I know you mean well. You care deeply about all of us, want us to have the best possible life and afterlife, and you feel the need to step in and make sure we don’t screw that up. You’re just trying to look out for your fellow citizens. I also know that you envision your political stance as supportive of small-government, pro-liberty ideals. You think that you’ve done nothing but support freedom for all, while the left does everything within its power to take it away. The problem is, that’s not really the case. In fact, social conservatives and their liberal opponents have a lot in common. You need to recognize that because, at the moment, you’re part of the problem.
Before you face the reality of your situation, you should know that we’re not polar opposites. In a lot of ways, you’re absolutely right on the issues. Social conservatives tend to be big on capitalism and have taken strong stands against the increasing socialization of the United States. You have a long record of promoting personal property rights, usually fight government intrusion into the free market and believe people should live self-sufficient lives. You understand the value of a life lived for your family, are overwhelmingly charitable to the less fortunate and thrive on the protection of our shared American history.
The values by which you live your lives and raise your children are not in question. The problem is that once you move past economic issues, and the outside walls of your own home, you start to force those ideals upon everyone else. Often, you sound an awful lot like the kind of big-government control freaks who you claim to despise.
We’re currently trying to defeat a president who has argued that the Constitution is this nation’s fatal flaw. He’s claimed that the free market system “has never worked.” He’s spent his first term attacking virtually the entire Bill of Rights via a series of bills that directly target the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Tenth Amendments. Along the way, he has decimated your economy, sponsored a government takeover of GM and Chrysler, engaged in an unconstitutional assault on Libya and thrown our global allies under the bus in order to curry favor with our enemies.
Yet, for some reason, your number one priority still seems to be finding a presidential candidate who will support a federal ban on gay marriage.
Without question, small-government conservatives were open to your opinion. We listened as you tried to make a cohesive argument in support of such a ban. Unfortunately, “because God doesn’t like it” is not a provable claim. Nor is it a tenable argument, since he doesn’t like killing people either, yet you (rightfully) have no problem with the death penalty or the killing of overseas terrorists. After spending years claiming that gay marriage would lead to “the dissolution of the American family,” you’ve offered absolutely no evidence to support this theory.
We watched as you applied the same M.O. to debates that have covered myriad issues, both big and small. You’re willing to trade freedom for safety in the War on Terror, are unwilling to admit that prohibition has always been a failing stance and are downright desperate to surrender your First Amendment rights if it means keeping “offensive” music and violent video games out of Wal-Mart. All of this, because despite a lack of evidence, you fear doing nothing will somehow damage your family.
Like those who champion Sharia law, Tenth Amendment be damned, you work toward a day when your morality is enforceable at the federal level — thrust upon the entire nation.