But I cannot believe that allowing for the government to have such total say so in every aspect of our life is something that you can attribute to the right or conservative side.
Actually, most conservatives I know believe in small government only in some things, primarily economic ones, and a few social ones like gun ownership rights, but on other topics they believe in a BIG government telling people exactly how to live their lives and what they can and cannot do. To provide some examples of the latter:
- Interracial marriage. Was it liberals or conservatives who opposed allowing interracial marriages? It was conservatives. If they consistently believed in small government, they would have supported the right of an interracial couple to marry, but they strongly opposed it, and many still do.
- Gay marriage follows the same reasoning that interracial marriage did. And the broader issue of gay rights also fits this reasoning.
- Transsexual rights. Is it liberals or conservatives who oppose transsexual rights? If conservatives were consistent in their belief in small government, then they should support those rights. But they do not.
- Doctor-assisted suicide for terminally ill patients. If conservatives believed in small government, then they should support the rights of terminally ill patients to choose to end their lives rather than having to endure the pain and suffering through the ravages of an illness. That has got to be one of the most personal and difficult of decisions a person can make as to when to end his/her life. Yet conservatives opposed allowing doctor-assisted suicide. Is that a belief in small government?
- Recreational drug use. Has it been liberals or conservatives who have supported legalizing the use of recreational drugs like marijuana? It has mostly been liberals who have supported it and mostly conservatives who have opposed it. If conservatives really and consistently believed in small government, they would support such legalization. After all, what is more personal than what one takes into one's own body, yet conservatives often oppose that right. If three deer hunters sit around a camp fire smoking cigarettes and passing around a bottle of Jack Daniels, many conservatives might not approve of them smoking or drinking but would not believe that the government should tell them that they can't do that. But if three college kids decide to go on a hiking trip and then while sitting around the campfire pass around a joint, a LARGE portion of conservatives believe that the government should intervene and fine or imprison those college kids.
I can go on for a lot longer, but you get the idea. Neither liberals nor conservatives are consistent in their belief in small government. They believe in small government when they want to do something and thus don't want government interference, but when other people are doing something they don't approve of, then they want to government to get really BIG to stop those other people from doing those things of which they themselves don't approve. The only groups that I think are consistent on that philosophy of small government are the libertarians.
In my journey through life I have progressed through the initial phase of being a political conservative as well as a fundamentalist Christian. I held those views primarily because others around me did so. As Mark Twain once observed, "Most people get their religious and political views second hand and without reflection." That certainly applied to me. While I was a fundamentalist Christian I certainly got my views second hand, i.e., from other people, and I held those views without reflection, i.e., without thinking about WHY I held those views.
That changed when in 1983 I read the book
The Ominous Parallels by Leonard Peikoff. The book is about the parallels between the pre-Nazi Weimar republic of Germany of the 1920s and the United States as of the book's date (early 1980s). It was a really scary book and a lot of what he wrote made sense. The book led me to the writings of Ayn Rand, whose brand of libertarianism she called Objectivism presented challenges to my conservative ideas and beliefs. I then read a lot of Ayn Rand's writings and after reading and thinking then became a libertarian, as her ideas seemed logically consistent, unlike the ideas of conservatism.
I was a hard core libertarian for many years, but in the past few years have begun to soften my views in regards to whether/how the government assists those in need. So today I would call myself either a liberal leaning libertarian or a libertarian leaning liberal.
Miss
@thistlebloom, you once said that "[t]he left is determined to destroy what this country was founded on and they are relentless." If forced to choose between the labels "left" and "right", I would choose "left", although I find the left/right labels too restrictive. Do you think I am "determined to destroy what this country was founded on"? I don't think that (most) conservatives are trying to destroy what this country was founded on, nor do I think (most) liberals are trying to do that either. I think instead different groups have different visions of what the country can be. Is it so wrong that we have different visions? Must we demonize those with whom we disagree? Sadly, I see so much hate on both sides toward the other. The hate seems to come more from the right than the left, but both sides are guilty of such hate. I wish this cycle of hate would end, that people would actually put into practice the Golden Rule rather than simply giving lip service to it and would seek to understand others and points of view rather than simply labeling them as the "Other" and thus deserving of suspicion if not outright hatred.
So, to those of you who have read this far, first, THANK YOU. Second, I ask you to consider what you believe, whether politacal, religious, or some other issue and ask your self WHY it is you hold such views. Is it because your views were acquired second hand, i.e., from other people? Have you reflected on those views to see if they really made sense? Have you looked at other points of view to try to understand what and how and WHY others think the way they do? If you have done all of that, I commend you. If you have not, then I think you need to reflect on the idea that you might be wrong. I try to remind myself of that, namely, that I might be wrong.
Mother Teresa once commented "We cannot all do great things, but we can all do small things with great love." Are the things you say and do motivated by love or by hate? By seeking to understand or not? By seeking to find our common humanity or by giving into our base nature of hatred? Only you can answer that.
Senile Texas Aggie
