Patrick McIlheran linked to a post from an "agnostic libertarian" (not named Elliot Stearns) who isn't buying into the argument that people are leaving the Republican Party because they're turning too religious.  OK, that's great.  The problem with the entire premise of the post, and Patrick's ensuing discussion, is that the majority of Libertarians (both small l and big L) who are abandoning the Republican Party are in not in fact doing it because of religion.  It's understandable that Patrick would pick up on all of this.  From what I've read of his opinions, he seems to be a pretty religious person, and tends to bring a religious bent to much of his writing, and opinion making.

However, I think I can speak on behalf of a majority of libertarians when I say that's its not about religion.  "It's the Government Stupid!"  Most Libertarians that I know have no problem with religion.  In fact, one of the most Libertarian people I know, is also one of the most religious people I know.  In fact, one of the reasons he is a Libertarian is because of his religious views.  I wrote about this idea some time ago.  So far, Patrick and I are in agreement.  The problem is that he then tries to turn this idea into a wedge, and says that libertarian agnostics (or maybe just libertarians in general) ought to get back in line with Republicans because Democrats are worse.  And here in lies the problem, and why Republicans (and Patrick in particular) need to stop thinking in terms of the Religious Right.

It's not about religion in our government.  It's about government in our lives, whether religiously motivated or not.  And here, the Republican track record, especially in the last 8 years is abysmal.  What Randall Hoven said was:

Just think for a moment about the things you are actually forced to do or are prevented from doing. Seat belts. Motorcycle helmets. Bicycle helmets. Smoking. Gun purchase and ownership restrictions. Mandatory vaccines for your children. Car emissions inspections. Campaign ad and contribution restrictions. Saying a prayer at a public school graduation or football game. Trash separation and recycling. Keeping the money you earned. Gas tax. Telephone tax. Income tax. FICA withholding. Fill in this form. Provide ID.

For the most part, the list just cited is post-1960. Neither Pat Robertson nor James Dobson ever forced any of that on us.

While "the Religious Right" may not have forced that on us, many Republicans did.  Campaign ad and contribution restrictions?  Thank your friend John McCain.  Provide ID?  Hello... Voter ID is a something that Republicans love, and our friend Jim Sensenbrenner is the brainchild behind Real ID which will create essentially a national ID card.  He's also the one who federalized the requirement to show ID when you buy cough medicine that actually works.  Remember that as we enter into cold and flu season.  Of course this is just the tip of the iceberg, as the War on Terrorism^TM has lead to even more attacks on our liberty, and the current round of bailouts (largely driven by Republicans) is attacking my wallet.

The Drug War^TM, while largely a bipartisan love affair (look at Joe Biden's record for instance), is more strongly supported by Republicans... as are bans on prostitution, gambling, and other vices that are between consenting adults.  Much of the drive behind that is religious in nature, and is in part fueled by a desire to eliminate "social ills".  But whether religious or not, it creates a large government infrastructure which then makes it easier for Democrats to go after other things... like smoking, trans fats, hate speech, and other "social ills" that they perceive.

Both sides see the government as engine to eliminate "social ills"... it's just the sides disagree as to the source of good, and the ills to go after.  Both sides wish to constrain my liberty.  I don't care whether religion is the reason, or liberal guilt.  I just want you to mind your own business and keep your hands off my wallet.

And perhaps that is the source of the confusion.  Because some restrictions on my liberty are driven by certain religious precepts, it's easy to see attacking those restrictions as also attacking the religion that was the source.  In fact, maybe it's not confusion after all, but done on purpose.  After all, there is no better way to rally the troops than to claim your religion is under attack.  Unfortunately, the end result is that my liberty ends up losing the war.