I have slammed the left in past articles, now I have to point out the problems that I have with the right side of the isle. I am a small government guy, I like low taxes, I don't believe in the so called "right" to kill your baby in an attempt to ditch responsibility for risky behavior. I sound like a conservative, right? There are some noticeable differences between Libertarian views, and Conservative views, and I will highlight two specific examples. These are two lines in the sand, that I draw to separate some of my principles from that of the Conservative wing of the Republican party. The two lines relate to, regulation of marriage, and the so called, "war on drugs".
We are going to start with the marriage license, as a tool, used by self proclaimed "small government" Conservatives at the state level. A license is better defined as, the government giving you permission to do something. Now, why do I need the government's permission to have a ceremony in the presence of God? It is a sacred moment that is shared between 2 souls, and there is no indication in any case that government is needed to come in and fix anything. Which brings us to gay marriage, I do not have any attraction to any member of the male gender, I am married to a wonderful woman, and she has given me a beautiful daughter who in now 8 years old. It does not affect my life, nor does it hinder my pursuit of happiness as a human being to have a ban on gay marriage. However, I do not feel that it is the place of an elected official to impose their beliefs, or the beliefs of their constituents, upon those that do not share those same beliefs. For those that believe that sexual immorality is wrong, that is acceptable and a reasonable view to have. In doing so, you must respond to sexual immorality, with the same level of scrutiny, even if that immoral behavior manifests itself in a way that is unfamiliar, or repulsive to you as a person of faith. Pre marital intercourse is also referred to in 1 Corinthians as a form of sexual immorality. If you are going to quote scripture, then you mustn't twist the words to suit your own preference. We should quote scripture often, it is a fact, that this country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. However, the use of scripture for purposes that are self serving, is never acceptable.
My next example of conservative hypocrisy is the "war on drugs". There are two main points I want to make when addressing drug laws in the US. The first involves the perception that the use of certain drugs contribute to many of the current changes in American society, more specifically, a functional family unit. the type of It is true that drug use does contribute to forms of conflict, such as, domestic violence and divorce within the American home. Those adverse effects of substance abuse are not unique to illegal drugs. Alcohol is a major contributor to the examples of domestic conflict mentioned above, and it is one of the most accessible drugs on the market. I hear the term, "gateway drug" when referring to marijuana, attempting to create a public perception that separates it from legal drugs such as tobacco, and alcohiol, and puts it in a "taboo" category. Alcohol can just as easily be put into a "gateway drug" category. One type of substance abuse can very easily lead to another, which suggests that the "gateway drug" argument is misused, if not completely untrue. The first point that I'm trying to make here is that drugs, legal or illegal, prescription or otherwise, have adverse effects, and negative societal consequences. As long as someone is taking these drugs on his/her own, whether it is to treat a medical condition, or for recreational purposes, it is within their right as an individual to do so without government intrusion. That is a true example of liberty. The second point that I wish to make, has to do with the effect of drug laws, as it relates to overall consumption, and accessibilty. When you ban a product from the market, by way of legislation, you drive the sale of that product, to the black market. Heroin, marijuana, cocaine, whatever the drug, the current drug laws give fuel to the cartels coming into our country looking to sell their "product". They would not have a "product" if buyers were not forced into underground dealing to obtain certain drugs. The Mexican drug cartels, are thriving, for the same reason that Al Capone and his business model were successful in the 1930's. The government seems to love to regulate things. Why don't they regulate these drugs and create some type of purity standards, or standard concentration of substances to assure that people don't die like Phillip Seymour Hoffman, when a crooked dealer creates a bad mix that proves lethal? In the meantime, the government, continues to regulate the things that they have no business sticking their nose in, while creating a booming market for drug cartels, that are now starting to import heroin. Makes you wonder, if the new product(heroin) is a response to the legalization and decriminalization of marijuana beginning to gain steam within some circles. Conservatives commonly argue against gun control legislation by stating,"Making something illegal, doesn't make it go away". This is a true statement, but why does it not apply to drug laws? We continue to throw people in jail for "possession". What is the reason, is it the job of the government to protect people from themselves? We need to take a serious look at what is necessary for public safety, and where we draw the line on interfering in peoples' personal lives.
