A CONSERVATIVE TAKE ON DRUGS

Surgeon General's Warning: Attention Pregnant Mothers, Smoking Crack
Can Be Hazardous to Your Baby's Health.

I once saw the mock warning label above in a political cartoon
attacking the idea of legalizing drugs. It was a wonderfully cutting
illustration of what drug legalization would actually look like --
flesh on a noxious concept cooked up amid gatherings of libertarians.

Practically speaking, the argument for legalizing drugs is flawed on
so many levels that a full accounting here is impossible. My
experience is that drug legalization is generally favored either by
people who do an excessive amount of drugs or those who have never
touched the stuff. The latter are clueless as to why a syringe of
heroin is totally different from a glass of Merlot.

Drug legalization is backed by libertarians convinced there is no
higher principle -- note the word "principle," not "virtue" -- than
100 percent consistency on "freedom," and who have concluded a "free
society" should have virtually no limits on freedom, save to protect
life, liberty and property.

The central error in libertarian thinking is the failure to
distinguish between freedom and vice. Freedom is not about an
individual's right to engage in anything, no matter how destructive
to the individual or larger society.

This brings me to a defense of the conservative position against drug
legalization. Libertarians like to accuse conservatives of hypocrisy
because conservatives incessantly invoke freedom but apply it
selectively. Quite the contrary, they misunderstand conservatism.

One of the best definitions of conservatism comes from political
scientists Kenneth Janda, Jeffrey Berry and Jerry Goldman.
Conservatives, write the three professors, value freedom more than
equality but would restrict freedom to preserve social order.
Libertarians, they note, likewise value freedom more than equality,
but value freedom over social order.

These definitions nicely explain where the two sides stand on drug
legalization. Conservatives believe it would be bad for social order
to legalize drugs. They do not want a culture where Johnny or Suzie,
at 18, can drive to the local smoke shop and casually light up a
little reefer, or perhaps drop a couple hits of laboratory-approved
LSD before catching a movie. Mom and dad might tell the teens this is
a lousy choice, but who are they to say? After all, it would be legal.

Conservatives do not like what this would do to society, from the
moral repercussions to health-care costs.

There are, however, much deeper roots to the conservative objection:
The conservative philosophy is grounded in and guided by eternal
truths; it does not separate itself from God. It moves toward God,
and it understands freedom in the way God intended freedom to be exercised.

A biblical verse that explains this is Paul's Galatians 5:13-14: "For
you were called for freedom, brothers. But do not use this freedom as
an opportunity for the flesh; rather, serve one another through love.
For the whole law is fulfilled in one statement, namely, 'You shall
love your neighbor as yourself.' "

Note the caveat, the "but" that follows, "For you were called for
freedom, brothers." This is not a hedonistic or uncontrolled freedom.

The gamut of vices libertarians want to legalize, from drugs to
prostitution, means wrongly exploiting "freedom" as opportunities for
the flesh. Doing so, even if the proponent of the freedoms does not
partake of them, certainly does not serve Christ's ultimate mandate
that we serve our neighbor in a loving way.

Conservatives believe responsible freedom is a guide to successful
living in a successful society. Fallen humanity ought to strive for
the holiness of Augustine's City of God, not the selfish, fleshly
indulgence of the City of Man. The first flawed interpretation of
freedom took place in the Garden of Eden. The mistake has been
repeated enough already.

William F. Buckley Jr. alluded to this understanding when he
declared, "I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to
God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the
authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting
booth." Nor, one might add, to political truths toasted up at the
bong bar of the local Hash House.

Our political ancestors understood. George Washington, the Father of
Our Country, said self-governance by the individual is essential to
self-governance by a democracy. This proper understanding of liberty
is embedded in the fabric of this nation. Our earliest politicians,
literally all the way to the current president, spoke of God as
"Author of liberty." Listen to the words of one of our most cherished
hymns: "Our father's God to Thee, Author of liberty, To thee we sing
/ Long may our land be bright, With freedom's holy light, Protect us
by Thy might, Great God our King."

If you want to remove this from the marrow of this nation, then make
your case and try to convince enough others to join you, but
understand you would supplant, not affirm or enhance, the American
republic as it was founded.

Conservatism and libertarianism are not simple policy disagreements,
but fundamentally divergent philosophies on the nature of freedom,
religion and the republic itself. Genuine American freedom is not
license. A nation hurts rather than helps itself by legalizing its
vices -- drugs included.