Why should government not interfere with business, but interfere with marriage and things like that?

This question is geared more towards people who are both socially and fiscally conservative. A pillar of fiscal conservatism is deregulation. So a fiscal conservative would say government should interfere with the capital system as little as possible. However a social conservative would most likely be against gay marriage and abortion, and most likely support legislation that would ban those things. How can you support interfering with personal lives, but not support business regulation? Why would someone believe that it is government's obligation to interfere with things like gay marriage, and woman's right to choose, but it is not governments obligation to interfere with business? Note that gay marriage and abortion doesn't have any affect on the general population, but uninterrupted capitalism clearly has negative effects on the world. Why should government interfere with marriage and not interfere with business?Why should government not interfere with business, but interfere with marriage and things like that?
Your thesis is flawed! The American 'government' has no role whatsoever in the lives of U.S. citizens. The laws and regulations of this great nation are made 'by the people, for the people'. Gay marriage was banned in California by a vote of the 'people'. If enough people were in favor of gay marriage, the law would be different. Abortion, where ever it is illegal, is a reflection of the will of the people. Most conservative objections to abortion revolve around making the 'people' pay the cost of abortions for irresponsible men and women. If a woman wants an abortion she should pay for it herself.Why should government not interfere with business, but interfere with marriage and things like that?
You're clearly dreaming if you think any country in the world has uninterrupted capitalism. The U.S. hasn't been capitalist since the early 20th century.





This so-called ';crisis'; you're alluding to is caused by the same thing that's historically always caused it... government.





As for the rest of your question... You make a good point about conservatives. They're perfectly fine with restricting freedom in the social sense, but against restricting freedom in the economic sense. On the other hand, liberals have no qualms restricting economic freedom but are against restricting social freedom. Both major ideologies are obviously very inconsistent.





The only ideology that consistently stands for freedom and liberty is libertarianism.
I personally don't have anything against gay marriage, but a woman's right to choose should not include killing another person

oil industry