"Defense of Marraige" as the Fundy War On Women

[JHB]

Found a post by Patrick O'Heffernan at Seeing the Forestthat's worth bringing to peoples' attention, since like Social Security "reform", tort "reform", and tax "reform", it's important to keep in mind it's advocates' REAL goals, not just the explanation they put put for public consumption:

-----
Out of public view, Bryce tells conservatives something different –he lays out the real reason for the protection of marriage campaign. Writing in the ultra-conservative magazine , The Family in America, he says that he and other conservatives behind the campaign are not really concerned about same-sex marriage; they really want to force women back into submissive, trapped, traditional wife roles like those described in the Old Testament of the Bible. Their real goal is to roll back the last 40 years of the women's rights successes, end no-fault divorce so women have to stay marriage whether they like it or not, close daycare facilities, and defund all domestic and international family planning programs in order to get women back under the thumb of men where they belong . To speed up this re-enslavement of women, they advocate against pension benefits and Social Security which they claim have led to the breakdown of the intergenerational family as seniors are no longer dependent on the goodwill of their grown children and can't be exploited as baby sitters so wives can have more babies.
---
The goals of these strategies are both short and long term. In the short term, the conservatives and the Christian Right are building a bundle of issues around marriage that they can use to excite and possibly expand their evangelical base without turning off non-evangelical Christians. After all, who is against strengthening marriage?

Additionally, by disguising their intentions as support for marriage, they hope to fool women, a traditionally Democratic constituency, into supporting Republicans in the 2006 and 2008 elections. The conservative communications machine is now using these messages to define marriage their way, create the “conventional wisdom” that marriage is in trouble (it is, but mostly in the red states and the Bible-belt), and that reforms are needed in government policy to protect it.
In the long term, the right’s goals are more Machiavellian. Married women, especially married women in male-dominate marriages, tend to vote for Republicans somewhat more than single women do, especially if their husbands are Republican. Conservatives have calculated that narrowing women’s options and channeling them into “godly” marriages where they are re-enslaved as “submissive wives” will increase female Republican voters over the long term. And in the very long term, daughters of these marriages will be raised to forgo college and get married and have large families – the profile of Republican voting women, thus guaranteeing a growing population of re-enslaved female Republican voters.
----more----
http://seetheforest.blogspot.com/2004_12_01_seetheforest_archive.html#110262369177395037

[undergroundpanther]

1. Fundees

Sayy...They don't hate freedom and democracy... BUT
They hate everyone elses freedom and democracy scares the hell out of these fucking control freak asshole bible beating bullies.These corrpted pigs who use the concept of freedom to justify slavery,elitism,feuadalism and torture..Fuck'em all.
And the retarded superstitious bibler god dolts that blitlely accept the con that screws us all.

[neweurope]

2. "daughters of these marriages will be raised to forgo college...

and get married and have large families" The German Nazis gave medals to women with large offspring. Is that being planned in the US yet?

Oh, it's all sounding so dèja-vu these days...

[Nikia]

3. Gay marriage is a threat because of gender roles too

Besides the "gay sex is a sin" aspect of thing, they are also disturbed that at least one partner in same sex marriage would not be able to fullfill their appropriate gender role. They are of the opinion that the man should be head of the household, which is messed up if there are two men or if there isn't a man in the house. I think that they also fear that there many women are really lesbian or bisexual to some extent and would stop marrying men and marry each other especially if most men turn into their ideal male who will keep their women in their place. If they really think that sexuality is a choice, it would be a smart choice for women not to be heterosexual under their ideals.

[BuelahWitch]

4. Bryce Christensen needs his smug, pompous ass kicked

As a woman who lived in Utah for 20 years, these yohos think that "as Utah goes, so goes the nation." Well, I couldn't give a rat's ass about
supporting "traditional marriage." It didn't do my mother or maternal grandmother any damn good. I've made more money in the last five years than either of them ever did (and I'm in the lower middle class bracket)
and I don't need or want anyone to tell me how to live my life.

I certainly hope that the majority of women who aren't tied to a Fundie church (and that includes Mormons) will NOT heed the directions of this
wanna be slave owner!

[nostamj]

5. the RIGHT is WRONG

but they DO have an agenda and they feel empowered to PUSH it now more than ever...

This is a continuation of a piece that was written for a 'dystopia' thread in the new Writing forum. Yes, it's a nightmare scenerio, to be sure. But, if the fundamentalists are allowed and even encouraged to continue their agenda, it is a nightmare we could see coming to pass here.

From: The Diary of Dan Frank

Outside Ithaca, NY. In the year of our Bush 2007

The Fundamentalist Papers

The entire purpose of The Fundamentalist Papers was to gain popular support for the then-proposed ReConstitution. Some would call it the most significant public-relations campaign in history; it was, in fact, the bedrock document for the secularization of the United States as a sovereign Christian nation.

If enough of us are writing these things down, perhaps a record will remain. That will have to be reason enough to continue.

By the time The Fundamentalist Papers, as they came to be known, were enacted into law, we knew it had become inevitable. The perverse and parasitic marriage between wealthy men controlling virtually the entire economy–including virtually all news and entertainment–though their metastacizing corporations and the terrified and enraged masses ready to remake the nation in their "Christian" vision was locked in holy stone.

In the months following the nuke attack in South Florida and the LNG explosions in the Pacific Northwest, a panicked populace was artfully driven into the arms of the most aggressive of the evangelical conglomerates, Our God's America (OGA). OGA's leaders, Pat Roberston and Jerry Falwell, the twin pillars of American christian hypocrisy, stated their organization's goals unequivocally–the restoration of the country's fundamental Christian foundation.

History, be damned!

...to be continued.

[elehhhhna]

6. When a man loses control of everything else, he becomes a

tyrant to his family. That's all he's left with to control.

[JerseygirlCT]

7. Exactly and that's how they intend to pacify large numbers of

supporters when the economy and the world go to hell. Don't look at the war or the diminishing power of your paycheck -- concentrate on being the king of your castle.

It's so sick, but I do think this is part of their plan.

[elehhhhna]

8. This is a big motive for Muslim Fundamentalism, imho

[Disturbed]

9. Insanity will reign?

Any religious person believes prayer should be balanced by action. So here, in support of the Prayer Team's admirable goals, is a proposed Constitutional Amendment to codify marriage, as they enjoin, on biblical principals:


A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between one man and one
or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5)


B. Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines, in addition to his
wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)


C. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a
virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)

D. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num

25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

E. Since marriage is for life, neither this constitution nor the constitution of any
State, nor any state or federal law, shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he
refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe. (Gen. 38:6- 10; Deut 25:5-10)

[JerseygirlCT]

10. Yes, I agree

they can keep the masses horribly poor, so long as every man has absolute control over the lives of his wife (wives) and children. The Saudis have promulgated this very successfully.

I don't think there's much difference with the Christian fundamentalists.