The 'Pro-Family' Scam

RSS stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust mixx.com Share this on Facebook

Posted July 13, 2008 | 10:09 AM (EST)



Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

The last few weeks have shown that so-called pro-family organizations are some of the most useless, money-sucking scams in the world. With real families suffering from economic hardship in America, a declining birthrate in Europe and Google doubling the price of daycare for employees, the only thing right wing family groups want to discuss is their bizarre and all-encompassing fagela fetish.

Recently, The Brooklyn Paper, had a huge headline, "SPLITSVILLE: Brooklyn divorces up 30%." The article cited a number of reasons including, "when the economy tanks, so do many marriages."

One would think this would alarm so-called pro-family organizations and they would be out in force repairing marriages -- or at least looking for economic solutions to take the stress off couples. Unfortunately, as I walked around my Brooklyn neighborhood, I saw not one representative from the American Family Association.

Well, I take that back. I did encounter one of the group's representatives on CNN Headline News as we debated a Heinz mayonnaise ad in the United Kingdom that featured two men kissing. I'm sure the children of these broken marriages in Brooklyn will feel much better knowing Heinz pulled the ad and they can have gay-free mayonnaise at both mommy and daddy's separate houses.

A new study by the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University showed that in 2006, for the first time in U.S. history, a majority of births to women under 30 -- 50.4 percent -- were out of wedlock. New York Times columnist Bob Herbert points out that, "By comparison, when John F. Kennedy was elected president in 1960, just 6 percent of all births were to unmarried women under 30.

One imagines that this report might have startled "pro-family" organizations and they would have put their millions of dollars towards stopping this trend. No such luck. Instead, they are investing huge piles of money and manpower to pass anti-gay marriage amendments in Florida, Arizona and California. The upshot for "pro-family" groups is that if heterosexuals keep screwing up marriage, by the time gay people finally win the right nationally, we won't want to use it.

"Evangelicals of the older generation have become obsessed in almost a technical psychological sense in opposing gay rights," David Weddle, a professor of religion at Colorado College told the Colorado Springs Gazette. "The irony is that homosexuality is not a biblical theme."

Right wing organizations and their flocks want to be taken seriously, but their priorities and actions are reprehensible. For example, a middle school teacher was fired in Mount Vernon, Ohio last month after preaching in the classroom, refusing to remove his Bible and burning crosses onto the arms of pupils. You read that correctly -- he seared crosses on the body parts of impressionable students, as if it were a gang ritual.

Surely, reasonable people can agree that such behavior is inappropriate in the classroom. But, oh no, some of the yahoos in Mount Vernon believe their religion places them above the Constitution - so they are holding demonstrations in the town square. I wonder if these zealots would have the same reaction if a teacher were burning a Stars of David or Muslim crescents on the forearms of students?

A recent New York Times magazine article, "Childless Europe," explored why certain countries in Europe are losing population. The hopelessly out of touch Pope Benedict chimed in with his typically sunny advice. "Europe is infected by a strange lack of desire for the future," the Pontiff said. "Children, our future, are perceived as a threat to the present."

Instead of selfishness, as the Pope implied, it was the traditional values of the Pope that contributed to the problem. In societies that either offered a safety net or where men shared the burdens of child rearing, women were having more babies. However, when educated women were stuck at home and forced to do all the work -- such as in Italy -- they chose to have less children. Will the Pope now call on men to help out more at home or for countries to ensure daycare for families?

Finally, the Wall Street Wonder, Google, plans to raise the amount it charged for in-house day care by 75 percent. Under the revised plan, parents with two children in Google day care could see their yearly bill increase to more than $57,000 from around $33,000. This crushing blow to the family drove a few employees to tears.

Was the American Family Association in Silicon Valley raising hell and standing up for families? No, they ignored grimacing parents, so they could punish Ronald and Grimace by launching a boycott against McDonalds for supposedly having a gay agenda. Maybe the delusional scolds at the AFA thought they saw rainbow color fries, in much the same way they once accused the cartoon character Mighty Mouse of snorting cocaine.

