Yale libertarian plans drastic 'Free State Project'

Yale Daily News ^ | Wednesday, October 23, 2002 | EMILY ANTHES

[Roscoe]

Frustrated by the Libertarian Party's failure to make progress nationally, Jason Sorens GRD '04 decided the best course of action would be to take over Wyoming. Or maybe Alaska.

The plan, which Sorens calls "The Free State Project," is ambitious. It calls for moving 20,000 people -- including the one additional Yalie who has signed on so far -- over the next nine years to a sparsely populated state where they would take to the ballot boxes in order to repeal most drug and gun laws, eliminate the income tax, and privatize most government-run industries.

So in July 2001, he posted an essay on the project on the Internet. Within a few days, he had over 200 e-mails from people who were interested.

"The response was positively overwhelming," he said.

[Demidog]

A sorcerer is one that intentionally fools people with chemicals. Doctors don't do that.

You are now backing away from your previous position. It is now your position that administering drugs is perfectly fine if you are not fooling people correct?

[#3Fan]

Really.... The Bible commands this. Adultry was an executable offense. Do you just not like certain parts of the Bible and feel free to ignore them at your whim?

God said the old covenant is no more.

If you are going to rely on this "uproot the tares" argument, then please explain why prosecuting people for the obscure "pharmacus" reference you have provided is justifiable, but prosecuting the highest sin (infadelity to God) is not?

God specifically told us to leave people alone in their beliefs. God did not specifically tell us not to enforce the law on private property.

Would you not be uprooting the tares by prosecuting people for intoxication? Do you realize that by your own logic, the Constitution can't possibly be ordained by God since it forbids such disregard for property?

We are allowed self defense through civil law. Laws against drug dealers are self defense. We are not directly threatened by those that believe wrong in most cases.

Do you really believe that you as a private citizen are authorized to enter your "un-neighbor's" house in order to make a citizens arrest for the crime of pot-smoking or intoxication?

Depends on what the civil laws on search and siezure are.

[#3Fan]

Well that is debatable. But lets just assume 120 years is correct. "Must shortly come to pass" is pretty plain.

120 years is not very long.

Furthermore, this sort of thing occurs often with "scholars" who ignore plain words. Jesus said "this generation will not pass..." I don't know how that can be twisted into something 2000 years and beyond but people do it.

Some in the generation died before others. Revelation starts when a person dies.

[Demidog]

So then you agree that the Constitution is not a libertarian document?

I don't agree. I don't even agree that it is not of God but #3fan has so twisted his logic that he can't possibly now say that a constitution which allows for blasphemy, adultry and abortion are "of God." Then again.....by his own logic God can't even be of God since it was he who created man and gave him the will to commit evil. He wants to make a distinction between alcohol and hard drugs where no real distinction exists. Alcohol and every other drug is for the purpose of self-medication. Self-medication is an inherant right. Such cannot be converted to a crime just because a few busy-bodies think it's a good idea.

Our freedom is more important than your good idea.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

So are Idolaters, Unbelievers, and those who get Intoxicated on their own Private Property -- Neighbors, or aren't they? Since if they are not "neighbors", then the State can throw them in Jail too, eh?? ~~ God specifically said to not interfere with a person's beliefs. Not so with drug dealers.

Matthew 13:24-30 says nothing about "beliefs". It only speaks of not uprooting the Tares.

Ergo, if this Scripture forbids State Actions against Tares who are False Religionists, it likewise forbids State Action against Tares who become Intoxicated on Private Property. There's NO evidence whatsoever in the passage which permits the division you are eisegetically attempting to draw.

Bollocks. Opium and Hashish have been used in the Middle East going back at least 3,500 years -- since the Jews were still in Egypt, and earlier. ~~ So there were a lot of opium addicts and hashish addicts during Moses' and David's times?

As you say, "addiction" is a subjective term.

But Opium and Hashish were in use.

There are 613 juridical Laws in the Old Testament. NOT ONE sanctions State Action against Intoxication. Do you suppose that God just... forgot?

Did he forget about speed limits too?

Already answered. The State cannot set Speed Limits on Private Property, for that would be a Trespass. See NASCAR, for example.

Earth to #3Fan: Romans 11:4 says not one word about the AntiChrist. It says that God reserved 7,000 togeether with Elijah against the worship of Ba'al. Thousands of years ago. ~~ Baal is antiChrist.

Ba'al is one anti-christian fallen spirit; but the specific passage you referenced refers to an Event which happened thousands of years ago, in the Time of Elijah -- unless you are calling God a Liar.

Which means it is NOT a Future Prophecy.

Which means you botched this one ridiculously.

You believe that Revelation took place in 70 AD, don't you. I'm not the one that botched things. LOL

Already answered. See #474.

There isn't any contrary Scripture to cite, you Biblical-Illiterate, because there isn't one word in the entire New Testament which invalidates the Trespass Laws. Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away. ~~ You do agree that the old covenant has vanished away, don't you? And now Paul says to follow the commandmnets and love your neighbor as yourself.

Sorry, there's nothing in Hebrews 8 which states that the Trespass Laws have been eliminated. The passage specifically concerns the Sacrificial Laws (see Hebrews 8:2).

Or do you believe that the Trespass Laws have been eliminated? Do you believe that you NOW have a Moral Right to commit Trespasses, because "the old covenant has vanished away"?

Rom 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if [there be] any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

But you just said that, if the State outlaws the Property, then it isn't Theft.

So how was the Nazi State violating the Golden Rule against Theft, when it confiscated Outlawed jewish property? After all, You just said that it isn't Theft if the State outlaws the Property.

So, what are you saying...

• The State can't morally Steal someone's intoxicants?
• Or, you are saying that it's not theft if the State outlaws the Property??

Well, if that's the case... when Hitler's storm troopers invaded the Private Property of Germany's Jewish population and turned them out of their shops and homes -- were they just, y'know, enforcing the Civil Law against Jews owning private property??

How could they be violating the Golden Rule against Theft?? For after all -- as you say -- it's not theft if the State outlaws the Property??

[Demidog]

Do you really believe that you as a private citizen are authorized to enter your "un-neighbor's" house in order to make a citizens arrest for the crime of pot-smoking or intoxication?

Depends on what the civil laws on search and siezure are.

Ok..good grief. Where does the constitution and the declaration of independence say that the "just powers" of Government originate?

[#3Fan]

"Belief" has got nuthin' to do with it, it's a simple matter of accomplished fact.

When did a third of the ships at sea sink?

Substantial portions of Revelation were fulfilled in 70AD.

Substantial portions? If you really believed God's word, you'd believe it all passed. 70 AD may have been a type, there have been mant through history, but the prophesies of Revelation have not passed.

An important point to remember is that most of the references to "the Earth" in Revelation are not Kosmos (the "world" or universe) but rather Ge (the LAND). