Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Is my right to keep and bear arms a "social issue"?

I love the Libertarians. They're a great bunch, mainly because they're one of the groups most likely to leave me alone if they ever get into power. That means a lot to me, because I believe that the aggregate of individual decisions comprises a single unit of knowledge much greater than that of a group of smooth-talking bureaucrats with teleprompters and speechwriters.

Now, as much as I love freedom, I'm certainly no Anarcho-Capitalist (sorry for the Wikipedia link). Aside from government's provision of a national defense, I believe that its laws are necessary to protect negative rights. In other words, I need the power of government to keep you from interfering with my property rights, but I can't project any requirement on you to take a positive action such as, I don't know, paying for my medical care or footing the bill for my children's education. I also want to be able to delegate enforcement power to the government to make sure that each of us upholds our end of any contract into which we enter. I want the government to provide a judicial system and be a fair means of punishing the guilty and protecting the innocent.

And that, my friends, is where the more "tolerant" Libertarians disappoint me. The national party's approach to the "sensitive issue" of abortion goes too far in its acceptance of doing one's own thing. The Libertarian party platform simply treats it as a personal decision about which people hold different "good-faith views".

How can life simply be reduced to a social issue, like whether we believe that consumption of alcohol is appropriate on Sundays? We as Christians have allowed this to an extent by projecting our morality onto others and allowing abortion to be redefined simply as a moral issue about which there is a debate rather than as an issue of fundamental rights and due process on which there can be no compromise.

A former coworker of mine used to say, "Don't chastise a non-believer for the act of sinning, because he is only being who he is. He needs Jesus' salvation, and no simple behavioral change will save him. Correct the believer, because he has been transformed and knows better." In much the same way, we need to defend life not only from the position of Christianity but from the position of jealously guarding our rights and the rights of others under our Founding Documents. Yes, our system of laws is based on that set forth by the Creator of the universe, and those who fail to submit to His authority on earth will be dealt with by that same Creator on the Day of Judgment. In the meantime, those who fail to recognize His authority must still be forced to recognize the written rule of our land, regardless of whether we're able to persuade them to change their personal beliefs or preferences.

The right to life is no more a social issue than is my natural freedom and equality, my right to property, and my right to defend that property. I would love to see the Libertarians begin to speak up for that right, or at least treat it with as much importance as legalization of marijuana.

No comments: