What is conservatism?
Who belongs within the conservative movement? Who should be excluded? It’s a question which has been burning on the Right over the past two months.
Personally, I don’t believe the Dissident Right has any stake in the electoral success of the conservative movement or the Republican Party. There is no reason to believe that Conservatism, Inc. is capable of conserving anything or that the Republican Party will use any electoral mandate from voters to either change our culture or make meaningful policy changes for its base. Indeed, Conservatism, Inc. has openly embraced homosexuality is now even more repulsive than it was before Trump won the presidency in 2016.
I wrote about the ongoing Twitter porn wars. *ducks head* | The misguided war on pornography and the return of right-wing puritanism https://t.co/H7xrP0VLV5— Casey Given (@CaseyJGiven) December 9, 2019
Casey Given writes this evening in The Washington Examiner about “the misguided war on pornography and the return of right-wing puritanism.”
“Some social conservatives are reviving a policy proposal straight out of the 1980s: banning pornography.
Right-of-center Twitter was ablaze this weekend debating the issue, largely instigated by Daily Wire blogger Matt Walsh and Republican lawmakers who called on the Department of Justice to take a tougher approach toward pornographers. One could easily dismiss this online banter as irrelevant, but it’s representative of a broader trend: A neo-Puritan zeal is infecting some members of the socially conservative right on a number of issues these days — from the panic over vaping to the freak-out over a drag queen story hour that sparked an intra-conservative debate over classical liberalism.
Social conservatives need to realize that we can handle pornography and other social ills without turning America into a Christian version of Saudi Arabia. America flourishes through choice, not government force. We must never let lazy moralizing force us to surrender our freedom to the government. Once we do, there’s no getting it back.”
BTW, Casey Given is a gay libertarian and executive board member of the DC Log Cabin Republicans who supports Trump’s Globohomo agenda. He supports #PrideMonth as “a celebration of individual autonomy.” Conservatism is gay liberalism.
In The Washington Examiner, the homosexual activist Brad Polumbo has agitated for everything from legalizing prostitution to ending the transgender military ban to policing the borders of the Right to exclude the Groypers in recent months.
Some conservatives like @MattWalshBlog want to revive government bans on porn.— Brad Polum-snot-nosed-lemming-bo (@brad_polumbo) December 9, 2019
But @CaseyJGiven writes for @dcexaminer: "We can handle pornography and other social ills without turning America into a Christian version of Saudi Arabia."https://t.co/6ZFMkxwEk6
"If social conservatives don’t embrace compromise LGBT rights legislation in good faith, they’ll surely live to regret it — that is, when they’re stuck living under the crushing Equality Act a decade from now."— Brad Polum-snot-nosed-lemming-bo (@brad_polumbo) December 9, 2019
New from me @dcexaminer: https://t.co/5pCoHQyvby
Some of the tradcon critics of Fairness for All object because it "codifies an immoral view of sexuality and gender" into federal law.— Brad Polum-snot-nosed-lemming-bo (@brad_polumbo) December 9, 2019
Basically, they think their religious morality should be law instead.
Sorry, no. That's theocratic. https://t.co/5pCoHQyvby
More good ink on the Fairness for All Act today from @brad_polumbo – this legislation is the right way to find a commonsense solution to protect the rights of ALL Americans. #LGBTQ #Equality https://t.co/CEkX8DCbdT— LogCabinRepublicans (@LogCabinGOP) December 9, 2019
The Trump campaign has been selling LGBTQ/pride-branded material for YEARS and the gay left just can't handle the challenge to their narrative – gay conservatives exist and have a home in the Republican Party. https://t.co/jItKlZuwm9— LogCabinRepublicans (@LogCabinGOP) December 5, 2019
Now, Brad Polumbo is agitating for the “Fairness For All Act” which is a sweeping new federal anti-discrimination law which would radically expand the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.
“In something of a plot twist, it’s a conservative congressman restoring sanity to the debate over gay rights and religious liberty. For too long, militant left-wing activists have sought to crush religious Americans, while many social conservatives have refused to budge an inch on legal protections for gay and transgender people. Thankfully, a sane coalition is finally entering the conversation.
With the backing of various religious and conservative groups, including the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Republican Rep. Chris Stewart of Utah, just introduced the “Fairness for All Act,” a bill that would finally update our federal anti-discrimination laws so they strike the proper balance between LGBT rights and religious freedom. Right now, federal anti-discrimination laws do not protect people on the basis of sexual orientation nor gender identity. …
Stewart’s proposed “Fairness for All” bill updates the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal laws to explicitly prohibit discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation in employment, housing, public accommodations, credit, federally funded services, refugee resettlement, and jury service. …
FFA would allow no discrimination against gay and transgender people in restaurants, lodging, entertainment venues, places of recreation, transportation providers, medical services, financial services, funeral homes and cemeteries, and medium-to-large retailers. This is well-warranted: No one deserves to be turned away from public, secular businesses because of who they are or whom they love. And large secular businesses open to the public have no legitimate claim for an exemption. …
But ultimately, compassion demands that even religious Americans make their peace with some form of meaningful legal protections for gay and transgender people. And if social conservatives don’t embrace compromise LGBT rights legislation in good faith, they’ll surely live to regret it — that is, when they’re stuck living under the crushing Equality Act a decade from now.”
I’ve saved the best for last.
If I wanted to live an Orthodox Jewish life, you know, before marrying a man, there were several specific communities I could have joined and Orthodoxed my heart out.— Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) December 9, 2019
Social conservatives don't really have this option.
If you believe your role is to impose morality and perfect humanity through coercion, you are a progressive.— Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) December 9, 2019
It doesn't matter which outcome you are pursuing.
I am HIV+ because I was raped by someone intentionally targeting people to infect.— Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) December 9, 2019
And to your point, I would be the exact person with the experience necessary to make this determination as I know the consequences otherwise. ???? https://t.co/QHP8AbBAGL
There needs to be service to match transmen and transwomen to trade body parts.— Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) December 10, 2019
Chad Felix Greene is an HIV+ Jewish homosexual who is a senior contributor to The Federalist where he writes about raising an autistic teenage boy with his husband. He believes that anyone who wants the state to play a role in regulating morality is a “progressive.”
“My husband and I find ourselves parents of an autistic teenage boy who looks to us for almost everything. To say my life has changed is beyond my ability to articulate. As for my future, I no longer have any idea what it could or will look like.
But I am grateful for all of it, for simply being given the chance to imagine more than I could before. As I prepare for what will be my first family Thanksgiving dinner in my adult life, I understand the kindness of this past year tangibly. …”
Let’s just say that Chad has an interesting Twitter feed: