Fightdirecto -> The GOP wants to create a "Daddy State" in the USA (4/6/2012 7:34:59 PM)
|
One of the frequently used GOP talking points (or attack points, if you prefer) is that the Democratic Party wants to create a "MOMMY STATE" (or "Nanny State", if you prefer) in the USA - using governmental power to stop citizens from doing things that might harm them or the citizens around them. Some examples they often cite are: * The Food and Drug Administration (government is stifling "free enterprise" by requiring food products and drugs be safe to use), * Seat-belt laws (overly intrusive on an individual’s "rights"), * Anti-smoking laws (reduces tobacco corporations' profits, stifling "free enterprise"), * Workplace safety laws (requiring purchase of saftey equipment reduces corporate profits, stifling "free enterprise"), * Minimum wage laws (reduces corporate profits, stifling "free enterprise"), * Maximum work hour laws (the 8-hour day reduces corporate profits, stifling "free enterprise"), etc. Instead they would prefer to create a "DADDY STATE" in the USA instead - The Santorum Strategy quote:
THE IDEALIZED CONSERVATIVE FAMILY IS STRUCTURED AROUND A STRICT FATHER WHO IS THE NATURAL LEADER OF THE FAMILY, WHO IS ASSUMED TO KNOW RIGHT FROM WRONG, WHOSE AUTHORITY IS ABSOLUTE AND UNCHALLENGEABLE, WHO IS MASCULINE, MAKES DECISIONS ABOUT REPRODUCTION, AND WHO SETS THE RULES -- in short, the Decider. Children must be taught right from wrong through strict discipline, which is required to be moral. This maps onto the nation. To be prosperous in a free market, one must be fiscally disciplined. If you are not prosperous, you must not be disciplined, and if you are not disciplined, you cannot be moral, and so you deserve your poverty. When this idealized family model is projected onto various governing institutions, we get conservative versions of them: CONSERVATIVE RELIGION WITH A STRICT FATHER GOD; A VIEW OF THE MARKET AS DECIDER WITH NO EXTERNAL AUTHORITY OVER THE MARKET FROM GOVERNMENT, UNIONS, OR THE COURTS; AND STRICTNESS IN OTHER INSTITUTIONS, like education, prisons, businesses, sports teams, romantic relationships, and the world community. Control over reproduction ought to be in the hands of male authorities... > Here's how the GOP's "Daddy State" logic goes. > * The strict father determines what happens in the family, including reproduction. Thus REPRODUCTION IS THE PROVINCE OF MALE AUTHORITY. * The strict father does not condone moral weakness and self-indulgence without moral consequences. SEX WITHOUT REPRODUCTIVE CONSEQUENCES IS THUS SEEN AS IMMORAL. * IF THE NATION SUPPORTS BIRTH CONTROL FOR UNMARRIED WOMEN, THEN THE NATION SUPPORTS IMMORAL BEHAVIOR. * The conservative stress on individual responsibility means that you and no one else should have to pay for your birth control - not your employer, your HMO, or the taxpayers. * Having to pay for your birth control also has a metaphorical religious value - paying for your sins. * This is a classical slippery slope narrative. IF NO ONE ELSE SHOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR YOUR BIRTH CONTROL, THE NEXT STEP IS THAT NO ONE ELSE SHOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR ANY OF YOUR HEALTH CARE. * And the step after that is that NO ONE ELSE SHOULD BE FORCED TO PAY FOR ANYONE ELSE. THIS IS, EVERYTHING SHOULD BE PRIVATIZED - NO PUBLIC EDUCATION, SAFETY NETS, PARKS, OR ANY PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS OR SERVICES. If one was forced to choose between the hypothetical "Daddy State" or the hypothetical "Mommy/Nanny State" (if those two choices were the only choices available) - which would you choose? As for me, if the only choice was either the "Daddy State" or the "Mommy/Nanny State" - I would be forced to chose the "Mommy/Nanny State" - as a Dominant male, I couldn't live happily in a "Daddy State". Sure, in a "Mommy/Nanny State", I'm forced to wear my seat-belt while driving in my car - But in a "Daddy State" I wouldn't be able to legally have genital sex with my sub unless I married her (OMG, We're living together at this very moment without the"benefit" of marriage - under the old pre-Liberal/"Mommy/Nanny State" laws, we'd be guilty of the crime of FORNICATION and could be sent to prison!) and unless I planned on her getting pregnant. [image]local://upfiles/42188/65ECC2F880324E1598FB74CD9668F9BB.jpg[/image]
|
|
|
|