Maybe the conservatives see the "family" (defined as the heterosexual male-led nuclear family) as part of "Nature." Just like environmentalists, they see this part of "Nature" as needing defense by the government. One might say that the "family" is a "public good" that cannot be provided by the government.
However, the folks who seem to use this argument are often anti-environmentalist and even anti-statist (unless they control the state, natch). (That's what "laissez-faire" means in practice: we're against government unless the government is controlled by those advocating for the short-term interests of the rich, such as tax cuts for the rich.) Jim Devine, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; web: http://myweb.lmu.edu/jdevine/ Doug writes: I'm always confused by this. If family life is so wonderful, why must it be encouraged - even subsidized - by public policy, and why are the "traditionalist" guardians of family life constantly promoting it?
