Values voters hate the first amendment

Someone has to say it.  People who make political campaigns and vote based on moral objections do not understand the principles behind the first amendment.  The purpose of the first amendment was to attempt to spell out that it is not the government's responsibility to tell its citizens what they should or should not be doing in their private lives.  The government should only become involved when actions taken affect others.  This means that people who campaign or vote based on positions that are against gay marriage or gay adoption are actually doing something that in all honesty should be illegal.

Discrimination based on ethnicity, race, religion, age, or sex is already illegal.  With the exception of religion, these are all things one is born with and is incapable of changing.  All reputable scientific evidence suggests the same for sexual preference.  Standing in opposition of these allowing people to have such rights is outright bigotry.  It is no different than when the disgusting legislation that prevented interracial couples from getting wed.  It astounds me that this type of thing is by default illegal in the first place.  I cannot understand the mindset of someone who thinks that they should have the power to prevent other people from enjoying rights that they themselves are allowed to practice.

Now let us begin by discussing the hypocrisy of the values voters who claim to be conservative.  I was under the impression that conservatism meant less government intervention in the lives of its citizens.  And yet value voters are more than happy to shove an ultrasound wand inside of a woman for exercising her freedom to have an abortion and even less of a problem with having the government be in the business of forming marital bonds, but only when it's the way they like it.  This is not what conservatism is or should be about.  This is not liberty, but tyranny.  It is beyond my ability to comprehend how a person can proclaim that the first amendment allows them the right to both free speech and freedom of religion to tell other's how they should and through legislation how they shall live their lives.  Meanwhile, when these people are told that this is inappropriate and violates first amendment rights, those very same people proclaim persecution.

This article is going to run a little long because I have one last point to make.  Value voters are also extraordinarily short sighted.  Many of them are Christians and many of them will say that they would not want to be forced to follow the laws of Islam for example.  But by putting into effect these religious based laws, they are in fact opening the door for Muslims to do exactly the same thing with regard to their own religious convictions.  With precedent being set that religiously based laws being acceptable, it takes only a majority of voters (since too many people don't vote) to be Muslim to force Islam based legislation on the Christians.  And we all know who will be the first to claim that they shouldn't be allowed to do it based on the first amendment.