LogFAQs > #926142039

Gaawa_chan posted...

Voting/marriage/bathroom restrictions = inflating the system and interference with a variety of parts of the private sector on the taxpayer dime.

Except banning marriage between non-hetero couples costs the government and private business nothing (in fact, you could argue the opposite, as the more marriages the government allows the more it has to "pay out" in marriage benefits). Telling people who can and cannot use a bathroom is, likewise, not going to rob anyone of profits or require any additional expenditures by the government.

Voting restrictions aren't a left/right issue because restricting or permitting more people to vote doesn't really alter the size of government (elections will need to be secured regardless) and both left-wing and right-wing governments have a history of doing it.

Gaawa_chan posted...

You already agree with this on drugs

Because drugs involve commerce, unlike your other examples. The government banning drugs is, in essence, the government inserting itself into the world of business and banning a product/service that the laws of supply and demand would otherwise support in order to promote the health of the populace. Same could be said of things like prostitution, slavery, child labour, and copyright infringement, all with varying degrees of justification.

Gaawa_chan posted...

The State hamstringing people's rights to privately organize in order to prop up employers = big government interference in the free market

If that's your justification, I'll point out that a "true" small government approach would be to allow companies to union-bust and not get involved.

The laws supporting union formation and engagement - like collective bargaining and arbitration - are big government, as they add additional regulation and bureaucracy to the processes of employment.

Gaawa_chan posted...

But ultimately you didn't address my point. "It's not a matter of "big" vs "small." It's just a matter of what you personally want.

But it's not what I personally want. I named some things in there that I support and some things in there I don't.

For instance, if we want to talk about social issues, on abortion I am very left-wing - I believe that abortions should be available at any time, for any reason, with no expense to the mother and no hurdles put in by the government (mandatory ultrasound, talking about alternatives, etc.), up to the point where the fetus is viable outside the womb. However, when it comes to recreational drugs, I am very right-wing - I believe that legalizing marijuana is a mistake that we will one day come to regret, and I'd honestly advocate banning alcohol if I thought it stood a hope in hell of ever becoming an effective law.

Very few people are "purestrain" liberals or conservatives. Most people will have issues where they cross over and that's totally normal (and, I'd argue, probably healthy).
---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!