Replies

"Perhaps we disagree because we are approaching this issue from two different perspectives."

It's beyond approaching -- we have actually arrived.

But you are correct. You believe that the rights of the individual reign supreme (as long as they do not violate the rights of others). I believe the rights of the individual need to be tempered with the overall good of society in mind.

Mine is a more pragmatic approach. Yours has the appearance of anarchy.

"Yours has the appearance of anarchy."

Anarchy is the absence of government.

Mine is a more pragmatic approach.

Wow - what an intelligent argument.

"I believe the rights of the individual need to be tempered with the overall good of society in mind."

What is the overall good of society?

Until 1929, hemp [marijuana, mary jane, pot] was legal to grow, use, and possess in this country. It was not made "illegal" to "protect us from ourselves"; it was made illegal because of the invention of the decorticator. This was the hemp equivalent of the cotton gin. (See February edition, 1926 Popular Science Magazine) It was made illegal to maintain the cotton industry and prevent competition from a large, existing cash crop. Its kept illegal to prevent competition with the lumber indusry (paper pulp), cotton, oil industry (640 sq. miles of hemp planted for seed produces the equivalent of 100,000 barrels of oil a day), pharmaceutical industries, and so on. (I chose this specific example due to the "libertarian - pot" start to this thread.)

But this isn't all. Freon, made "illegal" to save the ozone. Made illegal, coincidentally, after Dupont's patent was up and because some bright boy came up with the concept that, since water boils into steam at 220+ degress for electrical generation, a low boiling liquid (freon boils at 66 degrees, F) could be used for the same thing. And then had the bad taste to build a model and prove it. But no, freon (a heavier than air gas) was destroying the ozone. O3 = ozone. O2 = oxygen Don't suppose that all of those large commercial aircraft burning loads of fuel up there could have anything to do with it?

How about the dummy corporation put together by the auto industry to buy out and destroy the trolley systems in this country in the 30's and 40's to sell more cars? Systems that would cost billions to replace today.

Without full individual rights the overall good of society is trampled by those who don't give a damn.

The only drug laws needed in this country are laws to guarantee that what you buy is what is stated on the label. More people are dieing from the law enforcement than the drugs. And if an individual dies from taking ANYTHING of his/her own free will, and they aren't trying to take someone else with them, then more power to them. Let them serve as an example to the rest.

Sex, drugs, porn are religious issues. Not law enforcement issues (excluding non-adults). Are prisons should be filled with murderers, rapists and thieves. Not potheads and druggies.

Why is it that people keep asserting that libertarians are anarchists? Maybe so they can continue to enforce their moral values on everyone else?

The government that governs best governs least.

So I again ask, what constitutes the "overall good of society"? Is it whatever the media says is bad? The government? The church? Community standards?

Or is the overall good of society best served by a Constitutional Republic with ALL of its historic checks and balances in place?

Just wondering.

But you are correct. You believe that the rights of the individual reign supreme (as long as they do not violate the rights of others). I believe the rights of the individual need to be tempered with the overall good of society in mind.

Mine is a more pragmatic approach. Yours has the appearance of anarchy.
............................................................
Spoken like a true socialist liberal Democrat. Here you go - go ahead and sign up:

http://www.kucinich.us/volunteer.php