Right wing organizations can be considered many things -- but certainly not advocates for the family. They inhale money, exhale anti-gay pollution and have done absolutely nothing for the traditional families they claim to represent. It seems the more such groups proliferate, the more the family deteriorates.

 
 

Comments
12
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- twofish See Profile I'm a Fan of twofish permalink

When these people say "family" they mean "patriarchy." Somewhere there's a fantasy of a society with a strict heirarchy, with the old men on top. They see this as their God-given right, and are ready to pitch brimstone at anyone who questions it. I think it comes from the first century Roman model, where the Paterfamilias had the right of life and death over the members of his household.

Pathetic really; the most pathetic part is how many people go along with it without quite realizing what they'd be in for if these people got their way.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:14 PM on 07/14/2008
- acv See Profile I'm a Fan of acv permalink

Great post! It"s so important we call attention to the agenda of these far right, intolerant Christian fundamentalists.
Like all religious extremists, far right Evangelicals are preoccupied with sex. Premarital sex and anti-gay agenda trump everything. Their rigid, absolutist beliefs make them incapable of tolerating different lifestyle choices, which is also typical of religious extremists. Different views are considered a threat. Their thinking is often articulated by statements like, "If you"re not with us, you"re against us."
It"s absurd we give these people a place at the table and it"s even more absurd we elected one president and others to congress. Bill Frist, Tom Delay, Rick Santorum and Trent Lott come to mind. These fanatics were so busy lecturing the country on thier superior moral values and attempting to prevent Terry Schiavo"s husband from making medical decisions for his wife, they ignored what was happening in the White House. These are also the people who think the decision to teach creationism in public schools is a good idea and should be decided at the local level, so your freedom from religion can be violated locally. Can you imagine that these people have been shaping public policy in the United States of America. Wow!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:12 PM on 07/13/2008
- Pyott See Profile I'm a Fan of Pyott permalink
Moderator's Pick

HuffPost's Pick

Conservatives and traditionalists do seem preoccupied with sex, don't they? In fact, they seem to have a strange, antiquated conception of it (among many other things): perhaps something along the lines of a moral "miasma," either perfectly good or wicked, according to the established rules they follow.

You're essentially dealing with people who have a 19th Century concept of the world. They simply dismiss most things that don"t conform with that initially-formed worldview, despite having virtually no demonstrably objective basis to support their claims. They're generally incapable of examining their own assumptions about what truly characterizes moral human behavior, rather than relying on passed-down perceptions which may in fact be wrong. Unfortunately, many also possess a far less savory characteristic " harboring outright antipathy towards homosexuals, which is not ultimately justifiable and is itself poisonous to society at large.

One of the great ironies here is that " were it either legal or acceptable to indiscriminately target an entire class of individuals to pursue a moral reform-oriented public policy objective " it's quite clear from any remotely objective analysis of history that the single social sub-group most in need of active social/moral reform would be heterosexual males. For, strictly speaking, it is within THEIR ranks one observes the greatest incidence of destructive, criminal, and anti-social behavior in our species; while homosexual men possess notably greater degrees of socially desirable traits, like empathy, and show significantly lower levels of physical aggression than heterosexual men.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:02 PM on 07/14/2008
- egal See Profile I'm a Fan of egal permalink

Sadly true.

At this point, those who tend to call themselves fundamentalists in any major religion tend to be extremists in actuality. Unfortunately, they're also the most outspoken, so we end up with those who actually follow the spirit of their respective holy books' teachings being invisible against those willing to use terrorist tactics religiously, economically, and militarily.

