Hattip to my friend Paul Zummo, the Cranky Conservative. When asked what type of conservative I am, I have usually responded “just conservative”. Like most conservatives I know, I am conservative on social issues, fiscal policies and foreign policy. When one part of conservatism is ignored in a political race, electoral disaster often looms. That is why I embrace completely what my fellow Illinoisan, Paul Mitchell said in a recent speech:
…anyone who knows me knows that I am a social conservative. I am also a fiscal conservative. I am also a foreign policy hawk. I see no conflict between these positions; indeed, it seems to me that each without the others would be incomplete.
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.
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.
Go here to Paul’s blog, Thoughts of a Regular Guy, to read the rest.