Monday, July 03, 2006

we would rather have no morals than those morals

The National Journal (via AMERICAblog) reports that Americans are evenly divided over whether the federal government should be “involved in promoting moral values in our society.” The 48-48 split is in stark contrast to the 60% who said the government should be involved back in May of 1996.

Is this a measure of a growth in libertarian sentiment, rugged individualism, or rank amorality? Less than two years after the punditocracy coined the term “values voters,” has half the electorate said “values, schmalues?” Or, maybe, like me, voters care about certain values that could certainly be called “moral” (like a government that doesn’t lie or condone torture, a strong social safety net, economic fairness, universal healthcare, freedom of speech, a right to privacy, the establishment clause, etc.), but after five-plus years of Republican values, they’d rather see a values-free government than have to endure more of the “principles” promoted by the religious right and the corporate elite.

For more numbers—and what I think of them—jump on over to capitoilette.


Post a Comment

<< Home