Hypocrisy exists on both sides of the isle, you have to rely on objectivity, and be able to filter through the partisan bias on both sides in order to see clearly. Government control is bi partisan, perio
We are going to start with the marriage license, as a tool, used by self proclaimed "small government" Conservatives at the state level. A license is better defined as, the government giving you permission to do something. Now, why do I need the government's permission to have a ceremony in the presence of God? It is a sacred moment that is shared between 2 souls, and there is no indication in any case that government is needed to come in and fix anything. Which brings us to gay marriage, I do not have any attraction to any member of the male gender, I am married to a wonderful woman, and she has given me a beautiful daughter who in now 8 years old. It does not affect my life, nor does it hinder my pursuit of happiness as a human being to have a ban on gay marriage. However, I do not feel that it is the place of an elected official to impose their beliefs, or the beliefs of their constituents, upon those that do not share those same beliefs. For those that believe that sexual immorality is wrong, that is acceptable and a reasonable view to have. In doing so, you must respond to sexual immorality, with the same level of scrutiny, even if that immoral behavior manifests itself in a way that is unfamiliar, or repulsive to you as a person of faith. Pre marital intercourse is also referred to in 1 Corinthians as a form of sexual immorality. If you are going to quote scripture, then you mustn't twist the words to suit your own preference. We should quote scripture often, it is a fact, that this country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. However, the use of scripture for purposes that are self serving, is never acceptable.
My next example of conservative hypocrisy is the "war on drugs". There are two main points I want to make when addressing drug laws in the US. The first involves the perception that the use of certain drugs contribute to many of the current changes in American society, more specifically, a functional family unit. the type of It is true that drug use does contribute to forms of conflict, such as, domestic violence and divorce within the American home. Those adverse effects of substance abuse are not unique to illegal drugs. Alcohol is a major contributor to the examples of domestic conflict mentioned above, and it is one of the most accessible drugs on the market. I hear the term, "gateway drug" when referring to marijuana, attempting to create a public perception that separates it from legal drugs such as tobacco, and alcohiol, and puts it in a "taboo" category. Alcohol can just as easily be put into a "gateway drug" category. One type of substance abuse can very easily lead to another, which suggests that the "gateway drug" argument is misused, if not completely untrue. The first point that I'm trying to make here is that drugs, legal or illegal, prescription or otherwise, have adverse effects, and negative societal consequences. As long as someone is taking these drugs on his/her own, whether it is to treat a medical condition, or for recreational purposes, it is within their right as an individual to do so without government intrusion. That is a true example of liberty. The second point that I wish to make, has to do with the effect of drug laws, as it relates to overall consumption, and accessibilty. When you ban a product from the market, by way of legislation, you drive the sale of that product, to the black market. Heroin, marijuana, cocaine, whatever the drug, the current drug laws give fuel to the cartels coming into our country looking to sell their "product". They would not have a "product" if buyers were not forced into underground dealing to obtain certain drugs. The Mexican drug cartels, are thriving, for the same reason that Al Capone and his business model were successful in the 1930's. The government seems to love to regulate things. Why don't they regulate these drugs and create some type of purity standards, or standard concentration of substances to assure that people don't die like Phillip Seymour Hoffman, when a crooked dealer creates a bad mix that proves lethal? In the meantime, the government, continues to regulate the things that they have no business sticking their nose in, while creating a booming market for drug cartels, that are now starting to import heroin. Makes you wonder, if the new product(heroin) is a response to the legalization and decriminalization of marijuana beginning to gain steam within some circles. Conservatives commonly argue against gun control legislation by stating,"Making something illegal, doesn't make it go away". This is a true statement, but why does it not apply to drug laws? We continue to throw people in jail for "possession". What is the reason, is it the job of the government to protect people from themselves? We need to take a serious look at what is necessary for public safety, and where we draw the line on interfering in peoples' personal lives.
Hypocrisy exists on both sides of the isle, you have to rely on objectivity, and be able to filter through the partisan bias on both sides in order to see clearly. Government control is bi partisan, perio