Republican Sex Scandals a Sign It's Time to End the Family Values Wars

Republicans and Democrats should keep private lives private and divorce politics from "family values"

July 8, 2009 RSS Feed Print

An Oklahoma state legislator recently divined the cause of our economic funk. We are paying the price, according to a resolution state Rep. Sally Kern is sponsoring, for becoming a "world leader" in pornography, same-sex marriage, divorce, and other "forms of debauchery." It will come as no surprise that Kern is a Republican (a "Kern-servative" at that, according to her website).

If the states are indeed the national parties' farm teams, the Sally Kerns of the world will doom the GOP. Republicans can no longer afford to lustily fight the culture wars, and it's time for them to sue for peace on the marriage front.

The phrase "family values" first entered the political lexicon in the 1976 Republican platform, according to William Safire's Political Dictionary. But, coinciding with the rise of the religious wing of the Republican Party, the term came into its own in the 1980s, with the Bushes and Quayles gathering together on stage to cap off the 1988 GOP convention with an illustration of their support of traditional families (not like those godless, family-hating Democrats). It was an effective political issue, but never a magic bullet.

In 1992, when the Republicans gave over a whole prime-time evening of their convention to the "issue," conservative commentator turned failed presidential candidate Pat Buchanan declared a culture war and religious broadcaster Pat Robertson warned that Democratic nominee Bill Clinton and his wife viewed the term as having nothing to do with "either families or values. They are talking about a radical plan to destroy the traditional family and transfer its functions to the federal government."

The party's social conservative base was thrilled. The rest of the nation was repelled. And five presidential elections later, the GOP still has not figured out how to square that circle. The Clintons, of course, exacerbated that tension by bringing it into stark relief. A core tenet of the "family values" argument is that if a man cannot be trusted to keep his vows to his wife, then he is unfit for the public's trust. Bill Clinton was manifestly, grandly unfaithful to his wife—the very epitome of the kind of politician conservatives warned against.

But voters didn't particularly care. The economy was percolating along, and while his eyes might have wandered in his personal life, Clinton remained focused like the proverbial laser beam on the economy. The GOP should have realized then that "family values" (or "traditional values," as it came to be known) had been played out. But the party's social arm remained—and remains—too potent.

Clinton was an extreme but not isolated example. Would you rather have philanderer Franklin Roosevelt running the country or proper husband Herbert Hoover? JFK or Jimmy Carter, who has presumably kept his lust confined to his heart? Slick Willie Clinton or sanctimonious George W. Bush?

And there is something inherently offensive about moralists passing judgment on others' relationships. A marriage is an intimate and complex organism. Extrapolating character judgments from behavior observed from afar, through the prism of the press, is dangerous at best.

But no one ever said that politically cutting issues had to be well thought through or sensible. They do, however, require a critical element of consistency that the GOP has squandered. The stories of Rep. Mark Foley "sexting" congressional pages and Sen. Larry Craig's "wide stance" were bizarre late-night fodder. Louisiana Sen. David Vitter turned up on the "D.C. Madam's" client list. And this year the taint reached the Republican class of would-be presidential candidates. Nevada Sen. John Ensign revealed an affair with a former campaign staffer who is married to one of his legislative aides. And then there is the unfolding tale of South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, his Argentine amour (as well as other women, he told the Associated Press, with whom he "crossed lines"), and his turning "hiking in the Appalachians" into an instant political euphemism.

Granted, not all of the offenders were full-throated members of the "family values" wing of the party, but they were, at a minimum, fellow travelers. (Foley, Ensign, and Sanford, by the way, were all members of the House GOP class of 1994 who battled Bill Clinton under the leadership of then-married-but-already-dating-his-next-wife Newt Gingrich; all three voted to impeach Clinton.)

Tags:
republican party

Reader Comments Read all comments (32)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

What you do in your family reflects your values as a whole so I don't see the use of keeping information private. The GOP can stop being hypocrites however and the value voters need to think a bit more deeply about their vote.

IM of IA 9:13AM November 04, 2009

Let's see if they are going to give up the family values that they are most hypocritical about then they will have to return to their broadest base of undereducated, racist, walmart shopping, Kia driving, made in America dumbasses who continue to take Fox News as a news outlet rather than base entertainment, listen to the Drug Addict Rush Limbaugh, believe we are in Iraq for something other than OIL. You know the religious right without the family values part.

Man, do I hope they run the Quitter Sarah Paliin for president in 2012!

craig of KS 2:06AM August 01, 2009

John J says marriage and children is the foundation of society. It's the foundation of the patriarchal Roman Catholic family whose church bans divorce. Even if a husband turns out to suffer from incurable premature ejaculation, his wife is supposed to put up with that until one of them dies. If he refuses to use contraception and makes her dread every mating with threat of another pregnancy and 18 more years of dependency, she's stuck with him. If she has a family that leeches on him all the time, he has no relief. Patriarchal marriages put inheritance first. When marriage does fail, it is the civil government that runs divorce courts. Leviticus states God's hatred of homosexuals. Lev.18;22 says gays are an abomination to God. Lev.20:13 says kiil homosexuals. But God also says "Thou shalt not kill." So that is used against people who need and want an abortion. Go to "Skeptics' Annotated Bible" to understand where a person with a low religious boiling-point can get the idea to kill an abortion doctor.

auradawnveirs of CA 10:38PM July 19, 2009

advertisement

Debate Club

Was 2011 One of the Worst Years for the U.S. Government in American History?

Experts debate where 2011 ranks among Washington's worst years.

Latest Video

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

Obama’s Contraceptive 'Compromise' Doesn't Pass the Smell Test

The so-called "accommodation" on contraceptive coverage reinforces the administration's commitment to its pro-choice agenda.

On Women in Combat, Rick Santorum Insults Military Men

To suggest that the men in our armed forces cannot control their emotions is a real slap at the professionals who wear the uniform.

To Avoid a Failed February, Mitt Romney Needs a Big Idea

Mitt Romney needs a big idea to rouse enthusiasm for his campaign.

How Mitt Romney Should Respond to the Improving Economy

Even if the economy continues to improve, Mitt Romney still can present a better plan than Barack Obama's.

The Problems With the Catholic Church and Birth Control

The Catholic Church's stance on birth control is a slippery slope, as an Obama administration ruling highlights.

Democrats Rebelling Against Obama Birth Control Policy

Some Democrats are among most publicly opposed the an Obama policy requiring religious institutions to cover contraceptives.

Catholic Birth Control Fight About Healthcare, Not Just Religion

The framing of the issue of required contraceptive coverage in religious terms obscures the real question.

Rick Santorum's Sweep Means It’s Still Anybody’s Race

The GOP finds itself in the unusual position of not being sure who its nominee will eventually be.

advertisement