Ignoring Social Conservatism

It’s looking mighty weird at the front lines of America’s sexual revolution, and the picture’s that much murkier given the so-called “news” media’s utterly distorted spin on it.

Exhibit A: Abortion. Would you be surprised if I told you abortion is growing increasingly unpopular, and the country is moving – no, running -- from a woman’s right to choose death for her unborn child? Soon the House and Senate will agree to a partial-birth abortion ban package and send it to the White House for President Bush’s signature. Undoubtedly there are GOP strategists chewing their nails with angst over the anticipated political fallout, except they don’t realize there won’t be any.

Don’t take my word for it. Listen to the pro-aborts. The Center for the Advancement of Women is headed by long-time abortion promoter Faye Wattleton. They just released a national survey on abortion and the results are devastating – for them.

They found that 51 percent of women feel that abortion should be limited to exceptions like rape, incest, or the life of the mother, or banned. No plurality, that. A clear majority of women are now pro-life! Worse news for the abortion lobby: While 92 percent of the sample want a women’s movement to focus on domestic violence, only 41 percent believe in “keeping abortion legal as a top priority.”

These numbers clearly are in juxtaposition with the public’s perception of a pro-abortion rights public, a perception fed day after day, year in and year out by an overwhelmingly pro-abortion national news media. So what’s the media’s reaction when Wattleton releases her numbers shattering that myth?

Nothing from ABC. Nothing from NBC. Nothing from CBS. One interview on CNN. In other words, virtual silence.

What’s fascinating is that this isn’t the first time. Question: How many people know a Gallup poll in January found 60 percent wanted abortion illegal in most circumstances (compared to 34 percent for abortion in all or most circumstances)? Answer: About as many as know a New York Times (yes, the Times!) commissioned a poll in 1998 that found, among other incredible results, that a full 50 percent of women consider abortion to be nothing short of “murder.”

Remember all this when liberal reporters hit the 2004 campaign trail and as predictable as snow in Aspen in December, start recycling the same old garbage about abortion being the hottest issue among women, and how “extremist” pro-life beliefs are hurting the Republican party.

Exhibit B: Homosexuality. If the pro-family community can cheer on abortion, they have to be weeping over this issue, especially since the Supreme Court overruled the Texas sodomy law, which had little practical effect but could have a massive cultural effect. It’s one more in a steady stream of victories for the gay lobby as it seeks the ultimate prize. What would that be? Newsweek jumped into the fray last week with a cover story leading the charge: “Is Gay Marriage Next?”

The press bias in this debate is so thick, there is no debate, period. It is not just the quantity of news stories – a day doesn’t go by where you won’t find a story on this issue – it is in the rank editorialization. There are two camps -- compassionate and right vs. bigoted and wrong. The message is everywhere: It is not just gays who have a “right” to their lifestyle, it is society which must accept it. No liberal media outlet would dare suggest, with the slightest whisper that maybe, possibly, “gay marriage” is an oxymoron.

The intimidation by the gay left is so intense, the pro-family position is regularly ignored by the press. Reporters act as if featuring opponents of homosexuality in a story would be like including the Ku Klux Klan in a story on race. The same pattern surfaces in media reports on polls on the same-sex marriage issue, with conservatives excluded entirely. In his report, CNN’s Bill Schneider focused only on the growing pro-gay number, which grew from 27 percent in 1996 to 39 percent this summer. That’s a jump, sure. But how is gay “marriage” a cultural juggernaut when 55 percent of Americans still oppose it?

The Supreme Court decision opens a whole new can of worms. Will Americans support a pro-active gay agenda of forced acceptance? Will they genuflect at the ballot box, or in the elementary school classroom, or, yes, even at the church altar to the Anthony Kennedy mandate that homosexuality is “entitled to respect”? Will religious objections to the homosexual lifestyle become the target of “hate crimes” laws?

The jury’s out on public opinion. But we can be certain the pro-gay liberal media will favor this agenda every step of the way, just as they’ll continue to ignore the pro-life juggernaut.

LOOK! Another Freeper Just Gave To The Cause! WAY TO GO!
	We Salute Free Republic's Donors! Be one! Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

I posted this recent survey on abortion at a prominent feminist site and they flat out ignored it. About a week later I posted asking why there was no discussion on it. Only one poster responded saying that she "didn't believe it".

It seems to me pro-Life should do a carefully orchestrated media strike now while the iron is hot and while the ostriches have their heads in the sand.

I think Bozell is right about the progress social conservatives have made on the abortion issue. I think it's pretty much certain now that we will see a general ban on abortion in this country within the first half of this century, not that I think that would be the wisest way to deal with abortion. What's interesting to me is just how little substantive legislation on the subject has even been proposed in the Congress, considering this new receptiveness to anti-abortion policies on the part of the public.

The partial-birth ban, while being exceptionally effective for public relations purposes, is not going to stop many abortions, if any at all. You would think social conservatives would want to move some more serious pieces of legislation (like a federal informed consent law, for example, an idea which typically polls exceptionally well). The Republicans won't be in simultaneous control of both the White House and the Congress forever.

My only problem with the article is the suggestion that there is a need for the adjective "Social" to be applied to Conservatives, to deal with these particular issues. While there may be some actual Conservatives, who do not agree with most of us on some so-called "Social" issues, all real Conservatives are "Social Conservatives." The whole reason for being a Conservative--as opposed to someone with a particular position, which might be Conservative on a particular issue--is to preserve our traditional Societal or social values.

Pretending that arguments on economic aspects of preserving social values are somehow different from other family aspects of preserving social values, but plays into the hands of those who are trying by every possible means to divide us and leave us squabbling among ourselves, while they destroy what is left of our heritage.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.