“Social conservatism is a political or moral ideology that affirms the government’s role in encouraging or enforcing traditional values or behaviors in the belief that these are what keep people civilized and decent. However, the accepted meaning of traditional morality often differs from group to group within social conservatism.” – Wiki

I watched a debate between social conservative, Alan Keyes and liberal Barack Obama for Illinois State Senator. Barack Obama destroyed Alan Keyes on every issue. Staying true to his nature, Alan Keyes went berserk and started spouting out conceptual, theology and ethical philosophy that would have been interesting in a Christian college course on social conservatism, but didn’t go over so well an the Illinois State Senator Debate. He came off as a fundamentalist jerk who saw no room in the world for “sinners”. Don’t get me wrong, I support everyone’s right to believe what they want, but if your going to be a representative of me, how can you do your job if you are ignoring my basic right because your religion tells you that you should.

My original intension was to compare Keyes and Palin. But I suppose comparing social conservatives Alan Keyes and Sarah Palin is not really fair. After all Keyes tends to piss off most people the longer he talks. Even conservatives within the Republican party, he is a guy you either love or hate. Whereas, Palin is highly likable, adorable and even LOVED by other conservatives. She can do no wrong and is protected and worshiped by Conservatives like a “Pagan Ronald Regan”.

The weakness of far right social conservatives is that the more the talk the more crazy, fringe and ridiculous they sound to people in the middle and on the left. Other conservatives are very comfortable with these social conservatives because it sounds like the word of God (because to them it is the word of God.. according to their interpretation of the Bible).

Its not merely there beliefs that make them sound like fanatics, but the fact that they want to legislate their beliefs on all without compromise or middle ground. After all, how can one compromise with the word of God. It is the equivalent of far left PETA nuts’ “Holocaust on a Plate” in which they compare meat eating to something worse than the Holocaust. If you are a Vegan/Vegetarian because you don’t want animals to suffer that’s very compassionate of you. You step over the line when you try to push your views on the whole human race. Then to go a step further compare the systematic genocide/human extinction of the Jewish people to the consumption of a domesticated animal. It is not only ridiculous it is INSANE and misanthropic.

Here are a list of things that make social conservatives look insane:

1) Life begins at conception therefore contraception is a Sin. This goes a step beyond merely overturning Roe v. Wade. This line of logic also makes talking about sex education for teens a evil… they will all be celibate so there is no need to talk about sex AT ALL. A liberal would say: The reality is that most teens DO have sex before marriage so ignoring it is really irresponsible. I believe that Pro-lifers actually have a moral argument. They are trying to protect the life of the baby. But to call fertilized ovum a baby is pretty ridiculous.

2) Gay people denied their rights. When religious people start talking about the sanctity and tradition of marriage, its rhetoric. I’ve been married for 12 years.. I’ll just be frank here.. f*#@ marriage. If you want to do it, fine.. its over rated anyway (j/k). Anyway when a government makes it illegal for same sex couples the basic rights of any tax paying citizen, it starts to sound a lot like Civil Rights issues. It doesn’t sound like the moral high ground when a couple is singled out because of their sexual orientation.

3) Literal translations of the [insert religious text here]. Lets start with creationism. The book of Genesis puts the Earth’s age at about 6000 years old. This means that Tyrannosaurus Rex and Adam & Even were around about the same time frame. A 6000 year old Earth means that you must ignore MANY sciences of the last few hundred years including: Geologic eras, paleontology, and, of course, evolutionary biology. Also, if you accept that literal translation of [insert religious text] you have to accept some of the things that were accepted at the time of its writing, things like slaves, wife beating, raping, pillaging, killing kids.. you name it. Its in there.

When religious texts are taken literally, its a very slippery slope into a very dark part of humanity. Essentially, any and everything can be fully justified by [insert religious text here]. So social conservatives/fundamentalist regardless what there faith cherry pick certain parts of the their respective books to back up their point on what is acceptable.

When you start to consider what their worldview means for EVERY individual (not just there group of believers), things start looking very grim for those outside of their group.

p.s: Alan Keyes in one nutty, fruit cake.