Printed in the Fayette County Record on 4-11-25

What is a culture war? Is it simply a disagreement of beliefs? Or is it that one group wants to grant freedoms while another group wants to restrict them? The allotment of freedom is easy to comprehend, but from where does the desire for limited freedom initiate? Laws often restrict freedom to some extent or another and societal norms often serve as the basis for these laws. For example, intrusion into one’s home and/or theft is considered unfair and unjust so we have made laws against these actions. People’s safety and well-being present the easiest example of why laws should exist, but when do laws metamorphose from safety concerns into intrusions and become unfair? 

Let us start simple. Democrats, at least the modern day version, typically want to give people more freedom or choice. For example, The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act, which has repeatedly stalled in Congress, would restrict gerrymandering by both parties, automatically register citizens to vote, and allow more voting options on a regular basis by law. Flip the coin and we have a largely Republican opposition stalling that legislation. This brings us to Republicans restricting individual freedom. As a local example, Texas Republicans have recently introduced HB3817 that can imprison someone for misrepresenting their gender at work. In other words, a person is not allowed to legally be transgender. Texas also recently reverted to abortion being illegal. Defendants will point to the exclusion of “medically necessary”, but the fact is more women are dying now than three years ago because doctors and patients are scared of imprisonment.

Republicans rally against abortion to a fault. God helps bring life into this world and we should not interfere. As a personal idea this presents no issue. It is something to hold as one’s own, and one is welcome to persuade others into the same line of thinking. However, when we force others to live the idea we believe then the door to fascism opens.

Making other people do as you do is not altruistic, therefore, anti-abortionists are not interested in saving the fetus. Nor are they interested in saving the soul of the mother from damnation. So if altruism does not represent their intentions then perhaps the opposite quality equals an answer. Selfishness is the opposite of altruism and may actually get to the core of the culture war. Republicans are actually only interested in saving their own souls from damnation though they position themselves as saviors. They see every life they save as another token to gain admission into Heaven.

Selfishness reigns throughout as those saviors then push legislation to condemn those “saved” lives if they deviate from the norms to which their so-called saviors live. Not living up to those standards results in someone’s identity erased, their physical body imprisoned, and their soul rendered worthless. These are the goals no matter how someone tries to soften the situation. It’s like monopolizing an Easter egg hunt and throwing out any candy that isn’t your favorite.

Laws should serve to protect, not condemn, and there is no straight-forward answer to abortion. However, the motives are simple. One side is self-serving while another side wants freedom. If the self-serving side proposes to render a fetus useless and unworthy after birth - should the person identify as trans - then their privilege should not extend into defining the rights of said fetus or mother.

Democrats don’t get out of this unscathed. As this past and post general election cycle shows, Democrats accept trans people to the extent that it serves their party. Once it does not, they allow Republicans to place trans people in the shadows allowing prejudiced politics to take over while still positioning themselves as trans’ saviors. That is shameful at best. They turned away over the past couple of years possibly believing that being silent on prejudiced attacks on the community sufficed as a high ground. More likely, they thought fighting would cost them votes.

Now there are proposed amendments to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) which may already be in effect by the time someone reads this. Gender-affirming care is one of the protected health benefits required under the ACA. It will be extinguished by a self-serving group who want to rid the world of trans people, and Democrats have once again failed to defend. Former Texas Democratic Chair Gilberto Hinojosa was quoted as saying he understood people not wanting their tax dollars spent on gender-affirming care. He later apologized but it shines light on the nature of the Democratic party to recoil with fearful responses.

This current edits to the ACA treat gender-affirming care as if it is a lifestyle choice. If being transgender is a lifestyle choice then anything related to Type-2 Diabetes should not be required either as Type-2 Diabetes is largely the result of lifestyle choices. There is much more money to be saved in denying Type-2 Diabetes care and its complications such as heart disease and renal failure leading to dialysis. But the current executive and congressional branches will not do that because it would be too unpopular amongst their base.

Rather, Republicans will undermine a minority that the Republican base despises and the Democrats fail to defend. It is a win-win for Republicans. One's own popularity should not be the basis for healthcare coverage. Just like people with Type-2 Diabetes should have access to treatments, transgender citizens should have access to the appropriate care. The current edits to the ACA are a blatant attempt to segregate, shame, and deny the existence of transgender citizens and their legitimate needs.

A culture war only exists at the will of its proprietors who place laws and amendments to repress other groups. For the repressed groups, the war is a fight for freedom. Good people do not have to understand all aspects of someone else’s identity. Good people simply need to let other good people be themselves.