3 ms·

"I believe in old-fashioned traditional marriage but I don't really think the government needs to be too involved in this..." http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-b

"I believe in old-fashioned traditional marriage but I don't really think the government needs to be too involved in this..." http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/219672-rand-paul-shrugs-when-asked-if-he-could-rethink-gay http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/21967... "Senator Paul believes marriage is an issue that should be dealt with at the state level,” political adviser Doug Stafford told The Daily Beast. “Nothing about his position has changed." Stafford later added: "Senator Paul does not want his guns or his marriage registered in Washington. He has said this repeatedly and consistently. Marriage is not a federal issue. It is an issue for state and local governments to deal with." http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/28/rand-ditches-federalism-for-fundamentalism-on-gay-marriage.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/28/rand-ditche... According to the second quote, Paul is also opposed to federal opposite-sex marriage. That's pretty much a standard libertarian position.

XorNot 12y ago
In other words he told positions which conveniently would be enforced by not interfering with the status quo. Why is state government the only acceptable level of government interference in citizens private lives?
- SamReidHughes 12y ago
  That way government more closely follows the will of the people when people have geographically non-uniform distribution of what they want in government. For example, if 60% of Maryland wants children to be banned from playing outside while 40% of Pennsylvania does, it more closely matches the will of the people if Maryland bans it and Pennsylvania doesn't, instead of having the feds ban it or ban states from banning it. Not that "will of the people" democratic mysticism is a good justification for anything.
  - XorNot 12y ago
    Ah, so tyranny of the majority all round then?

XorNot 12y ago

In other words he told positions which conveniently would be enforced by not interfering with the status quo. Why is state government the only acceptable level of government interference in citizens private lives?

SamReidHughes 12y ago
That way government more closely follows the will of the people when people have geographically non-uniform distribution of what they want in government. For example, if 60% of Maryland wants children to be banned from playing outside while 40% of Pennsylvania does, it more closely matches the will of the people if Maryland bans it and Pennsylvania doesn't, instead of having the feds ban it or ban states from banning it. Not that "will of the people" democratic mysticism is a good justification for anything.
- XorNot 12y ago
  Ah, so tyranny of the majority all round then?