Friday, October 31, 2008
No on 8!
For the most part, the U.S. elections are a done deal. The Republican Party will be crushed, a fate they worked very hard to earn and richly deserve. It’s a pity that there’s no one any better to replace them. Obama-Biden will win by a landslide. The Democrats will strengthen their holds on both houses of Congress. The massive nationalizations inflicted on us by the Bush regime will be institutionalized. The United States, and for that matter the whole world, are in for a rocky ride ahead.
But not all news is depressing. In Michigan, two ballot initiatives stand a good chance of passing, although the margins appear close. Proposition 1 legalizes medical marijuana, and the more opponents campaign against it, the more the leads in polling seem to grow. I have never understood how anyone could oppose such a measure. As victimless crimes go, smoking marijuana is as harmless as they come, even to "perpetrators." And marijuana is a beneficial natural remedy for painful medical problems: so far as I can tell, one must simply hate humans to oppose it.
Michigan’s Proposition 2 would permit scientists in Michigan to do stem cell research that, similarly to medical marijuana, could eliminate a good deal of human suffering. I can at least understand the opponents here - they imagine that an embryo is an individual with rights. While I disagree, I can at least appreciate that they mean well, unlike opponents of medical marijuana, who can’t claim to be making anyone better off. The problem for Proposition 2 opponents is that the taking of stem cells from embryos does not destroy embryos as documented on this blog in September 2006.
Bottom line: Unforeseen Contingencies hereby endorses Michigan’s Proposition 1 and Proposition 2, and asks any Michigan readers to support them. (As if I had any readers!)
This is all a little too much "positivity," isn't it? Shouldn’t a libertarian blog be negative about the election? Well sure, and here’s one to oppose: California’s Proposition 8, the disgusting initiative to outlaw same-sex marriage. This is another position I cannot understand. I get it that some people might not like or approve of homosexuality. That's certainly their right. But the idea that people who love each other should be forbidden from mutually agreeing to live together as a couple is simply appalling. And the idea that a religion as crackpotty as Mormonism (the Mormon church is the number one financier of the pro-8 campaign) should be able to seize control of the law to discriminate against Christian churches that do look favorably on same sex marriage is utterly horrible. And there are already existing marriages that would be outlawed by this crazy proposition. What would the Mormons and Catholics think if the Protestant majority decided to outlaw their heretical & unbiblical marriages? Proposition 8 is as wrong as anything can be, and very dangerous for everyone's liberty, including its proponents.
Happily, No on 8! seems to be leading against the hate-mongers & bigots, but just barely. This is one issue where I’ve put my money where my mouth is, and I encourage all UC readers to please donate as well. The No on 8! ads are intelligent, libertarian, and often amusing. (No links here, but they are all on You Tube.) I don’t regret donating, and neither will you.
If you donate, I thank you. This isn’t an issue that affects me directly, as I always hope never to enter California, nor to ever again have to deal with any person who isn’t female. But for purposes of defending individual rights, this vote is about as important as they come.
### ### ###
Many thanks to CLS and his Classically Liberal blog for warning us about Proposition 8. When you donate, please do it in honor of his fine blog.
### ### ###
Also, I highly recommend Dick Gordon's interview with a Mormon priest who dares to oppose his church's bigotry: well worth listening, and very libertarian.