Yes, you are right that illegal immigrants have been defined by our politicians as being illegal. So? The immigration law that makes it illegal for a willing employer to hire a willing worker is a violation of a man’s natural right to life, liberty, and property. If you support laws that infringe upon that right, then you don’t support liberty. Using immigration laws to “protect Americans’ jobs” is the same sort of thinking that leads to every other interference in the market to promote certain ends, from affirmative action policies to the bailout of the auto companies.

On the homosexual issue, I’m not arguing for the federalization of marriage. However, I would argue in favor of removing government entirely from the whole marriage issue. Unfortunately, like most of my views, that just isn’t going to happen. Cuccinelli’s support of sodomy laws, though, is ridiculous. His professed support of using his view of homosexuality as unnatural as a basis for public policy also indicates his views on liberty aren’t all that deeply held.

Cuccinelli is probably a very good Attorney General (much better than the one we have in Maryland, I’m sure). As Attorney General, his job is to uphold state law, even the bad ones (although there are times when those charged with enforcing unjust laws have a duty to break those laws). But he’s far from being a friend of liberty. Like most conservatives, he’ll profess support for liberty when it serves his goals. But as soon as liberty means people can engage in acts with which he disapproves, then his true colors show.

An illegal immigrant is just that – illegal. Therefore they should not be hired by any employer in this country. Employers who knowingly hire an illegal immigrant should also be subject to sanctions.

As for using government power against gays, I am not sure exactly what you mean. Ken is a devout Christian and socially quite conservative. However, I don’t believe that he would ever allow that to interfere with his enforcement of the law. If you are referring to same-sex marriage (which many consider an oxymoron), it’s a moot point. Under Virginia’s constitution it is illegal. I know you well enough enough to know that you are not arguing for the federalization of marriage (or civil unions or …).

My problem with this has always been the “Full Faith and Credit” clause (and possibly the “Contracts” clause).

It would be nice if the conservatives who say they are in favor of liberty actually believed it.