Well, you’ve got to hand it to social conservatives. They sure know how to ignore the lessons of stinging legal defeats. Our nation’s history is littered with issues that social conservatives have fought tooth and nail all the way to the Supreme Court, only to be rebuffed. The 14th Amendment is truly the bane of their existence, because how dare we expect our laws to treat everyone equally in a country ostensibly built on liberty and equality?
Their stubbornness is one thing, but their outright ideological hypocrisy is just too much to ignore. Take for instance the ten states that have filed suit against the Obama Administration over the president’s directive that public schools give transgender kids access to the bathrooms designed for the gender they identify with. Even though not a single conservative can point to an instance of either a) transgender sexual assault perpetrators preying on bathrooms or b) an increase in sexual assaults in places where transgender people have equal bathroom access, they are bound and determined to minimize, marginalize and discriminate against trans people “for the children,” or some such shit.
Every single one of these bathroom laws is going to get struck down, eventually. This will be a crushing blow not just for bathroom bigots, but for bigots in general since these laws are about being able to discriminate against trans people in a whole host of areas, not just where they pee and poop. But in the end, just like their “defense of marriage” laws, social conservatives will lose all their legal battles over their bathroom access laws for pretty much the same reason as they lost the marriage equality fight — reality shows their fears of societal collapse are unmitigated bullshit.
But you know, regardless of their sexual morality crusade, there’s a fundamental disconnect conservative governors and red state legislatures are putting on full display between themselves and their own professed ideology. Just what, exactly, is fiscally conservative about knowingly signing laws into effect that will be challenged and lose in court? How many millions of dollars are going to be spent defending these laws, and on what grounds are these fiscal conservatives defending their lawsuits? Oh right, that they’re “standing up for what’s right” and one day God will just re-awaken in our souls and we’ll see the light of day.
What a crock of shit.
Isn’t it fun to think of all the services that these states could provide for their citizens if they weren’t spending money defending clearly unconstitutional laws? I mean, how many meals for the homeless could those legal fees afford? Isn’t taking care of people a better use of tax dollars than, say, writing and defending your generation’s version of Jim Crow? And this whole question of paying for the legal fight over these lawsuits brings up another fun thought experiment.
Take a state like Texas, who started the suit. It is true their economy does fairly well, but yet, have you seen what their budget would look like if they didn’t depend on federal defense contracts and other forms of federal taxpayer assistance? They need that money to wash out the deficits they’d run otherwise. The money they’re going to spend suing Obama for forcing them to treat trans kids like humans will cause a shortfall elsewhere, I’m sure, and who will be asked to pick up that shortfall? You and me, that’s who.
And so, extrapolate that fact just a tiny bit more and you realize that not only are these states not acting fiscally conservative by essentially forcing us to pay for their legal fight against the Obama administration, but they are doing so knowing they can’t really afford to do that and run their state. So, you guessed it, they’re takers. Mooching takers who force us to pay for their lifestyle — a lifestyle of reality denialism and a healthy fear of things they don’t understand.
And all of this is allegedly about where we let transgender kids go to the damn bathroom…How very conservative of them, huh?