Sergeant Schultz Libertarians

sarge

 

Sergeant Schultz was the bumbling tool of the State in the corny 1960’s era Hogan’s Heroes sitcom. His famous phrase was “I know nothing. No-thing” which he would utter right after being bribed with the latest delight for his sweet tooth.

Recently, a large swath of Libertarians were involved in a massive collision. There they were, riding down a privately owned dirt road, when a big semi hauling their Libertarian principles pulled directly into traffic on the main highway, where it was rammed by a speeding government bus bearing five passengers in black robes. The principles were left strewn all over the highway, while the government bus just kept on rolling, never pausing to survey the ironic and bloody scene.

Generally speaking, Libertarians have failed to come to grips with the fact that there simply is not liberty amidst anarchy. While they claim to abhor coercion by government, and rightly so, they throw out the baby with the bathwater, failing to realize that the resulting full-throttle anarchy, which is the warp and woof of Libertarianism, is utter chaos and societal upheaval which eventually affects each person in the society.

And sorry, citizens of Rockwellville, but we are still living in a society. This doesn’t apply to you if you’re one of the hardy souls who has built his own floating Libertarian Oz on a platform 30 miles offshore. Otherwise, it’s time to re-engage in the current sociological bloodbath.

In this corner, we have the Ten Commandments. And in this corner, we have the Ayn Rand symphony playing their latest hit, “You can commit adultery. Just not with me.”

Libertarians may well have the right motivation. They generally stand against force and coercion, possess a live-and-let-live philosophy, and are usually repelled by any encroachment of the State, which is ironic, considering the recent “gay marriage” decision dealt to us all, a decision which is ultimately enforced with guns, as is the case with all decisions of the State. But Libertarians have failed to think through the far-reaching implications of this wretched verdict. Their wholesale, knee-jerk reaction to it is, “Hey, awesome! The State is getting out of the marriage business. Another blow for liberty!”

It is difficult to believe that such intellectual giants which are daily featured on Libertarian web sites are completely failing to get the point as stated above. Liberty and morality, of absolute necessity, must forever remain married. If they are not, then liberty is the victim. And morality is codified by law, whether it be in a marriage of two people, a little league parents association, or an entire society. Laws codify morality. No society can exist for long without both.

Generally, Libertarians are failing to understand what has happened here. This was most certainly not a blow for liberty. This was the culmination of the not-at-all-subtle attack on traditional marriage by the unholy State, represented in this case by five thuggish lawyers, whose frightful decision has watered the garden of tyranny. In their decision, the robes were not saying, “Okay, whomever wishes to marry whomever is nobody’s business.” Instead, they were saying, “Whomever wishes to marry whomever will now ultimately be decided by the State, and anyone who does not comply with our decision will find themselves on the wrong side of the bars.”

And the Libertarians rose from their single-seat pews and said “Amen!”

cake

The Very Reverend Josiah Trenham, pastor of Saint Andrew Orthodox Church in Riverside, California says this of marriage in his homily delivered the Sunday following the court decision:

The majority justices have affirmed that defining marriage as it has been defined everywhere and by all throughout human history is contrary to reason and is an expression of bigotry. They have said that anyone who does not agree with that and adheres to what was until just fifteen years ago the unanimous judgment of all generations and all societies, anyone who does not agree with their new view stands against the United States Constitution.

This is the nub of the matter, and this is the point most Libertarians are completely missing. The decision to re-define the historical, natural view of marriage as being between one man and one woman has opened a Pandora’s box full of designer definitions. The Court is brazenly saying that it, and it alone, can better define what constitutes marriage, and who can be considered married.

This is a classic case, ultimately, of State versus Church. Myopic Libertarians fail to see the big picture here. But examples already exist where a Church refuses to marry two men, for example, only to feel the heat from the State. Ultimately, the State will assault the 501c3 tax-exempt status for Churches which fail to comply with the new law. Of course, most Libertarians would applaud this anyway. The trouble is, the incursion of the State into the Church will most definitely not stop with the rescinding of tax status. Clerics who refuse the court order will eventually be compelled to comply with the State directive, or face fines and possible incarceration. Only Libertarians who have their collective(!) heads in the sand of their privately-owned islands are completely failing to see this. In applauding the decision, they are high-fiving the very State they claim to abhor, and turning their heads when the full picture is revealed.

Crazy, you say, my dear Libertarian?

So I may assume you don’t own a bakery then.

Justice Roberts, of all people, in siding with the minority, correctly writes:

The court’s accumulation of power does not occur in a vacuum. It comes at the expense of the people.

He is, for once, correct. This illusion of liberty is not that at all. It is a win for the State, and those who disagree with it are the victims.

And the Libertarians yawn, while cleaning their guns.

Justice Scalia chimed in:

To allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than “no taxation without representation.” No social transformation without representation.

And Justice Alito nails the heart of the issue with his dissent:

I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools.

The Supreme Court is ostensibly saying, “This is our decision. And if you are not on board with it, then you have a target on your back. We just redefined marriage for you, and either you comply with it, or you will be hit with every book we can possibly throw at you. Not only will you bake the cake. But you will marry whoever ordered the cake in the first place. And if you don’t, well then Reverend, you can just go practice your sermons in a cage.”

And the Libertarians yawned and said, “Well, hell, let anybody marry anyone they wish to marry. It ain’t no skin off my nose!”

The Church has always defended the sanctity of marriage as being a holy estate between one man and one woman, and historically, the State has agreed with the definition. Were this simply a matter of the court saying that marriage is not the business of the State, then that would likely be the end of the matter. But that is not at all what the court is saying. The court continued its scandalous verdict by re-defining what marriage is, and this new definition comes with the full support of the gun-toting, cage-owning State. That is why this decision is yet another government assault on liberty. And that is the point that most Libertarians are pole-vaulting over.

Justice Kennedy sums up the court’s action with his petty, juvenile comment in response to the potential, and very real threat to religious liberty:

“We have a first amendment, and religious people who find this very important to the fulfillment to believe this will still be allowed to believe and teach this.”

To which Father Josiah replies:

Brothers and sisters, the first amendment says nothing about believing and teaching things! The first amendment is the right to exercise your religion. Not believe it, not think it, not say it in your church and in your home, to exercise it, to live it out in society without molestation. And these tyrants are coming for it.

He is correct. This is one priest who gets what most Libertarians are glossing over: this decision is a full-frontal assault on liberty by the United States government.

This wretched case is the logical conclusion to the “gay revolution” started decades ago in the United States. Anyone who believes these activists, the majority whom now sit on the highest court in the land, are going to stop with this decision, are being profoundly naive. Now that they have the full weight of law on their side, they will go in for the kill.

And there Libertarians sit, just not giving a damn.

The blood-letting has begun. Some will engage in the fight.

Libertarians will retreat back to Gilligan’s Island, with a Pina Colada, and a worn copy of Atlas Shrugged tucked under their arm, humming “Celebration” by Kool And The Gang.

Party on, Sergeant Schultzes.

And may the Lord have mercy on us all.

#Diocletianrising

© Copyright 2015 Tim Holcombe

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s