Chips Down? Use the Gays!
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Elections, SexualityThe Religious Right is concerned that the tide is turning the other way, so they’re looking to a familiar political scapegoat…the scary gay!
But get this one…they’re now saying that gay marriage would inhibit their freedom of expression! Whoa…
To revive some of the emotions around the issue, several organizers said they were taking up the argument that legal recognition of same-sex marriages would cramp the free expression of religious groups who consider such unions a sin � an idea much discussed at the conference.“That is an issue that wasn’t around two years ago and one that is absolutely moving to the very forefront,� said the Rev. Donald Wildmon, founder of the American Family Association, a conservative Christian broadcaster and advocacy group.
Although that idea may seem far-fetched to many liberal or secular-minded voters, legal scholars across the political spectrum agree that authorizing same-sex marriages could present legal questions for some religious groups. A Roman Catholic group in Massachusetts, for example, recently stopped offering children for adoption rather than provide them to gay couples.
But wait…that’s not all. Look at the campaign tactics that are being pushed on the faithful. Thankfully they seem to be rejecting them:
Even in this crowd of nearly 2,000 Christian conservative activists, some balked at one tactic recommended to turn out church voters. In a workshop, Connie Marshner, a veteran organizer, distributed a step-by-step guide that recommended obtaining church directories and posing as a nonpartisan pollster to ask people how they planned to vote.“Hello, I am with ABC polls,� a suggested script began.
Some attendees complained that the script seemed deceptive, Ms. Marshner said in an interview afterward. She said that such disguised calls were a common campaign tactic, that it was just a suggested script and that she never recommended answering a direct question with a lie.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, who played host to the conference, said he was “upset� to learn of her instructions and condemned any deception.
Amazing.
This entry was posted on Monday, September 25th, 2006 and is filed under Elections, Sexuality. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
September 25th, 2006 at 5:34 pm
In both NZ and Australia the Exclusive Brethren Church has been far more politically active in the past twelve months than ever before to my knowledge.
Is there any indication of the EBC getting involved in the US? I ask the question because the Church head in Australia is reported as seeing “the establishment of government under God” as one of the final steps before Judgement Day.
One of the things to emerge from the EBC’s involvement in our past election is their use of survey techniques. One of the more interesting was brought to light by a lady who is in the business of population survey. When she was asked who she would vote for in the coming election she replied “Labour”. Her reply was greeted by loud laughter and “Surely not!!” from the surveyer. She pressed on this and discovered -
* The instructed reaction to the response “Labour” was “to express incredulity and amazement”.
* The surveyer was a student, undertaking “required study”, at the Exclusive Brethren Bible College.
September 25th, 2006 at 8:02 pm
Congrats, JG, on finally finding a constitutional penumbra that you don’t embrace. Now you can truly empathize when the conservatives when rights are miraculously found in the Constitution out of thin air, like, I don’t know, let me think…a substantive due process right to sodomy.
September 25th, 2006 at 9:13 pm
Hence the new slogan,”It’s only a sin if we don’t win.”
September 26th, 2006 at 1:24 am
Ahh DP…you’re so pure. I bow before your bullet-proof interpretations that would, at the very least, give Jefferson, Madison, Adams and Paine post-mortem stiffies.
September 26th, 2006 at 11:20 am
My only problem with gay marriage is … tradition.
I mean, if 2 men marry, which family pays for the wedding?
On the flip side… there should be plenty of booze at the reception!
September 26th, 2006 at 11:49 am
Well, don’t get me wrong, JG, I like sodomy as much as the next founding father. And who can read Romer or Lawrence without getting a little e-roused? I just wish the Supreme’s would cut the silly “case and controversy thing” and start writing homosexual Harlequin Romance novels with legal twists:
Justin Kennedy slowly lifted David Souter’s black robe, revealing the glowing white buttocks of such an ardent scholar. They embraced, “spooning in chambers” was their inside joke. “Have you read the Amicus from the ACLU,” Kennedy whispered, immediately feeling Souter’s gavel bang. “I have…” David responded. “I’m waiting for ooorrralll arguments,” he said with a long sigh, “before I reach any conclusion.”
Thank you, thank you…I’ll be here all week.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:10 pm
Thanks Dos. I think I need to go wash my eyeballs :)
October 18th, 2006 at 11:26 pm
The problem is, their politics of fear ends up working. Scapegoating is a VERY old political tactic. And it always works. Fear and hate sells.
October 27th, 2006 at 10:18 am
[...] UPDATE: I found this post, where the religious right were knowingly using deceptive push polling tactics to “push” this issue back into the minds of the faithful. [...]