we do not accept the Supreme Court’s redefinition of marriage and we urge its reversal, whether through judicial reconsideration or a constitutional amendment returning control over marriage to states.”

Let's start at the beginning, where I see the hand of La Perkins at play: one of his favorite mantras is some variation on "Social science has conclusively proven that children do best when raised by their biological parents." (I have to hand it to him for that one: it not only lies about the research, it misrepresents science as a discipline.) In this case, yes, the data and the facts lead to an inescapable conclusion, but it's not the one in the platform language: the data and the facts point overwhelmingly to the conclusion that children thrive in home where they receive love and support from two parents; if the parents are married, that only strengthens the household.

"[We] embrace the principle that all Americans should be treated with dignity and respect." Liar, liar, pants on fire: This is the party that wants to strip rights from women, ethnic and racial minorities, and LGBTs. This is sort of like the Catholic Church claiming that everyone should be treated with dignity and respect, even those "intrinsically disordered" gays.

And then there's the marriage part, which is utter nonsense. Aside from the man/woman=marriage thing (and man/woman marriages are still recognized, after all), the government does actively promote married family life. It's just that more people are able to get married. As for the the "Supreme Court's redefinition of marriage," that didn't happen. The Court did not address the definition of marriage, which in law is still an agreement between two consenting adults to form a new household. And the states are still able to regulate who can marry, as long as those regulations do not conflict with the federal Constitution.

There's more coming out of the subcommittees, most of it equally pernicious (the post by Jim Burroway linked above also includes a mention of their anti-trans statement), which I may comment on, but to be honest, rebutting the same lies over and over again gets tiring.

Update: If you want to see just how awful these people are, just look at the headlines this morning at The New Civil Rights Movement -- that's all the "culture war" stuff, which is bad enough, but from TPM, there's also this which I've dubbed the "Bundy plank":

In a nail-biting vote Monday, the committee tasked with writing the Republican Party's 2016 platform voted to include language calling on Congress to return federal lands to the states immediately. . . .

The amendment has new resonance this year after dozens of anti-government protestors took over the Malheur Wildlife Refuge in Oregon in January to protest federal control of lands. Many affiliated with that takeover had argued the federal government had no business managing federal lands.
(Emphasis added.)

That last bit is a real howler -- that's the way these goofballs think: the states should be managing federal lands, which by definition belong to all of us, not just the ranchers out west.

Another Update: RawStory has a piece on some of the planks and proposed planks coming out of the subcommittees. I was going to pick out the most outlandish to quote, but I couldn't make the decision.

Sidebar: On the trans news front, Burroway has a good, thorough summary of the status quo.

No comments: