|Great article, Jason. I especially liked your point about Santorum not being for liberty, but against contraception and sexual promiscuity. His focus on the "culture war" may or may not work to his disadvantage. What I do know is that freedom is likely to suffer, if this is how people defend it. If Santorum does win the nomination and faces off with Obama, the people will be left with this decision regarding government involvement: "If you'd like government involvement in your sex life, choose Santorum, or If you'd like government involvement in most spheres of your life, choose Obama." People would hopefully choose the lesser of the two freedom eaters. However, Santorum has yet to fully show how against freedom he is. |
Furthermore, I'm wondering why the conservatives waited so long to stage such a concerted attack against Obama's health-care mandate. Were they waiting until they could use religious freedom to bolster support for their argument? What ever happened to political freedom? Do they think people don't hold political freedom in as high esteem as they do religious freedom? Perhaps it is as Jason suggests. Conservatives don't view atheists and agnostics as having rights. Therefore, they can only defend the religious person's rights.
The argument goes like this: "Only the good can have rights, and all good is ordained by a God, and the only way you can ensure the goodness of a person is to have him fear divine retribution."
This is implied in the comment Ed relayed.
Comments such as those are the reason I seldom read comments on unfamiliar sites. I used to read comments often but I've had my fill. However, comments are useful in that they are measures of a society's culture and intellectual climate. I've viewed enough comments to say with certainty that the views expressed in those two comments are representative.
We should be worried.