Skip to comments.The Grand Myth of Live-And-Let-Live Liberalism
Posted on 09/11/2013 4:17:07 AM PDT by Kaslin
In Washington, D.C., the city's department of health wants to subject people seeking a tattoo or body piercing to a mandatory 24-hour waiting period before they can go through with it. That's just one of the regulations in a 66-page proposal of new rules for the tattoo and piercing industry.
Reasonable people may differ on the wisdom of these proposals, but as someone whose interest in such establishments begins and ends with keeping my daughter away from them, I can't get too worked up either way, save to say D.C. has bigger problems to worry about.
What did catch my eye was this line from the write-up in the metro section of the Washington Post: "The body art rules are the latest product of a city government that has occasionally struggled to reconcile its socially liberal sensibilities with a zeal for regulation."
As a conservative resident of Washington, D.C., where registered Republicans are outnumbered by about 9 to 1 and where truly conservative Republicans are outnumbered on a scale comparable to the predicament faced by Frodo and Sam when they sneaked into orc-infested Mordor, I find such statements hilarious.
There is a notion out there that being "socially liberal" means you're a libertarian at heart, a live-and-let-live sort of person who says "whatever floats your boat" a lot.
Alleged proof for this amusing myth (or pernicious lie, take your pick) comes in the form of liberal support for gay marriage and abortion rights, and opposition to a few things that smack of what some people call "traditional values."
The evidence disproving this adorable story of live-and-let-live liberalism comes in the form of pretty much everything else liberals say, do and believe.
Social liberalism is the foremost, predominant and in many instances sole impulse for zealous regulation in this country, particularly in big cities. I love it when liberals complain about a ridiculous bit of PC nanny-statism coming out of New York, L.A., Chicago, D.C., Seattle, etc. -- "What will they do next?"
Uh, sorry to tell you, but you are "they." Outside of a "Law and Order" script -- or an equally implausible MSNBC diatribe about who ruined Detroit -- conservatives have as much influence on big-city liberalism as the Knights of Malta.
Seriously, who else do people think are behind efforts to ban big sodas or sue hairdressers for charging women more than men? Who harasses little kids for making toy guns out of sticks, pop tarts or their own fingers? Who wants to regulate the air you breathe? The food you eat and the beverages you drink? Who wants to control your thermostat? Take your guns? Your cigarettes? Heck, your candy cigarettes? Who's in favor of speech codes on campuses and "hate crime" laws everywhere? Who's in favor of free speech when it comes to taxpayer-subsidized "art" and pornography (so long as you use a condom, if liberals get their way) but then bangs their spoons on their high chairs for strict regulations when it comes to political speech? Who loves meddling, finger-wagging billionaires like Michael Bloomberg when they use state power and taxpayer money to herd, bully and nudge people but thinks billionaires like the Koch brothers who want to shrink government are the root of all tyranny?
At the national level, who bypassed Congress to empower the EPA to regulate the atmosphere? Oh, and who pushed Obamacare on a country that didn't want it? Who defends bending the entire country -- including religious institutions -- into a national health-care scheme dedicated to the proposition of live and let live so long as you live the way the Department of Health and Human Services says you should?
Did legislative and bureaucratic gremlins sneak into government buildings at night and pass all of these rules and regulations while the social-liberal free-thinkers were off not judging people and refusing to harsh anybody's mellow?
Sure, today's liberalism does carry within it some genetic lineage to the classical liberalism -- i.e., libertarianism -- of J.S. Mill and John Locke. But genetic ties are overrated. After all, humans share half of our genes with bananas. (Look it up.)
Social liberalism -- better understood as progressivism -- is a worldview that seeks to use the state to support its preferred values and culture. That isn't libertarianism. Support for abortion rights does not make you a libertarian; it makes you someone who wants very lax regulations on abortion for ideological reasons. Which is why socially liberal bureaucrats in D.C. want to make you wait 24 hours to get a tattoo of a baby on your arm, but there's no waiting to have an abortion.
Someone HAS to quote Jummy Buffet here...
Make that “Jimmy”
Liberals (the capital "L" type) have NEVER had "live-and-let-live" sensibilities.
Their philosophy was, is and always will be: "I live, and you live how I tell you to live - because I know better!"
PS - The level of hypocrisy demonstrated by vociferously, and even viciously, opposing any form of waiting period for women who want abortions, while gleefully advocating a waiting period for a tattoo, is almost too great to wrap one's mind around.
By the way, the “What a load of crap” was aimed at the proposed ordinance, not at the writer of the article...
I was just going to ask you if you read the title
How we got here I haven’t a clue?
Except that our representatives refused to fight for our values.
And you can hardly call abortion "Live and let live."
1. Highest percentage of HIV/AIDS in the nation.
2. Highest infant mortality rate in the nation.
3. Last or next to last in education for the last 40 years.
D.C. is a tide pool for every failed, corrupt progressive experiment ever tried.
I guess it will just be easier to go to prison to get a tattoo soon.
Not that some inspection isn’t warranted—parlors should be checked for sterile practices to prevent disease transmission. But 66 pages? How typical.
FTA: In Washington, D.C., the city’s department of health wants to subject people seeking a tattoo or body piercing to a mandatory 24-hour waiting period before they can go through with it.
I was thinking along these lines from Margaritaville...
... nothing to show but this brand new tattoo.
But it’s a real beauty,
A Mexican cutie, how it got here
I haven’t a clue.
Drunks getting tattoos leading to government trying to protect said drunks from themselves. More interference from the do-gooders. *spit*
If you (the theoretical “you”) want to get drunk and do something stupid why the **** should government try to protect you? That leads to things like unconstitutional laws.
That was the point I “shorthanded” with the Buffet comment.
...but at least now there will be fewer unwanted tattoos in the city...
I like that!
Very accurate and true article about the consequences of social liberalism.
Goldberg makes a great point that too many don’t understand.
Libertarians are not socially liberal and and fiscally conservative. Libertarians are socially libertarian and fiscally libertarian. Social liberalism is not the same thing as social libertarianism. Fiscal libertarianism is not the same thing as fiscal conservatism. There are plenty of fiscal conservatives who support centralized monetary policy (i.e., Larry Kudlow).
Generally, libertarians want to keep social policy decisions at a low a level of government as possible. Libertarians also want social policy decisions made with consent of the governed. Libertarians are anti-statists.
Some libertarians are pro-life, such as Ron Paul. Some libertarians are pro-choice, such as Gary Johnson. But both believe any policy decisions about abortion should be made at a state level, not a national level.
Liberals want to dictate social policy from as high a level of government as possible. Liberals want social policy decisions made by an elected or appointed elite. Liberals are statists.
There are many social liberals who use libertarianism as a fig leaf, but when you dig further, it is clear they are statists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.