I have discussed the problems, potential and real, that arise for our society from abortion and gay marriage; that leaves legalizing drugs as the third issue I am interested in.
Even the most ardent Libertarian has to agree that the damage from hard drugs, Cocaine, or Opiates, is not only not confined to the individual, but unacceptable to our society and others. Our appetite for such drugs corrupts our system, but even more significantly, corrupts other, less resilient countries, making them prime targets for Narco-terrorists and terrorists of all stripes. However, Marijuana, while it has its risks, has been used by millions with minimal damage to themselves and few social problems. Typically, when one develops a dependence on Marijuana, the individual shows decreased motivation (apathy), which means that they are low risks for criminal or violent activity.
The Libertarian approach to drug use is to believe that every adult has the right to choose whatever they want to ingest. Certainly, a line must be drawn when the substance involved inexorably leads to dependence and all its attendant social costs. Marijuana, despite the alarm of many, rarely leads to severe social costs. There are individuals who will find themselves dependent on Marijuana, and their plight is unfortunate. They stand a good chance of ruining their opportunity for the pursuit of happiness, but if they are adults, and this is how they choose to live, this will primarily affect them.
So, why not Gay Marriage, Abortion on demand, Legal Marijuana? In all three cases, the societal cost seems minimal but increases as time goes on. Gay Marriage may increase the size of the non-marriage cohort by devaluing marriage as an institution primarily devoted to establishing the best setting for the rearing of healthy children. As long as the risk remains that we can worsen our already damaged institution of marriage, we should be very cautious about introducing Gay Marriage into the body politic. Abortion on demand has morphed to the point where courts have held that 13 year old girls can have an invasive medical procedure without parental involvement. A 13 year old can't get her ears pierced in most states without parental involvement but they are allowed to have a procedure that will affect them in unpredictable and possibly lasting ways; this doesn't hold up well to common sense. Finally, Marijuana is often a "gateway" drug (but less so than alcohol) and can cause grief for susceptible individuals on its own. What to do?
The problem is that once society legalizes an action, it is essentially condoning the action and all the consequences of the action. Barn doors and horses come to mind.
I would suggest that we need a concept of Constructive Ambiguity, or perhaps Constructive Hypocrisy. Most of the evidence suggests that adopting a highly secular agenda is damaging to a society. The prime evidence exists in Europe, specifically Western Europe, where the decision to cater to the individual's hedonic pleasures is leading to the inevitable failure of the inevitably growing welfare state and ultimately, to demographic disaster.
The best outcome for our social order would be allowing individuals to enhance and maximize their freedom of action while not condoning behavior that damages the society. Ultimately, I think it is likely that we will take this approach. The major obstacle is the maximalist demands of the proponents. There is no way the typical American voter will agree that an abortion of a viable baby is not a problem or that 13 year old girls should have the right to an abortion without their parent's knowledge or approval. There is no way the typical American voter will agree that a homosexual relationship (or a polygamous relationship, or any of the variations that legalizing gay marriage will tend to extend toward) is the equivalent of a heterosexual relationship. Perhaps some day in the distant future this will be accepted, but we are a long way from that. Finally, even people who enjoy or have enjoyed smoking Marijuana are likely to hesitate in having society condone Marijuana use. We already have enough trouble dealing with the effects of alcohol abuse; adding another drug to the mix is likely to destigmatize more dangerous drugs and slippery slopes always go downhill.
If the Gay community can accept a partial victory (civil unions) and the abortion proponents can accept a partial victory (abortion on demand for adult women prior to infant viability) and the Marijuana proponents can accept a partial victory (decriminalization) our political and civil discourse is likely to benefit. This is why when courts mandate social changes it is so destabilizing; it short circuits the discussion and ratchets up the emotional passions on the extremes; it is antithetical to democracy.
Recent Comments