I'm confused about something, and I have been for a while. I started drafting this post in my head as I was driving around, listening to a caller chime-in on the health care debate on NPR. I'd love for any of the loyal NINE readers to explain the following to me.
I know a lot of Christian fundamentalists, or people who would otherwise label themselves as very religious (choice of word important here -- I do not mean "spiritual"), who are die-hard Republicans. They want the government to stay out of their lives. (An example, I heard today that Texas Governor Rick Perry is planning a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the newly-enacted health care reform bill, urging Texans -- including the 6 million without insurance -- "to take responsibility for their own health.") Yet another tenet of the party platform is "American values," which loosely translated seems to mean no assistance for illegal immigrants, no abortions and no gay marriage, or even according to some people, no equality for same-sex couples.
The latter strikes me as among the most significant possible infringements by government in one's life -- the government in your bedroom and in your uterus. (I, for one, would much rather have the government in my health insurance company.) Yet most conservatives welcome that infringement and fight for it, assumingly because they place themselves on such high moral ground that this invasion of privacy wouldn't affect them, the heterosexual virgins-until-marriage that we know all them to be. But surely some of these devout church-goers are themselves without health insurance? Perhaps, dare I say, some of them may be smokers, or diabetics, or otherwise at risk for a chronic health condition that could render them uninsurable or financially crippled due to out-of-pocket healthcare costs under our current system? Universal health care in general is virulently opposed by conservatives, notwithstanding the fact that it could help them, their neighbors, their families, their friends and their communities, because they don't want government in their lives. Apparently, they'd rather have the millions of Americans without insurance die broke from a disease that wasn't properly treated, than have some government-run health care. Because some version of the current bill would have theoretically allowed healthcare funds be used to subsidize abortions, even those abortions that are medically necessary, the whole bill is rendered evil and catastrophic. I don't get it.
Bravo to the group of Catholic nuns who urged Congress to pass the healthcare reform bill, despite official opposition by the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops. These brave women wrote that the bill "will uphold longstanding conscience protections and it will make historic new investments – $250 million – in support of pregnant women. . . . This is the REAL pro-life stance, and we as Catholics are all for it.” But one nun in particular went even farther, writing that national health care must include “Medicaid funding for a woman on Medicaid … who chooses this legal medical procedure.” God bless her and all those people that prayerfully dissent from what their religious leaders tell them and choose to recognize that this issue is not so one-sided.
Speaking more broadly, I remember what someone told me once about democrats and republicans. I was in college at the time, interning for the summer with U.S. Congressman Charles Taylor in NC, a Republican. He was a tree farmer, and a logger, and cast numerous votes that destroyed much of the western NC wilderness. These things didn't bother me at the time -- I knew I wanted to go to law school, he was the congressman from my home district, and I wanted the experience for my applications.
The other experience I was getting that summer was as a public relations intern for the United Way. When I was shoved into the dark, dank, dusty basement of the congressman's fundraising office to "clean and organize" YEARS worth of press clippings and notes from constituents, I came across several letters to the editors of area newspapers from my supervisor at the United Way, railing on the congressman. I talked to her about it at some point, and she told me that she thought democrats tended to be nicer people than republicans, because their platform is based on helping people, rather than forcing everyone to make it on their own.
At the time, I thought this was complete crap. I'm not sure I do anymore. I'm confused. Because all of the issue that are important to me -- conserving resources and being kind to the earth, promoting diversity, ensuring a healthy food supply, making sure ALL children have access to the SAME quality of food, education, and health care, giving those people who got dealt a crappy hand in life some support, treating all people with dignity, respect and fairness -- are NOT supported by the republicans. That are strongly, loudly and shamelessly opposed by most republicans. To me, these beliefs epitomize a pro-life ideology; specifically, I think these things are exactly what Jesus -- the religious leader so many conservatives claim to follow -- preached. Jesus said that God is the judge, not man. He said help your neighbor out. He begged us to love the earth the God created for us (in 6 days of course, a mere several thousand years ago.) He brought compassion to those people the community ostracized and condemned. He pleaded with people to not be douchebags to each other. (My words, not his.)
So I'm going to need some help here. I have found myself more and more lately leaning toward the dangerous predisposition that republicans = douchebags. I know this can't possibly be true. So I need someone to explain to me how and why I'm wrong. Please.
UPDATE:
Bob Herbert is preaching to the choir! Preach on!!