When politicians talk about protecting family values, more often than not they care more about fearmongering to build popular support, than they care about families.
By
Glad Rag Kraken
on February 09, 2007
Regardless of how they define "family". A Bay Area politician rallying against a totalitarian edict of what a family can and can not be, is profiting on the fears of their constituency as well as the hackneyed Rush Limbaugh/Stuart "what the queers are doing to our soil" nonsense.
Agreed
47
1
97.9% 2.1%
Embed Claim
Make a related claim
This claim was inspired by
Similar claims
- 25-41 Let's hug the terrorists.
- 42-16 The nuclear family model is not particularly deserving of protection.
- 47-4 When people talk about "protecting families" in a political sense, they usually mean trying to preserve the nuclear family model.
- 128-3 When people talk about "protecting families" in a political context you should be very skeptical about what they have to say.
- 85-4 Constant warnings of Terrorism increase the level of fear of the populace.
Discussion (3)
Indeed. Where I grew up, people who talk about "traditional values" and "our great cultural heritage" usually also wear white hoods.
I'd be even more bold and say they are preparing to justify the removal of your basic rights and mine by denouncing believers in civil rights, who oppose their agenda, as unpatriotic. It's a very old game -- just ask Plato.
Mmmm. I suggest that a similar amounts of politicians tooting the 'civil rights' horn are merely choosing a different value to scare us with.
I wish that there were more of them, and I buy into what they claim to want, but I don't buy that they're any better than the rest of them.