Analysis: Why Same-Sex Marriage Bans Succeeded While Republicans Lost

The election of Barack Obama to the Presidency marks the beginning of a whirlwind adventure in sugar-coated socialism, the likes of which I predict will cause a bad case of voter’s remorse within two years.

It also marks the collapse of the Republican Party as it was.  There will be a massive purge of party machine heads, who will be replaced with leaders more amenable to working on real conservative economic and social “Marriage Values” programs.   I met with Missouri party leaders over the past couple of weeks, and a few tonight as well.  Most Republican leaders I have spoken with are ready to pick up the pieces and restart the Republican revolution, and do it right this time.  The ears are open, and they are looking for answers.

This passage of same-sex marriage bans in Florida, Arizona, and apparently California speaks volumes. How could “conservative” legislation win, while radical liberalism swept away Congress and the Presidency?   Because America is, at its core, far less liberal than  federal elections might suggest.

Republicans lost (again) because they failed to deliver pro-social reforms they promised in 1994.  When Republicans won the 1994 landslide, they had few actual policy ideas of their own, so they adopted Democrat ideas and put Democrats in charge of most social issues committees (such as Wellstone and Biden).  This further stimulated illegitimacy.  Even more women fell into poverty, have to “do it all”, and work full time as well. The numbers of women on welfare rolls declined only because single mothers also must work full time.  This left more children neglected or raised by kids down the street, resulting in higher rates of teen incarceration, drug use, crime, poor school performance, and illegitimacy.  There are few voters trapped in this system who are happy.  Republicans got it between the eyes on November 4th.

Republicans were also blamed for the home loan and banking collapse, which again was caused by liberal Democrat home-loan policies that Republicans did not fight hard enough.  George W. Bush is being held responsible for all these problems, despite the fact he was nowhere near Washington when legislation creating these problems was passed by Congress.

Obama won on anger, not because America has become radically liberal.  Obama captured the anger and the dreams, and Americans bought it.  Anger is the most dangerous of all human emotions, and it flowed out of millions of ballot boxes on November 4th.  The same thing happens to the first person standing in front of a pack of angry bulls.

Analysis of the Same-sex marriage issue is an excellent opportunity to realize a much broader set of emerging conservative social policy directions based on a solid combination of “Marriage Values” social and economic policies positively addressing problems at the source in ways helpful to women, men, children, the economy, and the taxpayer.

Many conservatives and liberals complain intensely about the problems that radical feminists wrought via the divorce revolution.  Conservatives never discovered firm political or policy ground to get in front of feminists.  The problems grew tremendously since 1965.  We still have not yet found productive politics and policies to unwind this problem to let womena and men have what most of them want and need.

In the mid-1980’s feminists launched “gay marriage” as a victim-class attempt to feminize marriage entirely.  Female-female marriage places feminists in full Supremacist control of the nuclear family and child-rearing.  Their idea is to leave men with no constitutional rights to be a part of legitimate society, and to render them nothing more than servant to the established child support (nee welfare) state.   “Gay marriage” victimology always expands into “same-sex” marriage when N.O.W. shows up to impose their agenda on unwitting courts or legislatures, because N.O.W. has always been out to accomplish much more than permitting lesbians to marry each other.

Here is the plain-earth secular Marriage Values analysis that conservatives failed to recognize and apply in court cases they lost:

Heterosexual marriage is the only institution that fully erases all physical, economic, social, and culturally-imposed differences between women and men.  It is the only institution that harnesses the entire human race to work hard together and raise children in prosocial manner.  It is the only institution that naturally assures everyone equal rights of every description regardless of race, sex, or creed.  Same-sex marriage is the polar antithesis of equality because it maximizes every tangible disparity that exists between women and men.

The above analysis predicts that same-sex marriage would be much more attractive to feminists than men.  Massachusetts has been permitting same-sex marriages since 2004, and is the only state with enough historical data to study.  80% of same-sex marriages in Massachusetts involve females, and only 20% involve males.  This is precisely what a social and economic cost/benefit analysis predicts: men get little or nothing out of marrying each other.

Like the ERA, same-sex marriage is a equal-rights trojan horse.  It must be stopped. The greatest socioeconomic problems are still caused by the feminist-inspired divorce revolution.  The immediate and downstream costs to women, children, men, and the taxpayer are horrendous. We see them reflected every day in the media .. the plight of dissatisfied heroic single mothers; children abused or neglected, children in trouble, and “deadbeat dads” whose crime is often that they, too, are poor or underemployed.

These problems cannot be impacted by subsequently turning the entire institution of marriage over to feminists.  Major contemporary problems such as poverty, crime, teen pregnancy, child discipline, and massive welfare outlays will abate only when the divorce revolution itself is unwound, federal programs modified, and heterosexual marriage once again becomes the most advantageous route to success for all Americans.

When Republicans finally realize the vast importance of enacting solid “Marriage Values” policies, America will stand a chance of realizing what Republicans promised in 1994.  Proposed policies include a “Welfare to Marriage” transition, effective prevention of family violence, marital discord, social violence, child abuse, and traffic fatalities via programs that apply the courts to help responsible spouses get a drug or alcohol-abusing spouse into treatment and recovery.  Marriage Values policies will ensure that marital responsibility is always rewarded in the event of divorce or unwed childbirth, and marital irresponsibility always gets shown the door.

Far fewer Americans will become trapped in the tragically problematic diaspora of marriage-absence when federal programs expect and reward marital responsibility, and no longer bait Americans into making very bad choices that harm themselves and their children.

The passage of same-sex marriage bans will help keep the liberal core of radical feminism in check during the next few years.  The divorce revolution should be held in check.  Feminists will not be able to convert the discontent of single mothers into “female-female” marriage.

In the meantime, we must rebuild conservative values from the ground up, beginning with a refocusing on the fundamental tenets of social conservatism, capturing what was not realized during the Reagan era, recognizing that pro-marriage reforms are a prerequisite to the success of economic plans within a balanced budget.

The discontent of single mothers and disenfranchised fathers will be unresolved and continue to fester under Obama.  We must act, preparing the Republican party to apply this massive energy towards winning a second Republican landslide, based on Marriage Values, with a sound set of social and free-marriage-market economic policies ready to enact upon victory.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 4th, 2008 at 10:21 pm and is filed under Drug Policy, Economics, Family, Feminism, Politics, Vox Populi. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. | 1 views | Trackback | Print this page |

| More from David R. Usher