Libertarian Folly: Why Everybody is a Social-issues Voter

American Thinker ^ | 08/07/2014 | Selwyn Duke

[SeekAndFind]

There is this notion, one we hear more and more, that the Republican Party has to shed the social issues to seize the future. “Social issues are not the business of government!” says thoroughly modern millennial. It’s a seductive cry, one repeated this past Tuesday in an article about how some young libertarians dubbed the “Liberty Kids” are taking over the moribund Los Angeles GOP. Oh, wouldn’t the political landscape be simple if we could just boil things down to fiscal responsibility? But life is seldom simple.

If you would claim to be purely fiscal, or assert that “social issues” should never be government’s domain, I’d ask a simple question: would you have no problem with a movement to legalize pedophilia?

Some responses here won’t go beyond eye-rolling and scoffing. Others will verbalize their incredulity and say that such a movement would never be taken seriously. This is not an answer but a dodge. First, the way to determine if one’s principles are sound is by seeing if they can be consistently applied. For instance, if someone claims he never judges others, it’s legitimate to ask whether he remains uncritical even of Nazis and KKK members; that puts the lie to his self-image. And any thinking person lives an examined life and tries to hone his principles.

[dfwgator]

Social and Economic policies are joined at the hip, you cannot separate the two.

[falcon99]

Seems to me that over the last few elections, it is the Dems who are constantly talking social issues while Repubs are talking jobs and economy. Just like impeachment, it is mostly a Dem talking point

[Yollopoliuhqui]

The Republican Party has to field a candidate with an IQ greater than a turnip who does not look like a prepackaged Ken doll in the pocket of the globalist financial plutocracy.

[driftless2]

I have a sister who likes to use the “is that hurting you argument?” Well then, some Islamist on the other side of the world inflicting genital mutilation or hanging homosexuals does not hurt me directly either. Should I support those two actions? According to liberal “logic” I should.

[Dilbert San Diego]

Social issues are not the business of government???

Yet these liberals are the ones who are forcing the government to take the liberal side of these issues. On abortion and homosexual marriage, the liberals have expended huge resources and years of effort, to force the government to have liberal policies in these areas.

And now we are saying that liberal thought is that these areas are NOT the business of government? After they expend so much time and energy to force the government to deal with them in a certain way? Really???

[Jeff Chandler]

When you think about the Republican candidates since Nixon . . .

.

.

[Durus]

Pedophilia is not a “social issue”, it's a constitutional and legal issue, like Gay Marriage, Abortion, Gun Control, etcetera.

[FrankR]

If we don’t get back to the Constitution and some semblance of order, there won’t be any “social” to worry about.

[mjp]

to legitimize pedophilia.

secular humanists believe in the psychology of self actualization. In a secular humanist utopia, there would be no limits to individuals becoming self-actualized by meeting all of their personal needs. They learn to worship their perfect selves.

[PGR88]

This article is bashing libertarians and seriously misrepresents what it is about.

Most libertarians I know are social conservatives - indeed most are orthodox Catholics.

They understand one key point - abortion, gay marriage, drug use, are not causes, they are symptoms. Debt, fiat money and activist progressive government are the causes of harmful changes to society and to how people behave. Fix those first and the social problems will fix themselves.

[Responsibility2nd]

Most libertarians I know are social conservatives...

You are a very confused individual. You cannot be a libertarian AND a conservative.

[Boogieman]

Sure, but neither that argument, or the “no legislating morality” argument that the author addresses, are actually the argument that has won over the majority of the public to socially liberal positions.

I don’t think we should be getting distracted by these basically irrelevant arguments, just because they are easy to pick apart. The real argument that has been winning the day is: “what happens between two consenting adults, as long as nobody is harmed, is nobody else’s business”. That’s the actual argument we need to focus on.

[Dr. Thorne]

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Simple-minded Libertarians don't understand this basic truth of humanity. Without men governing themselves, there can be no liberty. Any society that codifies immorality (abortion, homosexuality, recreational drug use, etc.) into law is doomed.

[Responsibility2nd]

Bingo. That’s why libertarians are very big on pedophillia.

Like other social diseases, they believe the gubmint has no right to involve itself.

[Boogieman]

Yep, sums it up nicely.

[wagglebee]

Homosexual Agenda and Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[entropy12]

You are absolutely correct. The hypocrite liberals push for abortions and free contraception’s while attacking only Christian conservatives. They never attack sharia type Muslims.

I am of the opinion that federal government should focus on defense, security of citizens, encourage self reliance instead of dependence, stay out of people’s private lives, and leave infrastructure and education issues to the local governments.

[LevinFan]

Excellent explination on why social laws MUST exist. Especial important is the ‘never happen’ stuff. You’d think that after being wrong so much, they’d get it that never is a word one should never use.

One example no brought up was abortion. Under the concept of no moral law, we don’t get to care or challenge it.
But as a person of character can not simply ignore murdering babies. It is either right or wrong. It can have no more grey area than life or death. And i see that, even as a person who’s mission isn’t even abortion.

Government must be about more than money, or what are we? Our founders built a government fit for a moral people, and unfit for anyone else.

[Dilbert San Diego]

Agreed that government should focus on certain areas, and leave most things to local government or the people themselves.

We live in a world in which school bake sales are now being regulated.

This sort of thing could be a powerful issue for conservatives. While we can all debate about whether too many cupcakes from a bake sale are good for us, I think we can make a strong case that a bureaucrat in Washington, DC, SHOULD NOT BE telling local schools what products are allowed to be sold at a bake sale.

In this case, we should make the case that we want local schools to decide what they want to sell at a bake sale. Issues like this are none of the business of a bureaucrat in Washington.

And there are many other issues just like this, in which the federal government is involved, but should not be involved with.