Home   News   Schools   Sports   Biz   Opinion   Health   Scitech  Arts   Dining   Movies   Outdoors   Weather   Comics   Archives  NM Jobs Cars Real Estate

          Front Page  opinion  guest_columns

Thursday, January 08, 2009

Progressives Sacrifice Conscience on Altar of Noble Ideals

By Jim Scarantino
For the Journal
      From Las Cruces to Santa Fe to Capitol Hill, Democratic progressives have won power over the lives and fortunes of fellow New Mexicans. Progressives have built a political infrastructure that guarantees they remain a potent force for years to come. Indeed, they have their eyes on more prizes, including the office of Albuquerque's mayor.
       Progress is good. Progressives stand for progress. Ergo, more progressives with more power means more of a good thing. Right? Not so fast.
       As Nobel laureate Friedrich Hayek has shown, progressives have always had a regrettable dark side. True, progressives are popularly perceived as people of noble ideals. From the time of Teddy Roosevelt, they have worked to end child labor, institute the eight-hour work day, improve public health, ensure a safe food supply, give women the vote and conserve America's natural wonders.
       But in their push to transform society, progressives frequently show an eagerness to employ the coercive powers of the state against individuals and individual rights that inconvenience their agenda. This is progressives' dark side. On their way up, progressives are all for empowering individuals. Once progressive gain power, it is individuals that pay the price for “progress.”
       President Woodrow Wilson jailed thousands of dissidents and closed newspapers that challenged his progressive vision for America. European progressivism that sought to help workers and protect the environment slid into fascism. Until war broke out, many American progressives sought to emulate Mussolini.
       In Mexico, progressives concluded religion blocked progress. The 1917 Mexican constitution outlawed all religious observances outside “temples.” The penalty was frequently death. Many parishioners and priests were murdered for daring to live their faith. The Cristero Rebellion re-established religious freedom, but only after a decade of civil war.
       In the name of doing good, New Mexico progressives are displaying some of the same dark traits of their ideological forbears. Particularly in the field of social legislation, New Mexico progressives stand ready to advance their transformational agenda at the expense of individual liberty.
       State Rep. Mimi Stewart has again introduced legislation to extend to same-sex partners the contractual rights enjoyed by married heterosexual couples. For what it's worth, I am on record supporting this concept. In seeking to extend rights to the intended beneficiaries of her legislation, however, Stewart would deprive others of their right to practice a religious faith that condemns homosexuality.
       Every major religion continues to reject homosexual unions. In a nation that honors religious freedom as a fundamental principle, these beliefs — regardless of our personal views — must be forever immune from governmental interference. Stewart's legislation purports to recognize that principle. A clause in her bill states that nothing “shall interfere with or regulate the religious practice of any religious body.”
       But Stewart's bill does not honor the religious beliefs and practices of individuals. Stewart thus echoes the Mexican progressives who sought to confine religion to temples. Under Stewart's bill, any individual who attempts to observe a faith-based objection to homosexuality outside a church building — say, by declining to provide services to a same-sex ceremony — will be subject to punishment by the state.
       Another example of progressives' unappealing side appears in the abortion debate. The “freedom of conscience” rule, issued in the waning days of the Bush administration, prohibits health-care providers receiving any federal funds from discriminating against employees holding moral or religious objections to procedures such as abortion. Lt. Gov. Diane Denish and progressive Democrats want this rule quickly overturned.
       Progressives again demonstrate their contempt for individual freedom when that freedom gets in their way. Providing abortion services is a legitimate goal under existing law. But progressives would see doctors, nurses and pharmacists denied livelihoods for refusing to participate in a procedure that results in destroying a developing human. Forcing people who have dedicated their lives to healing to participate in a procedure they consider to be homicide falls far from progressivism's likable face and lands much closer to its fascist alter-ego.
       Progressives have much to offer this state. Good intentions drive them. They want to see New Mexico be a better, more just place. With their newfound power, let's hope they find many ways to do good without also doing harm.
       Jim Scarantino spent 25 years practicing law, including time as a prosecutor in Philadelphia and New Mexico. He concluded his legal career as the ACLU-New Mexico's lawyer of the year in 2006. Scarantino also served as executive director of the N.M. Wilderness Alliance and Republicans for Environmental Protection. He currently writes a monthly report for the Rio Grande Foundation.
       

---