Coalition of the Willing?

Tax cuts for the large corporations and the wealthy, dismantling social security and other government programs, anti-public education, anti-welfare, a hawkish foreign policy, upholding a ban on all forms of abortion, lax gun laws, overturn environmental and consumer protection laws, and standing for the "sanctity of marriage" by preventing homosexuals from marrying.

The above demands have been on the Republican Party platform for decades; the far-right has held an anti-government regulation and morality-upholding through government intervention coalition since the 1970s. The "Red State" religious voters obviously have a staunch opposition to abortion rights and gay rights, but why would these voters, who are in the lower-to-middle income bracket, vote against their economic interests? It is because conservatives have been able to forge an alliance between free-market neo-conservatives, and Christian fundamentalists, and have done it successfully.

Goldberg sites the 2004 Presidential election as an example of how homosexuality was politicized in a negative way. Gay marriage bans were on the ballot in a dozen states, and churches were galvanized to vote to protect the sanctity of marriage (Goldberg 54). False claims, such as churches who do not recognize gay marriages would have their tax exemptions stripped, were rampant throughout the campaign. Images of gay couples in San Francisco were also used to mobilize church-going voters.

She also mentions Anita Bryant's campaign in the late 1970s to repeal Florida laws that were seen as "gay-friendly". Bryant famously said that homosexuals "want to recruit your children and teach them the virtues of becoming homosexual" (Fetner 411).

One can point out that the economic recession would turn many voters around into making the economy, not "moral values", a priority. However, Obama's big win in 2008 alongside Prop. 8 in California, as well as the victory of Anita Bryant's anti-gay legislation in Florida at a time of economic recession, were evidence that this may not be the case (Fenter 414).

The Religious Right's movement has been a reactionary one; with more people attaining rights and liberties, Conservatives became outraged in the decline of moral standards in society. As Goldberg puts it, gays and lesbians were targeted as the epitome of moral decay. That gays would ultimately bring down civilization. This is why religious conservatives will unlikely defect from the GOP; the Democrats have long been associated with liberal social changes. As long as the Republican Party continues its opposition to gay marriage by adopting the rhetoric of Christian Fundamentalism, they will lose the argument that the GOP is a "big tent" party. However, as what we have seen, homophobia can bring out the religious vote, which can be a factor in winning an election.

Homosexuality has become the mobilizing issue for the Religious Right; they have "tolerated" gays and lesbians up until a point. To the Christian, marriage is sacred and is one of the binding institutions, alongside the family, that hold society together. When they see gays engaging in marriage and the adoption of children, the line is crossed and immorality is assaulting what is sacred. Therefore, the "homosexual agenda" is an attack on God.

Works Cited:
Fenter, Tina."Working With Anita Bryant: The Impact of Christian Gay Activism on Lesbian and Gay Movement Claims. from Social Problems, Vol 48, No. 33. University of California Press. 2001

Goldberg, Michelle. "Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism". W.W. Norton and Company, Inc. New York, NY. 2007