The Case Against the FMA

Dale Carpenter makes it – calmly and brilliantly as ever. Ryan Sager argues for cultural federalism here. You have in this a classic example of the distinction between conservatism and fundamentalism. Conservatism seeks to govern society as it is and as it evolves. It allows for diversity and federalism and local rule. Instead of demonizing minorities, conservatives seek ways to integrate and include them and foster responsibility among them. Fundamentalists, in contrast, begin with an a priori religious deduction – homosexuality is Biblically or "naturally" wrong and homosexuals as such do not exist – and proceed to enforce that view on everyone. If constitutional procedures or principles of federalism get in the way of such doctrinal truth, then those procedures and principles must be abandoned. There is no extreme they will not seek, because God demands it. You saw that in the Terri Schiavo case, where the Christianist right abandoned even a pretense of believing in federalism or the rule of law. And you see it in the case of the FMA. This battle is not just about gays. It’s about the survival of limited government conservatism and inclusion within the Republican party.