The two big government-related things that have jumped out at me recently are Chicago’s repeal of their foie gras ban and the overturn of the gay marriage ban in California.

I was never a fan of the foie gras ban, even though I detest everything about this so-called food.  Unfortunately, the only thing these sorts of regulations accomplish is to draw a direct connection between animal rights activists and anti-abortion activists.  The goal of the people who crusade against abortion is to criminalize it.  Do we really want the general public to think that animal rights activists have the same kinds of goals?  Do we really want to use the law to regulate diet the same way conservatives want to regulate pregnancy?  I think not.

The other problem with this specific “ban” was that it was never really enforceable.  Were they really going to send the police to restaurant kitchens in search of contraband foie gras?  Since the answer is obviously no, the only conclusion one can draw is that the ultimate point of this “ban” was to appear to be doing something, to appear to be open to a particular group’s ideas.  The Chicago government’s goals in adopting this “ban” were nothing more than appeasement and the appearance of action.  Since the goals of animal rights activists are far more concrete than that, I think we ought to temper our enthusiasm for these sorts of half-measures.

The other thing something like this does is to give meat eaters an excuse to act like they’re some kind of persecuted minority.  And so it guarantees the continued usage of phrases like “food police.”  Animal rights ought to be about changing minds first and then maybe changing laws a distant second.

Truthfully, I’m surprised this “ban” lasted as long as it did.

The other repealed ban, the ban on gay marriage, counts as good news for sure.  Except I’m still convinced that the government should not be in the marriage business at all, and that if the government didn’t hand out marriage licenses (and decide who can and can’t marry), then this entire political firestorm of so-called gay marriage would go away.  (The only reason I use the phrase “so-called gay marriage” is because the word marriage should not have a qualifier in front of it at all.  We don’t use phrases like “gay car repair” or “gay snowboarding,” so why should we say “gay marriage?”)

Anyway, I am more and more disappointed and fed up with the people who look like I do, the white, meat-eating heterosexual majority.  There really is no excuse for these scary people in West Virginia.  And there really is no excuse for eating like a barbarian when you bathe, drive a car and listen to an iPod every day.  And there is really no excuse for both institutionalized and personal bigotry against gay people.

But sure, I’m the weird one.