Phony solutions for real social ills

Los Angeles Times ^ | Feb. 7, 2011 | David Boaz

[rlmorel]

"...Back then, conservatives still defended sodomy laws. These days, after the 2003 Supreme Court decision striking down such laws, most have moved on. Now they just campaign against gays in the military, gays adopting children and gays getting married..." Most conservatives understand that you could not "enforce" the sodomy laws as they were written, because to do so would have required an intrusion by the authorities that was unconstitutional. This guy is accusing conservatives as just taking up the next talking point. I don't view it that way, I see it more pessimistically as fighting a rear-guard (no pun intended) action like the American forces on the Bataan peninsula our defensive area constantly shrinking because the activists on the other side never sleep, and the majority of people out there won't be bothered by it until it is too late.

"...Reducing the incidence of unwed motherhood, divorce, fatherlessness, welfare and crime would be a good thing. So why the focus on issues that would do nothing to solve the "breakdown of the basic family structure" and the resulting "high cost of a dysfunctional society"?" Government acceptance of homosexuality and homosexual marriage IS a direct attack on the institution of marriage. The Left has been chipping away at it since around 1960 or so.

"...Well, solving the problems of divorce and unwed motherhood is hard. And lots of Republican and conservative voters have been divorced. A constitutional amendment to ban divorce wouldn't go over very well, even with the social conservatives. Far better to pick on a small group, a group not perceived to be part of the Republican constituency, and blame it for social breakdown and its associated costs. That's why social conservatives point to a real problem and then offer phony solutions..." Hmm. Where to begin? This particular argument goes to the heart of the difference between liberals and conservatives. Because conservatives may be divorced or have children out of wedlock does not impel us to remove all impediments to making those things possible, we try to reduce them while recognizing that they still happen. Liberals, on the other hand, propose that since we cannot prevent it, we should make it as comfortable, financially affordable and as free of all shame as possible. They use government to do this for everything from drug addiction to welfare.

To liberals, the greatest crime and insult is to be accused of hypocrisy. To them, there is nothing worse. Therefore, they must remove all limits and standards of behavior so that one can never be stigmatized for failing to meet those standards. Conservatives believe we must have standards and should aim to meet them, understanding that it doesn't always work out that way.

And because it doesn't work out that way, we shouldn't grease the skids to make it more likely to occur.

[Wuli]

“But those problems have nothing to do with abortion or gay marriage, the issues that social conservatives talk most about.”

No Mr Boaz, THOSE are the Conservative issues that (1) YOU LISTEN TO/HEAR THE MOST, (2)YOU complain about the most.

Conservatives are just as equally animated about many other issues, but those other issues either don’t concern you, or you don’t understand them, or you know your position is a losing position, so you don’t want to talk about them, even though Conservatives are ALWAYS talking about them.