Wednesday, August 1, 2007

Weekly Podium: "Putting the 'Right' Into Focus"

(Cross-posted at The New Dominion)

Conservatives and Republicans...whether you are one and the same or not, both the ideology and the party are suffering through some hard times in the public eye. However, maybe if the Republicans got back to the priorities that won them the favor of the American public in the first place, things wouldn't continue the way they are.

Many pundits will point to Iraq or Bush's general unpopularity as the anchor that weighs down the GOP. However, I believe that the push of topics like gay marriage and abortion to the forefront of the GOP agenda is what is the true anchor to the party's ship.

Now, before many of you social conservatives get riled up and start firing off angry e-mails and comments, allow me to explain why.

During the first two Republican presidential debates, there were a lot of references to Ronald Reagan, and how his legacy should be used as an inspiration for conservatives and the Republican Party of the future. This is true...Reagan's legacy should be an inspiration for the future. However, I believe there is a gross misrepresentation as to what that legacy is.

Leaders of the so-called "Religious Right" has espoused the viewpoint that they "got Reagan elected" in the first place. They have lumped Reagan in with many of the religious conservatives of the past 25 years, with strong viewpoints against homosexuality and abortion. Watching these presidential debates, it was notable that many of those who are more closely aligned with the Religious Right's stances on these social issues also attempted to paint themselves as being in-line with Reagan's political stances and philosophies.

However, this would be a fallacy.

If one were to look back at Reagan's presidency, one would see that Reagan never made gay marriage or abortion part of his agenda. While Reagan had a moral objection to gay marriage and abortion, he never actively pursued any legislation to limit or abolish these practices. Reagan knew what was right in his own mind, and what was right for the American public, and pursuing constitutional amendments against gay marriage is not something I believe Ronald Reagan would have ever championed.

Reagan knew that there were certain issues of mass importance, and other issues that would have a lesser imapct. He prioritized these issues, and the Republican Party of today should do the same.

Roe v. Wade made abortion legal, and it would take another court case such as this to overturn such a ruling. While pursuing the abolition of certain practices, such as partial-birth abortions (which even a number of those in favor of abortion feel to be an inhumane procedure), is a noteworthy cause...legislation to completely outlaw abortion is not something that the current American public is going to be in favor of.

To attempt to widen the scope of government influence over social issues like abortion and gay marriage is increasing the size of government, period. Pardon me if I'm wrong, but I thought that increases of government's power and control over the people was part of the liberal agenda.

Let's look at what is most important for our nation as a whole. A strong economy to keep unemployment low (as it has been) and strong national defense (both military and covert intelligence) to further protect our soil from both terrorists and other rogue threats. These are important to our nation's future, and are really things that conservatives have traditionally done a good job with managing.

I feel I speak for many conservatives when I say that I don't particularly care if gays get married or not. It does not affect me, nor does it have an effect on the majority of the population. There are plenty of gay couples that make excellent parents, as well. Dick Cheney's daughter and her partner are a perfect example of that.

While we can look to religion for inspiration and guidance for our morals, we must remember that we must learn that there is a separation of religion from government. It is this same separation that makes us different from the Islamic-based governments of the Middle Eastern nations that despise our freedoms.

We must keep our borders secure and our immigration process easier to navigate for those who wish to take the legal and rightful path to enjoy the fruits of freedom that come with residence within our borders. You saw the vocal opposition to the Bush-backed immigration reform bill, you know that conservative voters favor immigration enforcement and reform, not amnesty and loophole-filled legislation.

Until recently, the migration of conservatives from the Republican Party has been a problem for the GOP. The proverbial bleeding has stopped a bit, from what recent polls have stated, but the Republicans need to realize something. Conservatives feel like the GOP has abandoned them. In fact, as a conservative myself, I feel that the Republican Party needs to realize that certain issues are only catering to certain groups of conservatives.

However, if you want the support of the majority of conservatives, instead of certain vocal groups, the GOP must get back to the core issues that it has long stood for. Strong national defense, limited government, and economic prosperity. These are the core issues of the conservative base, and have traditionally been the core issues of the Republican Party as well.

It's the principles that the party's icon, Ronald Reagan, stood for. If we're to look back at the Reagan legacy to look forward into the future, then we must first realize what that legacy truly was. Bantering about wedge issues is not, nor has it ever been, the legacy of Reagan's presidency.

That legacy was about creating a "big tent", where evangelicals and secular citizens could join together and move America forward. It was about spreading peace through strength, economic prosperity, forward thinking, and allowing Americans to live their lives and chase their dreams without paying a tax for it. This is the legacy the Republican Party needs to attempt to learn from.

1 comment:

Vivian J. Paige said...

Good post, Phil. And dead on.