Todd Baker's attack (March 4) on conservatives, though snide and condescending, is, despite itself, a glimpse into the way liberals think and a step up from the usual straight name calling and demonization. It might make a few fair-minded people examine what conservatives really think.
First he mocks conservatives for supporting military funding and at the same time ''stocking up on guns in order to protect yourself from the same military.'' What Baker is missing is that in 1791 when the Bill of Rights was ratified, the founders could not know if the government fifty, a hundred, or more years hence would still be representative and virtuous or if venal politicians would have found ways around the protections that were built in. They did know they would try. Today we have no more assurance about the future than the founders did. The second amendment is our national plan B.
Baker objects to conservatives relying on our ''personal faith'' to ''block women from getting abortions.'' Actually, we are relying on our collective heritage of values and experience in condemning arbitrary homicides, especially of innocent victims. Liberal dehumanization of the unborn is a transparent ghastly lie which they privately admit.
Baker charges, conservatives ''(make) it harder for (women) to fund their birth control.'' We do no such thing unless he considers he is making it harder for me to take a trip because he won't pay my way. We oppose forcing people who act responsibly and pay their own way to subsidize those who don't. If need be, conservatives will even resort to the universally available, 100 percent effective, and completely free method of birth control, but nothing infuriates liberals more being asked to do the same.
Baker complains conservatives demand a right to own ''assault rifles'' ''yet you attempt to block a homosexual's very right to be happily married.'' There is absolutely no political or logical connection here. Yes, we see the current batch of gun legislation as a constitutional infringement. No one has a ''RIGHT to be happily married,'' just to try. No matter what our proclivity, normal, homosexual, deviant of any stripe, no matter who we love or why, we are all subject to legal restrictions on marriage, the same restrictions for all. Or we did until the homosexuals achieved special privileges for special people. Yes, conservatives support traditional, age old attitudes and taboos regarding marriage and behavior, as opposed to the conceits and self serving excuses of liberals or poorly raised baby boomers.
Baker contrasts our opposition to excessive and intrusive environmental controls with our ''bans on stem cell research.'' Again, no connection whatsoever, much less a logical contradiction. And nobody has banned stem cell research. The debate is about federal funding of research. Such liberal lies for political effect are innumerable.
Most bizarre is the attempted contrast of our opposition to big government while we want ''our country being run on the doctrine of your personal religion.'' There again, no connection whatsoever. Everybody, most especially liberals, wants the country run on their own values and attitudes. Conservatives favor time tested collective traditional values and assumptions. It is irrelevant if the values are ascribed to a prophet, a philosopher, or a political scientist. Religion merely codifies them. It is the values, not the religion that liberals really detest.
If you can't think logically or tell the truth, you might be a liberal.
Norman P. Carlson is a Busti resident.