One the one hand, I wish our rights were not up for a vote; that I didn't have to worry about someone else being in a position to simply pull a lever (or tap a screen) to take my money – or my liberty – away.

On the other hand, if by voting I can prevent my money or my liberty being taken away – and yours, also – then it seems okay to vote in favor of that.

Of course, you're usually not voting just for that. Hence the uneasiness of libertarians regarding voting.

Which has become a lot like buying a new car – and specifically, buying new car options. Which are plural, usually. The thing you want is bundled with things you may not want. The sunroof is part of a package. If you want that, you've got to buy this and that too.

It's worse with voting, of course, because the package you're stuck with costs more than just money for features you didn't want. It is probably also going to end up costing someone else their rights – as well as yours.

Even as you're voting to protect yours – and theirs.

This is so because casting a ballot is – among other things – the endowing of an official with essentially unrestricted proxy power to "represent" you . . . without any formal requirement that he is, in fact, representing you.

Even if he wanted to – exactly in accordance with your specific wishes – the thing is mechanically impossible. How does one person "represent" the will of even half a dozen different men and women? Let alone the thousands (if not tens of thousands) who vote in most congressional races and the millions who vote for senators, governors and presidents?

Even with the very best of intentions, the best that can be expected/hoped-for is that the person who is voted in will try to avoid acting in such a way as to violate the rights of any of the people who voted for him. And even those who didn't vote for him.