Two things this morning.

First, this article on Salon about the new cultural battlefield points out the hypocrisy of the Federal Marriage Amendment:

Kindly notice what this proposed amendment leaves out. While purporting to be aimed at the defense of marriage, it entirely overlooks every single problem associated with heterosexual marriage. The amendment does nothing to stop no-fault divorce, or indeed prohibit divorce altogether, nor does it recriminalize adultery. Its aim is not to protect straight families, but only to attack gay ones.

Good point. The FMA is a “defense” of heterosexuality, not a moral stand for the “sanctity” of marriage.

2. Johan Golberg, an unabashed conservative, does a good job in this essay explaining why laisse-faire economics isn’t very Christian:

Today, the loudest voices in the Democratic party want to regulate the economy based upon what’s nice, not on what works. Yes, it would be nice if economic realities didn’t make it necessary for some jobs to be sent overseas, and, sure, it’d be sweetness and light if life-saving drugs could cost a penny.

So, it’s not up to economic conservatives to be nice and try to help people. It’s their job to simply be sure the system works, and if it steamrolls a few people, well, them’s the breaks.

Posted on 2 March 2004