Giving in to the temptation to watch a video of Leslie Stahl's interview with Marjorie Taylor Greene on 60 minutes last week, I was amazed at how deeply the Georgia congresswoman is immersed in a world of her own creation. Certain questions seem to trigger monologues and replays of pre-recorded messages rather than getting a straight answer. Even a veteran journalist like Stahl couldn't get a straight answer from her that deviated from her pre-planned narrative and talking points. Facts didn't matter, as Stahl pointed out several times but were completely ignored in the response.
It was exactly what I expected. Initially, after watching it, I thought it made Greene look like the backward, cliche-spouting, conspiracy theory-chasing, white supremacist that she is. And if the intended result was to make more people on a national scale aware of just how extreme she is, and point out that Kevin McCarthy has elevated her status in Congress to some influential committees, especially the oversight committee, it achieved that. At least, I certainly hope that it did, at least, for a clear majority of voters.
What I would like to see from 60 Minutes now, in response, is someone who will wrap all of that up for the American people and properly categorize it as dangerous ignorance that needs to be rooted out of the government. Taylor Greene does not understand the constitution, the way a democratic republic works, or that democracy gives everyone in the country equal rights and an equal voice, at least in theory. But it is her false accusations, the twists in the language and perspective she attempts to create, that bother me more than anything. 60 Minutes needs to set the record straight, and so will the Signal Press.
Democrats are not Pedophiles
Greene kept insisting that support for sex-change operations for minors makes Democrats pedophiles. That probably plays well in some of the more ignorant corners of her Georgia congressional district, but her logic is flawed. It's political rhetoric, but when challenged on it, or asked to explain her position, it simply becomes her assertion.
The issues surrounding gender identity and gender dysphoria are complicated. I admit that I don't really have an understanding of the causes, the feelings, or the circumstances that cause transgender persons to have such a strong sense of gender identity different from their physical gender, or of the complications that cause gender dysphoria. And since I don't understand it, there's no way I can stand in judgement of people who do, or claim that their feelings aren't real, or tell them that if they pray hard enough or believe hard enough, this will just go away. I understand enough to know that this has to do with brain development, neural pathways and the chemical and hormonal balances that affect the brain's function. And I understand that the feelings they have about their gender identity are as much a part of who they are, and would be as impossible to change, as mine are.
The few transgender persons I've met are not sexual deviants or pedophiles, they are human beings with physical, mental and emotional circumstances beyond their control that have affected their identity. They have the same right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that all of the rest of us do, and they have the right to consult with the professionals in the psychology and medical fields who they believe will help them relieve their anxiety and enjoy life. They have the right, if they choose, to pray to God for help through spiritual transformation. And they have the right to reject that if they choose.
Supporting the rights of these people to get the psychological and medical help they choose on their own does not make one a pedophile. There's no pedophilia involved here, even if those seeking the help are adolescents. They are human beings, trying to understand something that most of us will never have to face. Supporting their right to make their own life choices doesn't have anything to do with pedophilia.
Democrats are not "Baby Killers"
Isn't it ironic that Christians, who claim to believe in the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible, and who claim to implicitly follow the gospel of Jesus, come up with some of the most caustic, abusive, derogatory names for their political opponents, in spite of Jesus saying to "love your enemies," and one of the church's apostles, John, telling a church to whom he preached that "Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love." (I John 4:8) Any Evangelical politician or political leader, or pastor for that matter, using the term "baby killer" is not exhibiting any Christian character and lacks values to support their claim to be Christian.
I grew up believing that human life begins at conception. This belief is based on several places in the Bible that indicate the presence of human identity in a child in the womb, not yet born, though there is not a direct statement indicating that this happens at conception. That's a conclusion drawn by inference from the Bible writers' narratives about marriage and human sexuality. I still believe that sexual intimacy and marital fidelity are core concepts that go a long way toward making a marriage last "until death do you part." And I still think that human beings have the intelligence, knowledge and wisdom it takes to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. And because of that, I believe that abortion, used as birth control, is an avoidable act of irresponsibility.
However, that is an inherently religious perspective. The secular world does not necessarily accept the premise that life begins at conception. Noting that abortions are sometimes medically necessary to save the life of the mother, or that they are sometimes emotionally and psychologically necessary, as in the case of rape or incest, means that there are different lines drawn in answer to the question as to what point in the course of a human pregnancy an abortion would be taking a viable human life. Not all religions or Christian denominations agree on circumstances that would make an abortion acceptable. The rights of all of those who hold a different perspective on this issue, including those who rely on the word of available medical science, must be considered in making a decision about when an abortion can be performed legally, and when it would involve taking the life of another human being.
Having an abortion is a personal decision and it is as ridiculous to assign accountability for any guilt that may be involved to Democratic politicians who supported a woman's right to choose to have one by calling them "baby killers" as it would be to assign guilt for deaths in mass school shootings to Republicans who refuse to support reasonable gun control legislation. Politicians who pass laws protecting a woman's right to make her own medical decisions can't be held accountable for someone's personal decisions. Blaming Democrats for abortions but not blaming Republicans for mass shootings is hypocritical.
Any state laws that have been passed, or which were triggered when Roe v. Wade was overturned, to ban abortions are in violation of the constitution's establishment clause. The position that life begins at conception and that abortion should be illegal is primarily based on religious teaching, specifically Christian teaching. The rights of others who have a different perspective on when a fetus becomes a viable human being must also be taken into consideration equally. The Dobbs decision is a serious violation of the establishment clause and religious liberty and is an indication of a Supreme Court ruling in a purely partisan manner, on a specifically religious basis.
No Religious Liberty is Violated by Guaranteeing the Rights of the Non-Religious
In his Notes on the State of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson said, "But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
The extension of personal, constitutionally-guaranteed liberty to LGBTQ persons, including those who are transgender, as well as to those who hold no specific religious belief and who do not believe that life begins at conception doesn't pick anyone else's pocket, or break anyone else's leg. It doesn't interfere with anyone's individual rights. No one else is accountable for the decisions that individuals make when it comes to their own personal identity, or their own health.
The claim that there is "grooming" going on, aimed at recruiting children and youth to adopt a transgender preference or to change their sexual orientation is as false as the Q-Anon allegation that Democratic politicians are involved in sex trafficking. Gender identity and sexual orientation are not things into which someone who does not have those kind of feelings can be groomed or recruited and the assertion indicates a measure of ignorance about the behavioral and psychological scientific research that is being done in this area.
There is an effort, in some places, to educate people and make them aware of the issues and what's involved, in order to help reduce the bigotry and social rejection people experience because they are different. I'm not sure how well that works. But I would also note that people are free to take whatever steps they feel are necessary to recruit people to their own religious beliefs. There's no restriction on that in this country. None.
It works this way for everyone. Those of us who have a more progressive perspective on constitutional rights and freedoms have just as much of a right to express our views, and vote for whom we choose. Likewise, even the most extreme conservatives have the same right. That's how democracy works.
No comments:
Post a Comment