Regular Guy Paul on the Link Between Fiscal and Social Conservatism
(Hat tip: The Cranky Conservative)
From a speech delivered by our old friend Regular Guy Paul last Saturday:
... Imagine if you will a society that embraced abortion, euthanasia, easy divorce and gay marriage, and that denigrated family life and religious faith. Could such a society, placing personal pleasure above family responsibility, ever show enough self-reliance to adopt fiscally conservative policies geared towards smaller government and lower taxes? I have a pretty good imagination, but I can’t imagine that. Could such a society find among its numbers enough young men with the courage and spirit of self-sacrifice to maintain its ability to defend its borders and its interests? I don’t believe so.The Cranky Con expands on the Regular Guy's thesis:
Likewise, would a people who turn first to government for the answer to every problem be likely to show the sense of responsibility necessary to defend life and family? I seriously doubt it.
I could go on in this vein, but I think you see my point. Our conservatism can be comprehensive, or it can be incomplete. And if incomplete, then it will be unstable and unworkable in the long run...
[Read the whole thing]
... This is a great summation of the nexus between social and fiscal conservatism. I would also remind folks of how often “fiscally conservative, socially liberal” politicos wind up sticking to their guns on the latter but not so much on the former – see Schwarzenegger, Arnold.
Labels: Conservatism, Economics, Social Conservatives, Values Voters
posted by Pro Ecclesia 2:46 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
A bunch of empirical claims with no empirical basis. Snore.
A drive-by comment from someone I've never heard of, adding nothing of substance to the discussion. Snore.
Well if someone is going to claim that there is a connection between a lack of courage and homosexual marriage, he better be able to support that claim rather than just say "I don't believe so." There is no basis in empirical studies that homosexual couples place "personal pleasure above family responsibility." That is something he made up, and as such without some sort of concrete evidence, rather than metaphysical or theological distinctions, it is just not worth taking seriously.
That's better.
But one need not agree with every aspect of Paul's argument to recognize the validity of his overall point that, as one commenter at The American Catholic has put it, "a culturally self-indulgent country will not be a fiscally sound one".
My point, A.J. is that there is a connection between selfishness and a lack of courage and self-sacrifice.
Perhaps you disagree.
Post a Comment
<< Home