Close

The one and only.

Text

Sarah writes, “Some conservatives have argued that sodomy laws and marijuana laws should be struck down because ‘we shouldn’t have laws on the books that we don’t enforce.’ I.e., it’s hypocritical to have laws and then not enforce them. Well, that argument can just as easily be used to defend a blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. . . .” I think the argument is better rendered as “we shouldn’t have laws that we can’t, or shouldn’t, enforce.” With the understanding that an inability to enforce a law 100 percent of the time does not mean that the law can’t be enforced.

So it is entirely possible to oppose amnesty because the immigration laws can and should be better enforced, while opposing laws against pot and sodomy because those laws shouldn’t be.

Text