, popular demand for an individual right is simply too powerful to overcome --- and will not be sacrificed for PC
On Nov 2, 2:18 pm, "M. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote: > The End of ProhibitionWhy gay marriage, getting high, and going to Cuba will > soon be legal.By Jacob Weisberg > Posted Saturday, Oct. 31, 2009, at 7:06 AM ET > "I think this would be a good time for a beer," Franklin D. Roosevelt said > upon signing a bill that made 3.2-percent lager legal again, some months > ahead of the full repeal of Prohibition. I hope Barack Obama will come up > with some comparably witty remarks as he presides over the dismantling of our > contemporary forms of prohibitionlaws that prevent gay marriage, restrict > cannabis as a Schedule I Controlled Substance, and ban travel to Cuba. "You > may now kiss the groom," perhaps, ora version ofthe commenthe once made about > smoking pot"I inhaledthat was the point." > Prohibition now is different from Prohibition then. When the 18th Amendment > went into effect in 1920, it was a radical social experiment challenging a > custom as old as civilization. Its predictable failurethe gross insult to > individual rights, the impossibility of enforcement, the spawning of > organized crimecame to an end when Utah, of all places, became the 36th state > to ratify the 21st Amendment in 1933. Today prohibition is a byword for > futile attempts to legislate morality and remake human nature. > Our forms of prohibition are more sins of omission than commission. Rather > than trying to take away longstanding rights, they're instances of > conservative laws failing to keep pace with a liberalizing society. But like > Prohibition in the '20s, these restrictions have become indefensible as well > as impractical, and as a result are fading fast. Within 10 years, it seems a > reasonable guess that Americans will travel freely to Cuba, that all states > will recognize gay unions, and that few will retain criminal penalties for > marijuana use by individuals. Whether or not Democrats retain control of > Congress, whether or not Obama is re-elected, and whether they happen sooner > or later than expected, these reforms are inevitablenot because politics has > changed but because society has. > A few reference points: In April, Obamalifted restrictionson travel and > remittances by Cuban-Americans. Last month, the Justice Department announced > that it wouldno longer prosecutecases involving medical marijuana in the 14 > states where it is now permitted. Same-sex marriages are recognized insix > statesand counting. In a larger frame, loosening restrictions and lax > enforcement reflect evolving social norms. Since Bush left office, American > tourists no longer worry about being prosecuted for visiting Havana without a > Treasury license. Gay unions have beencelebrated on theNew York > Times"Weddings"page since 2002. And have you been to Los Angeles recently? > You need only tell an on-site doctor at a cheerful, walk-in pot emporium that > you've been suffering from anxiety to walk out with a perfectly legal bag of > Captain Kush. > The chief reason these prohibitions are falling away is the evolving > definition of the pursuit of happiness. What's driving the legalization of > gay marriage is not so much the moral argument but the pressures from couples > who want to sanctify their relationships, obtain legal benefits, and raise > children in a stable environment. What's advancing the decriminalization of > marijuana is not just the demand for pot as medicine but the number of > adultsmore than 23 million in the past year, according to the most recent > government surveywho use it and don't believe they should face legal > jeopardy. What's bringing the change on Cuba is not just the epic failure of > the 48-year-old U.S. embargo, but the demand on the part of Americans who > want to go therewhether to visit their relatives, prospect for post-Castro > business opportunities, or sip rum drinks at the beach. > For similar reasons, there is not likely to be any retreat on the basic legal > statusas opposed to tinkering around the marginsof the right to have an > abortion or own a gun. Conservatives would be wise to give up on the one, > liberals on the other. In each of these cases, popular demand for an > individual right is simply too powerful to overcome. The Internet has been a > crucial amplifier of all such claims. With pornography, and gambling, the Web > itself became an irrepressible distribution tool for indulgences that were > once perforce local. When it comes to gay marriage, the Web has accelerated > the recognition of a new civil right by serving as an organizing tool > andinformation clearinghouse. More broadly, the freest communications medium > the world has ever known has raised expectations of personal liberty. In a > world where everyone has his own printing press, restrictions on private > behavior become increasingly untenable. > Republicans face a risk in resisting these new realities. Freedom is part of > their brand; if the GOP remains the party of prohibition, it will > increasingly alienate libertarian-leaners and the young. But the party as > presently constituted has very little capacity to accept social change. > Democrats face a danger in embracing cultural transformations too eagerly. > Nearly four decades after George McGovern became known as the candidate of > amnesty, abortion, and acid, cultural issues are still treacherous territory > for them. Why get in front of change when you can follow from a safe distance > and end up with the same result?http://www.slate.com/id/2234017/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
