If the Unexamined Life Isn't Worth Living, Why Are So Many People Living It?

As I noted in "Stupid Liberals, Evil Conservatives", political belief is often received knowledge, a culture built around a shared set of beliefs, with more emphasis on the shared part than the beliefs part. Maintaining political orthodoxy has become so integral a part of political identity in this country (thanks, two-party system!), we're surprised when someone breaks ranks. We're downright shocked if they're doing it because of what they actually believe instead of for the sake of political expediency.

Enter Ted Olson.

Go read the article. If you don't have a free account with the NYT already, shame on you and go get one. I'll wait.

A couple quotes of note from the article before we dive in:

"...during the Reagan administration, when Mr. Olson was asked if the Justice Department could dismiss a prosecutor for being gay, he wrote that it was “improper to deny employment or to terminate anyone on the basis of sexual conduct. In 1984, Mr. Olson returned to private practice and was succeeded by Mr. Cooper, his adversary in the marriage case. The switch eliminated 'what was seen as a certain libertarian squishiness at the Office of Legal Counsel under Ted,' Mr. Calabresi said."

Libertarian squishiness. Libertarian squishiness. That's right. If you have an internally consistent set of political beliefs and you stand by them in the face of political pressure, you're squishy, because you agree with the opposition. This, ladies and gentlemen, is why orthodoxy is not a thinking man's art.

"Mr. Cooper asserts that Mr. Olson is stretching the scope of the Lawrence decision, pointing out that it dealt with the criminalization of private sexual behavior, not a state’s duty to recognize a marriage. But Mr. Olson notes that no less a conservative than Justice Antonin Scalia argued in a blistering dissent that the majority in Lawrence had indeed opened the door to same-sex marriage. "

This is why I fucking love lawyers. Also, I have a newfound affection for Scalia.

"Furthermore, the Court's ruling in Ambler v. Whipple all but guarantees that I shall be forced by stare decisis to lower the disco ball and perform my famed Gloria Gaynor impersonation at the beginning of each session. I find this deeply distressing."

"Since then, he and Mr. Cooper have been filing dueling briefs. "

*snort* He said "dueling briefs". Gaaaaaaaaay...

It could also mean "undergarments to be worn during a duel". This is just how my mind works.

I don't know about you, but I find this article incredibly inspiring.

It's not so much that Mr. Olson has "seen the light" on gay marriage that I find cause to celebrate. It's the fact that he didn't need to "see the light" at all. Here's someone who is intelligent enough to understand the underpinnings of his own political beliefs, and has enough intellectual integrity to follow them through to their logical conclusion, AND isn't a whackadoo about it. What I think about his take on gay marriage is pretty much irrelevant; I respect this man for the depth of his thinking and the integrity of the way he lives.

I find the line between having a consistent ideology and being an ideologue fascinating, mostly because so few people ever tread it successfully. Usually, political beliefs are determined by your party, which is a mish-mashed coalition of sometimes mutually exclusive interests that a lot of people don't want to examine too closely. To take just two examples:

The Right
Government should stay out of our lives
UNLESS
It involves people having sex in a way I think is icky.

The Left
Government should stay out of our lives
UNLESS
It involves guns.

There are exceptions to this kind of schizophrenic political thinking, but they tend to be of the proves-the-rule variety.

*cough*

How many of us would be willing to follow our political and personal philosophies to conclusions we didn't like?

I don't have this problem, what with the being always right and all, but sometimes I wonder how the little people live.

-- The Prolix Wag
Why does everyone assume that just because I'm elite, that makes me an elitist?