Lately I feel like I’ve been doing a lot of refereeing and discussion about the libertarian-social conservative debate. Along those lines, I believe my readers would gain a lot of insights from this American Thinker essay by libertarian Randall Hoven:
Social conservatism is taking a beating lately. Not only did it lose in the recent elections, it is being blamed for the Republican losses. If only the religious right would get off the Republican Party’s back, the GOP could win like it is supposed to again. I beg to differ.
I’m anything but a social conservative. In nine presidential elections, I voted Libertarian in six. I am a hard core “limited government” conservative/libertarian; I want government out of my pocket-book and out of my bedroom. Concerning my religion, it’s none of your business, but I’m somewhere in the lapsed-Catholic-deist-agnostic-atheist spectrum; let’s just call it agnostic.
Having said all that, I have no problem with “social conservatives” or the “religious right” and their supposed influence on the Republican party. I base this not on the Bible or historical authority, but on the love of liberty and the evidence of my own eyes.
The provocative conclusion?
When the day comes that the only thing between me and liberty are some Bible-quoting know-it-alls, I’ll reconsider. But right now, there are a lot of things between me and liberty, and the “religious right” is not one of them. In fact, I see them voting for more liberty, not less. If the Republican Party ever decides it really wants to be the party of liberty, rather than the slower-road-to-socialism party, I’ll gladly join the religious right there.
The evidence is laid out in the essay. Judge for yourselves. I think Mr. Hoven makes some excellent, eminently rational points. Social conservatives need a little more humility, and libertarians need a clearer perspective. Together they should see much more in common than not from which to form an ongoing, truly conservative, political alliance that can lead the GOP back from the wilderness.