Cruelty Is The Basis For Conservative Culture War Policy

I try to understand the whys of the world.  When I was older my parents never told me I drove them to distraction as a child, but I am certain they felt inundated with a never-ending series of questions about why, why, why?  At age 62, the need to understand the world around me remains a central part of my character. This week, the ruling from a federal judge overturning Florida’s mean-spirited transgender policy placed me into the questioning mindset.

The legal finding of Judge Robert Hinkle of the Federal District Court in Tallahassee is welcome news, as he ruled parts of a Florida law that bans gender transition care for minors and imposes hurdles on adults seeking such care are unconstitutional.  Many who have watched this case evolve felt no other logical outcome could result.  But why was there even a need to place such an awful policy into law in the first place?  Why would there be any desire to limit a parent’s right to make medical decisions for their transgender children?

The championing by Governor Ron DeSantis of anti-transgender legislation made national headlines as he attempted to turn culture war issues into fodder for his Potomac Fever.  He signed the bill that barred doctors and nurses from prescribing or administering transition-related medication to those under 18 and also exposed medical providers to criminal liability and professional discipline if they did so.  So, it must have deeply stung to read the 105-page order from Judge Hinkle who wrote that “gender identity is real” and that a “widely accepted standard of care” includes puberty blockers and hormone treatments that Florida unlawfully banned.

“The State of Florida can regulate as needed but cannot flatly deny transgender individuals safe and effective medical treatment — treatment with medications routinely provided to others with the state’s full approval so long as the purpose is not to support the patient’s transgender identity,” Judge Hinkle wrote.

I have often tried to examine the mindset of conservatives who took actions that history demonstrates to have been completely wrong.  The Civil Rights bill offered by President John Kennedy was rebuked by conservatives, which included many Southern Democrats.  There were columnists at the time who wondered which leading Republican would pick up the pitchfork and run against the further inclusion of Blacks into our society. Who would reap the whirlwind of racism for partisan gain?  Barry Goldwater would try to unite conservative resentments and grievances in 1964 but lost to Lyndon Johnson in what up to then were historic numbers.

Over the decades some conservatives were seeking to ensure that interracial marriage would never be allowed. In the last 20 years, gay rights and marriage equality have been used as a partisan bludgeon by conservatives who seemed unaware of the people they were negatively impacting within their own families with such actions. Recently, transgenders have been the favorite target for right-wing partisanship and fundraising efforts.

I understand how transactional politics might be used concerning topics from EV batteries to subsidies for corn growers and ethanol production.  Politics is, after all, politics.  But when the lives of the citizenry are directly impacted in harmful ways that cut to the heart of both happiness and health, as with the Florida transgender legislation, then we must ask the questions.  Why?  For what purpose?

Self-righteousness and partisan zeal do not make for sound policy-making regarding gender dysphoria. Why would conservatives have thought their ham-handed arguments about this topic would fare better than the others over the decades that veered so wildly into the bigoted ditch? If there is clearly going to be a resounding rejection by the courts what is the motive for conservatives to push forward? If a policy is not being crafted with a desire for a credible outcome, why spend time on it?

Cruelty is the point. But again, why? How can a sizable portion of a political party think there is an upside to taking advantage, via the legislative process, of those who are weaker or more vulnerable in our society? Why do the ‘bright lights’ who think it’s politically expedient to mount legislative attacks on transgender children not get rebuked by their own party?

Questions abound. Few solid and reasoned answers can be found.