Why does the War on Drugs increase drug use? Why does the War on Poverty increase poverty? Why does the War on Crime increase crime? Why does every War on X increase X?

X can be terrorism, inadequate health care or bad mortgages. It is not because these governmental policies were mismanaged. It is that they are destined to fail. But which programs? And why? Does that mean there is no proper role of government?

I will propose a single, simple law that answers these questions and more: the Law of the Puritanical Boomerang.

You may be thinking what I will propose is like what Ron Paul and many other libertarians, free market advocates and various think tanks refer to as the Law of Unintended Consequences. But that law is different from what I'm talking about.

Have you ever seen one of those squeezable little stress dolls? When you crush its torso, its eyes bug out. That, in a nutshell, is the Law of Unintended Consequences. Terrorists banished from Afghanistan, corporations prevented from using a particular loophole, and lobbyists no longer able to give direct gifts will all go bug out somewhere else. The problem with the Law of Unintended Consequences is that we don't know exactly where they'll bug out to.

The Law of the Puritanical Boomerang attempts to explain which government actions will fail and why. It applies just as much to domestic policies as it does to foreign relations. The law is three little words: Religious violence backfires.

How can such a law be contained in just those three words? By using the correct, broad definitions.

Violence means any initiation of force. Violence doesn't need to be physical. You can initiate force with intimidation and threats. Furthermore, the victim doesn't even need to know violence was used—fraud is a form of violence because, as it has been eloquently put in the past, it attempts to steal your brain.

Equally, religion is not just what idols you set up. Religion is a fundamental part of every person. It could involve a belief in a supernatural power, but it need not. Religion is the way you live your life. It is your acts, attitudes, thoughts, and beliefs.

At times, you may wish to impose your religious beliefs on others, and if proselytizing doesn't work, you might try violence. This can range from bans on drugs you don't think others should use, to pogroms and crusades to convert, to the invasion of the Middle East to spread democracy.

Each time, the plan backfires. A backfire means two things. One, your goal will fail. Drug use will rise, other religions will somehow flourish, and the Middle East will become even more tyrannical. Two, you will become less like the kind of person you wanted to be. You were a good person who thought others shouldn't smoke pot or drink alcohol, and now you've turned into a narc and a snitch. You thought your religion was the peaceful way of God, and now you've slain millions. You thought democracy was great, but now the people want you to pull out of the Middle East, and you can't let them vote that way.

Why does religious violence backfire? Is our universe set up this way for some deep karmic purpose? Does it naturally follow from human nature? Perhaps it is because of the imbedded hypocrisy and the inextricable inner contradiction. Religion at its core is the antithesis of violence. Carrying the name of God in vain—or using God's name to justify violence—is one of the strongest prohibitions of the Ten Commandments.

The ultimate irony comes from our own forefathers. The Puritans came here so they and their offspring could live a stark and pure life. They attempted to legislate religious observance with force. And it worked for a while, because the original settlers wanted to live that way.

But within about a century, the Puritans were gone. They were replaced by Connecticut Yankees, rugged individualists, tolerant of differences, seeking only freedom.

In mixing violence with religion, our Puritanical forefathers boomeranged themselves.