Bush Betrays the Pro-Family Agenda Again, But Does Anyone Care?

 David Alan Black 

Did you vote for President Bush in 2000?  Did you do so because you believed he would take a conservative stand on social issues such as abortion and homosexuality? If so, do you realize that his administration has not saved a single unborn life through its policies? Abortion remains a scourge on our nation, despite the fraud of the so-called ban on partial-birth abortions.

Previously, your editor has pointed out that the president’s decisions on abortion are motivated more by political expediency than by principle. Now comes news that Bush is speaking out of both sides of his mouth on the homosexual issue. According to World Net Daily, not long after Bush endorsed “Marriage Protection Week” he sent a letter of congratulations to a denomination founded by homosexual activists called the Metropolitan Community Churches (MCC). Please understand that this denomination is no small player in America’s culture wars. It performs more than 6,000 same-sex “weddings” each year!

Last month Bush wrote to the founding congregation of the MCC in Los Angeles, which is led by homosexual activist Rev. Troy D. Perry, on the occasion of its 35th anniversary. Here’s what Bush said: “By encouraging the celebration of faith and sharing of God’s love and boundless mercy, churches like yours put hope in people’s hearts and a sense of purpose in their lives.” He added, “This milestone provides an opportunity to reflect on your years of service and to rejoice in God’s faithfulness to your congregation.”

Please read those quotes again. They are frightening.

Now remember that this is the same Bush who issued a proclamation endorsing the traditional family in which he declared, “Marriage is a sacred institution, and its protection is essential to the continued strength of our society. Marriage Protection Week provides an opportunity to focus our efforts on preserving the sanctity of marriage and on building strong and healthy marriages in America.” Bush then concluded: “Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. …”

The Metropolitan Community Churches’ Perry responded to Bush’s proclamation with alarm. After all, the guy’s supposed to be on our side, Perry reasoned. “President Bush was wrong in his endorsement of a week dedicated to denying equal rights to gays and lesbians,” Perry said, adding, “the president has sent a very mixed message that makes his effusive praise of MCC’s 35th anniversary all the more puzzling.”

Puzzling indeed. Rev. Neil Thomas, senior pastor of Metropolitan Community Church of Los Angeles, said the president’s letter baffled him. “How does one denounce the right of gays and lesbians to marry in their churches and suggest they are incapable of having healthy marriages in one moment, and in the next rejoice in God’s faithfulness to a gay and lesbian congregation that performs such same-sex marriages?”

Those of us who voted for Bush are asking many of the same questions. Moral and religious issues are being decided with no appeal to religious or moral principles and, in fact, an intentional disregard of them. Cases such as the MCC are becoming commonplace to the point of banality in the United States today. The message Bush is sending the public is, “America is a pluralistic secularistic state that endorses open-mindedness!”

Once again this is a classic case of the myth of neutrality. By default if not by intent, Bush has lent the support of his presidency to the false idea that there is nothing right or wrong and that to teach any substantive ethical precept or idea is to “indoctrinate” people. Nowhere is this schizophrenic double standard of trying to impose absolutely the idea that there are no absolutes seen more clearly than in the attack on the traditional family structure. More and more conservatives are recognizing this, but they are not dispensing with the myth of Republican conservatism. For some reason, admission of the failure of the prevailing Republican Platform is an impossibility. Deceit, duplicity, double standards—what could be a more accurate description of a party that calls good evil and evil good?

My friends, we are not to seek the short-lived approval of man or fear the ridicule of a short-sighted secularist world. To follow the whims and social trends of our culture is to forsake obedience to the One to whom ultimate obedience is due.

November 12, 2003

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. He is currently finishing his latest book, Why I Stopped Listening to Rush: Confessions of a Recovering Neocon.

Back to daveblackonline