In response to Mr. Moran's thoughtful essay: If you are so thoroughly disgusted with social conservatives that you wish to see them leave the party, I have good news for you: there is no need to actually do any purging. Because a political party founded on libertarian ideals, free of the oogedy-boogedy SoCons, already exists. It is the Libertarian Party. But, if you think that there is some merit to some of the social conservative ideas, AND if you are willing to show social conservatives a bit of respect, then you should stay put and try to make the marriage work.
Here are my thoughts. I see the Republican Party style of conservatism to be a more enlightened form of libertarianism than that which the Libertarian Party offers. The Libertarians are big on individual liberty. This is a good thing. But the Republican Party goes beyond this; it tries to construct a moral framework that attempts to guarantee the future preservation of this individual liberty. That is to say, it recognizes that individual liberty can only really prosper in an environment that is respectful towards liberty in general. I believe this is the great value that social conservatism brings to the Republican Party. It reminds us that libertarianism can quickly descend into libertine-ism if the people are not prepared to accept the responsibilities as well as enjoy the benefits of liberty. So rather than viewing libertarianism and social conservatism as warring parties forcibly bound together by a Big Tent, I tend to view them as complementary parts of a larger whole.
So rather than having one side kick out the other, I believe a better strategy is to more tightly integrate the two; to more clearly demonstrate the complementarity. So when it comes to abortion, for instance, we have to not only play up the immorality of it, but also persuade people that legal abortion really is not consistent with a society that values the dignity and worth of every individual. That's not a religious argument, that is a secular libertarian-esque argument. When it comes to something like sex education in schools, sure social conservatives will in general be opposed to anything but abstinence-only education, because anything else doesn't reflect their values. That's not an unreasonable argument. The libertarian angle might be to support devolution of power over education away from the federal government, and to support competition among schools so that parents have choice over what kind of values education they want their children to receive. It's a win-win: the social conservatives get to have their desired form of sex education in their schools, and the libertarians get to have a free-market approach to education.
But, honest people can have honest disagreements over issues, and especially in a party that values individualism way more than the other party, those disagreements are going to tend to be larger. We have to remember, though, that we are all on the same team. So if a libertarian conservative can't find it within him/herself to oppose abortion, I'd expect social conservatives to be politely respectful of that fact. However - and here's the important part - if a social conservative finds the greatest justification for his/her views in Scripture, I'd expect the libertarian conservative ALSO to be politely respectful. From what I see currently, though, the respect is not a two-way street. The wise and educated libertarian conservatives, with their enlightened views on abortion, are to be looked up to; while the social conservatives, with their crazy Biblical views, are to be looked down upon. This has got to stop. If libertarian conservatives do find some value in social conservatism at all, then libertarian conservatives shouldn't throw them under the bus whenever they get embarrassing.
But, if you can't stand doing that, if you really do think SoCons are a bunch of uneducated rubes, then you should join the Libertarian Party.
