From: J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: What is a Conservative?
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 18:04:33 GMT

In <1992Nov11.162009.9147@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>, John Welsh writes:

>>
>> A True Conservative (tm) would be against the RICO seizure statutes, against
>> keeping drugs illegal, against keeping prostitution illegal, against making
>> abortion illegal, against forced prayer in schools, etc., etc., etc.

>This sounds more like a libertarian than a conservative.  Libertarians
>do not like the aggressive use of force in government and want to
>de-criminalize "victimless" crimes, such as the above.  The sad thing
>is that they would probably send in the police to break up prayer
>meetings that the students organized.

What?  Libertarians would use the police to break up prayer meetings?  I hope
you're not serious.  If the students freely organized the meeting, if there was
no government role in the meeting (providing a facility is not a "role" in the
meeting as long as other groups have the same access to the facility) and if
all students were attending the meeting of their own free will, then there is
no Constitutional conflict.  In fact, *denying* them the right to assemble is
unconstitutional.


>> >Conservatives believe in limited government and the empowerment of the
>> >individual

Conservatives favor limited government in *economic* affairs.  Lower taxes,
less regulation, more free trade and so on.  They do not seek to empower the
individual in *social* affairs, choosing instead to make individuals conform
to what they consider "socially acceptable."  This is no different than
"political correctness" in that they wish to control actions much as the PC
crowd wants to control thought.

>This sounds more like true conservatism.  A conservative seems to
>have a more stringent standard for right and wrong and a greater
>desire to see individual freedom within a this standard.  One of
>Rush's truths is that right and wrong is not a matter of individual
>choice, another is that there is a God and a yet another is that
>abortion is wrong.  There are many politicians that say that they
>believe that abortion is wrong for them, but that they will not
>impose their standards on others.  That is liberalism; a "to each
>his own" stance.  A true conservative would say that it is wrong
>(and possibly give very specific exemptions) and would crusade
>for his/her cause.  Conservatives believe in enforcing the law
>just as much as liberals do.  The difference is the type and tone
>of the laws they would support.  Another difference is the source
>of their standards of right and wrong.  Conservatives usually have
>a faith in God and is is by this God's standards that they go (now
>we have to hope that no Aztecs or Druids get into high office, they
>believe in human sacrifice).  One of the most important thing about
>this character issue is what is the source of your standards of
>right and wrong and quite often that source determines your leaning
>towards what kind of government you want.

But *who* determines right and wrong?  To say that a majority considers some-
thing as "moral" or "immoral" is meaningless.  Even if morality can't be
defined by individual choice (an oppressive idea), that still doesn't mean
that *morality* should dictate government policy.  In that respect it seems
that democracy is three wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for lunch.

My wife and I live an "Ozzie and Harriet" lifestyle.  She stays home and we
are about to start an all-American, apple pie-style family.  That's the way
we *choose* to live.  We have no desire to force that on others, though.
That's the difference between conservatives and libertarians.

Tim Irvin
Planned Libertarian candidate for Congress in 1994