It's the same problem that infests so much of the political sphere--instead of focusing on real needs or values, the focus is on soudbyte-driven minutia and irrelevancies. Perhaps if the pro-[something that sounds virtuous] groups were actually for anything productive or relevant to their supposed stance instead of merely being anti-[something to spark fear] groups (or replace "groups" with "politicians"), we wouldn't be sitting in such moral, political, and economic squalor.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:57 AM on 07/14/2008
- Mass Irish 2nd Generation See Profile I'm a Fan of Mass Irish 2nd Generation permalink

Yes, the Republicans have been bouncing this ball for years, but it has pretty much gone flat for most Americans, except for the extremely stupid and those poor souls ideologically obsessed with the gays. When will the social conservatives wake up and finally realize the goals of the Republican Party to promote the interests of the wealthy and business and working families are small cogs in their thinking. Of course, they want mothers to work because it drives down the cost of labor. No more wages where a father could support his family on only his salary like in the past. Everyone in the family is fed into the business cycle. I don't know why these right wing preachers who are flunkies for the Republicans are not pelted with rotten vegetables by an outraged audience when they make public appearances? They are not serving God, but Mammon!

Film clips of former Senator Phil "Mean Smile" Gramm were on the talking heads shows this morning detailing his complaint that Americans are a bunch of "whiners". When he goes to lobby for his Swiss bank to his buddies in Congress and ask them to put the interest of foreign banks before the interest of Americans, isn't that a form of "whining"? Of course not! Not the way the MSM thinks.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:46 PM on 07/13/2008
- bgregs See Profile I'm a Fan of bgregs permalink

Just like the so called "pro-life" really means anti-choice, the "pro-family" groups are just a front for being anti-gay people!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:29 PM on 07/13/2008
- Rockerbabe See Profile I'm a Fan of Rockerbabe permalink

I haven't a clue as to what family values means. The only thing I know, is that these groups oppose everything that shows respect for the individual(s) as they make their way in the world. It seems to be all about preserving the status quo; where some get the benefits and the rest of us get to pay the bills and be f#$%*d at the same time.
I don't understand supporting hate in the name of preserving the family; how is hating a family member who is gay a family value?
I don't understand the hatefullness towards women and girls who are pregnant; denying female members the right to make decisions about their bodies and life direction. How is punishing women with children a family value (especially when the men don't want the children either).
I don't understand the general mistrust and hatefullness towards unmarried people (young and old); we all work just as hard as the married folks and often pay more in taxes!
I don't understand how denying a person medical benefits, right of survivorship, etc is a family value; since when is neglict and theft a family value?
I know I can be clueless at times, but this has always eluded me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:26 PM on 07/13/2008
- Lt See Profile I'm a Fan of Lt permalink

I believe that we could add one more point,

these so-called pro family values organizations are all part of the

evangelical war against humanity, and should be stomped out of existence,

or at least have their republicon sponsered political power removed

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:21 PM on 07/13/2008
- RPLinNYC See Profile I'm a Fan of RPLinNYC permalink

Right on! Great post. I hope they invite you back
on CNN.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:51 AM on 07/13/2008
- benne See Profile I'm a Fan of benne permalink

"Traditional marriage"? For whom? Which tradition? From which period? If we go by the so-called Old Testament, it would be one man, one wife, and one "handmaid." Is that the traditional marriage you are talking about? Please consider thinking about the kind of gender politics promulgated by the Obamas. It's very Reagan-1980s, when we pushed this myth of the way things never were.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:15 AM on 07/13/2008
- Sciguy See Profile I'm a Fan of Sciguy permalink

Excellent post, thanks!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:04 AM on 07/13/2008
- kjdwyer See Profile I'm a Fan of kjdwyer permalink

BRAVOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

That was a PERFECT description of the completely incoherent stance of right-wing "family values defenders." They are all over the map when it comes to explaining how gay people threaten marriage by wanting in on the franchise, and, as you so ably pointed out, completely absent in the face of the true threats to family stability.

I loved the tone, as well. Just snarky enough without taking away from your argument.

Nothing to add, just thanks for a great read.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:04 AM on 07/13/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in

 
 

 
 
Related Tags