It seems to me now that George W. Bush is no longer president, he can let his various cohorts come out of the closet and admit their true feelings about various issues. The latest is Laura Bush, his wife, who had recently come out and openly admitted to supporting same-sex marriage and to being pro-choice. Now, I knew about her stance on abortion for a long time, dating back to a Washington Post article in which it was considered a secret, but the same-sex marriage part comes as a bit of a shocker to me.
Now, understand that I could not care less about legalizing same-sex marriages. I firmly believe that the state has no business making an individual swear an oath before them before you swear an oath before God to commit to the most sacred of covenants that most people can enjoy. I believe that the government has, like most other things, abused the authority it has been granted to issue marriage licenses to impose tyranny on individuals. Marriage licenses were used to prevent interracial marriages, most likely due to racism and eugenics, and they were used for religious persecution as well (remember how the Mormons were polygamists originally). I think any state imposition on marriage will end badly and the LGBT alliance would do well to read their history before demanding such an extension. It is also adds on to this concept that I refer to as circular morality where the state imposes a moral mandate on the people based on the people’s demands of the state.
As for abortion, I’ve made myself clear, I believe. I believe that it is evil and a violation of the right to life. Even though a woman is carrying a child in her womb, her right to convenience doesn’t trump the child’s right to life. However, I would rather see abortion clinics go out of business than to be outlawed by the force of the state. This would mean that the culture has shifted toward a better outlook on preserving life and doesn’t need the force of the state to impose it.
So while I actually don’t really care about Laura Bush’s stances on these issues, the larger issue is the deceit she placed on the hearts and minds of millions of conservative Americans who voted for George W. Bush. Do you honestly believe if she had these views made public in 2000 or 2004 that Bush would have won either election? The so-called ‘values’ voters who helped carry him to victory in both election cycles know that a man and a woman are one in marriage. And if there was any disagreement, any hint of differing opinions on these kind of issues, a good portion of them would have withheld their votes.
The fact that Laura Bush kept her views to herself is a sign that the President was purposely deceitful as well, since he had to have known about them. He never once mentioned it, as far as I can tell, and it makes me question his integrity. I believed that he showed bad judgment by not firing CIA directory George Tenet following the 9/11 attacks and subsequently trusting his assessment that Iraq had stockpiles of nuclear weapons.
Now it seems that he also had bad judgment in picking a mate. Either that or these two all-important issues for a large part of his voting base were not all that important to him. I suspect that it is probably the latter since the former would mean he would not have a good marriage to begin with. Although, I suspect that this has driven a wedge in his marriage to Laura, unfortunately.
The bottom line here is that with the Democrats, we know what we are getting. They are a wicked bunch where they will outright lie to us about what they intend to do but everyone knows they will do the opposite. We know they hypocrites and we expect that to a large degree. But when Republicans do it, it is high time we call them on it and keep them honest. Because people will respect honesty more than they will respect ideology of any kind. If you cannot be straight with someone, then you are insulting them.
And the former First Lady is a huge insult to the conservative movement. So much for being a classy lady.