29 January, 2000

One of the universally accepted truths being talked about these days is "The right to less government intrusion in our lives." At the center of this debate is the issue of personal freedom. Owning a gun is certainly a personal freedom that many conservatives support. Their support is based on a fundamental American concept -- that of protecting everyone's personal freedom from government intrusion. This is a concept which is in agreement with both the intent and the spirit of our Constitution.

However, staunch supporters of personal freedom are confused by the inconsistent approach that most conservatives take on their other applications of this idea. Is it not the most personal invasion of freedom for the government to dictate a particular view on abortion, euthanasia, or even drug use? Why should the government have any right to decide what you do with your body? These issues would seem to define personal freedom. All these issues are asking for is freedom from government intrusion in the most personal of decisions. Yet many conservatives take an un-characteristically big government approach -- they would have the government force everyone to give up their personal beliefs to abide by extremely intrusive (anti-personal freedom) laws.

It is comforting to see that some conservatives are seeing through the hysteria to be consistent. Recently the conservative Republican Governor of New Mexico announced that he was in favor of legalizing drugs. This is a clearly a conservative view -- at least for those conservatives that believe there should be less government intrusion into their personal lives.

Gun control, abortion, euthanasia, and drugs are all just one issue -- should the government have the right to tell you how to live your life? I suspect most of us would just say NO. It is interesting to note that only a century ago, with the exception of abortion and euthanasia, Americans unquestionably had the freedoms called for here.

Stephen L. McGourty

Arlington, WA

Never submitted

Back