Handling contradictions between what you want, and what you think is right....?

[Bob Hubbard]

So I got to thinking about this recently after a couple of exchanges here. My political leanings being what they are it makes for some interesting considerations on my end.

Take for example the "gay marriage" issue. My political position is one of "if the US Constitution doesn't authorize it, the Feds can't do it." This is sometimes called a strict or Jeffersonian view. So, since nothing in the Constitution specifically allows the Fed to meddle in marriage, it's up to each state to figure the issue out itself. Cases where the states rule against my belief that everyone should be able to do this, makes me wish the Fed would pass something. The old "They aughta make a law" thing. But this is against my belief that it's also none of their business.

Gun control is another issue. Taxes, privacy, etc.

Or, what about picking candidates? Party person, but the person you like is in a different party? Or, you like the person, but their views on X,Y,Z are opposite of yours. Etc.


Point here isn't to reopen the various debates, but I'm curious.
Anyone else deal with similar? How do you balance it?

 

[Cryozombie]

All the time. Most often I balance it on the most good for the most people theory... but somtimes my moods dictate how I feel about it at any given time. When I am feeling particularly evil, I'm more forgiving of stupid hurtful things, and when I am feeling relaxed and at peace, I tend to side with whats more socially acceptable.

In otherwords... I waffle a lot.

 

[tellner]

The story goes that a man pleading his case before Oliver Wendell Holmes said "Your Honor, all I want is simple justice."

The great Jurist replied "This, Sir, is not a Court of Justice but of the Law."

Respect for the Law is a good thing. There are things which the Law is against which are also good things. These things happen all the time in that messy thing called the Real World.

 

[Thesemindz]

I face this as an anarchist.

There are many things I personally object to. Some things I object to deeply. Sometimes for spiritual reasons, sometimes for secular reasons. And I can understand and empathize with the "there ought to be a law" position.

Sometimes it is hard for me to justify to myself a society without violent coercion when I am confronted with stories about parents abusing their chidren, or heads of companies getting away with fraud and walking away billionaires. Because despite my adherence to the zero agression principle, I want to be the one holding the gun and deciding who's right and who's wrong.

For me, it is a matter of first principles. By having a bedrock belief to refer back to, I can work my way through the thorny emotional issues.


-Rob

 

[GBlues]

Everyone has this issue Bob. I think the trick though is to do and say what you feel is right. An example would be in politics. When the person that you like is from a different party. In my mind voting for a president was and has never been about what party that you belong to, it's about voting for the man and ideals that you think is going to do the best job. All any person can do, is what they think is right. Sometimes people will be upset or even offended by your decisions, that is there right, but it is also there problem. You can only do and be who you are. For my self personally I don't care if our homosexual citizens want to be marrying each other or not. I personally don't see how it will affect me. I think life will carry on. Same for me on a lot of issues. Peoples morals get in the way many times. We feel that everyone should feel the same way we do about things, and that is why there are forums like this one, for debate. If everyone thought the same way nothing would ever get done. In the final analysis, it all boils down to one thing. What do you think is the right thing, and how are you going to handle the changes that come? Will you break like board, bend like a willow tree, or will you stand tall like a mountain unmovable against the wind? That's how I live my life. I do and say what I feel when I feel it, and I say it exactly how I think it and feel and if aint nobody like it, well.....as the old saying goes, "Tough titty said the kitty"

 

[geezer]

...Cases where the states rule against my belief that everyone should be able to do this, makes me wish the Fed would pass something. The old "They aughta make a law" thing. But this is against my belief that it's also none of their business.

Gun control is another issue. Taxes, privacy, etc. ...Point here isn't to reopen the various debates, but I'm curious. Anyone else deal with similar? How do you balance it?

Basically sounds like you're a tolerant guy who just doesn't like having what you do dictated by a distant committee of deaf idiots (my apologies to the hearing impaired). For example, the people in my state voted twice to legalize medical marijuana. But of course that didn't fly, since it's prohibited by federal law. Now it doesn't affect me since I'm not sick and don't use the stuff anyway. But what business is it of government to butt into my personal business? I guess I just have a problem with authority. How about you?

 

[elder999]

Take for example the "gay marriage" issue. My political position is one of "if the US Constitution doesn't authorize it, the Feds can't do it." This is sometimes called a strict or Jeffersonian view. So, since nothing in the Constitution specifically allows the Fed to meddle in marriage, it's up to each state to figure the issue out itself. Cases where the states rule against my belief that everyone should be able to do this, makes me wish the Fed would pass something. The old "They aughta make a law" thing. But this is against my belief that it's also none of their business.

In some cases there is a law, Bob. It's the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution, the one that basically says that you and I (separately!) are married in all 50 states of the Union, regardless of where our marriages took place. The same should apply to same-sex unions,and probably will, eventually-it'll just take a while to get past that little ideological definition of "marriage."

In other cases, though, well, we're on our own, aren't we?

 

[CuongNhuka]

I know quite a few Libertarians from various sources and websites (this isn't the only forum I hang out on). I've noticed that you seem to be the only one who is adamitly 'The Fed will do nothing not in the Constitution'. A few others (when faced with similar situations) will admit to themselves, 'ok, sometimes the Fed does need to do a little bit more...' A few others just shut there brains off and blame everything on the Fasicst in government. Whatever floats your boat.

 

[celtic_crippler]

I try to see as many sides of the issue as possible, detach emotionally (probably the hardest thing), apply logic and reason, listen to other's opinions on the matter, take into account majority rules with minority rights and go from there...

It's not easy, and just another reason why those in power should be viewed more closely before allowing to take a position where they impact legislation that affects all of our lives.

 

[teekin]

Bob, I may be a lone voice howling in the wilderness here but I still believe that almost all humans Know what is right and just. Free will is about following that belief or not regardless of what you may want or not want at that moment. I think that is the struggle that defines us as human.
lori