Pat Buchanan writes a love letter to Vladimir Putin, calling him a beacon of “moral clarity” (read: authoritarianism). Given Buchanan’s lifelong love of dictatorial strongmen, this is hardly a surprise. But some of the arguments he makes along the way are rather entertaining.
With America clearly in mind, Putin declared, “In many countries today, moral and ethical norms are being reconsidered.”
“They’re now requiring not only the proper acknowledgment of freedom of conscience, political views and private life, but also the mandatory acknowledgment of the equality of good and evil.”
Translation: While privacy and freedom of thought, religion and speech are cherished rights, to equate traditional marriage and same-sex marriage is to equate good with evil.
No moral confusion here, this is moral clarity, agree or disagree.
President Reagan once called the old Soviet Empire “the focus of evil in the modern world.” President Putin is implying that Barack Obama’s America may deserve the title in the 21st century.
This isn’t “moral clarity,” it’s merely simplistic moral coercion. The notion that same-sex marriage, or homosexuality in general, is a moral issue at all depends solely on allegedly divine command. If you don’t accept the Bible’s hopelessly outdated and childish commandments in this regard, there is no moral issue at all when two consenting adults love each other or just want to have sex with one another, regardless of their gender. Indeed, I would argue that the only moral dimension to it at all is in the immorality of imposing one’s religious beliefs on another person and discriminating against them. That is immoral. Two men or two women having sex has no moral dimension at all as long as it is consensual.
Nor is he without an argument when we reflect on America’s embrace of abortion on demand, homosexual marriage, pornography, promiscuity, and the whole panoply of Hollywood values.
Our grandparents would not recognize the America in which we live.
Moreover, Putin asserts, the new immorality has been imposed undemocratically.
The “destruction of traditional values” in these countries, he said, comes “from the top” and is “inherently undemocratic because it is based on abstract ideas and runs counter to the will of the majority of people.”
Does he not have a point?
Unelected justices declared abortion and homosexual acts to be constitutionally protected rights. Judges have been the driving force behind the imposition of same-sex marriage.
Except the majority of Americans support a woman’s right to choose. And an overwhelming majority of Americans support protecting gay people from discrimination, with a smaller majority now supporting marriage equality as well. And I have absolutely no idea what “because it is based on abstract ideas” could possibly mean. That’s Palin-level gibberish.
Attorney General Eric Holder refused to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act.
No Pat, that’s a lie. DOMA was enforced all along until the Supreme Court struck down the key section of it. Not defending it in court is not the same thing as not enforcing it. In fact, if they had not enforced it there would have been no court case for it to be overturned. This is not a difficult distinction to grasp, so I can only assume that Buchanan is lying rather than merely ignorant.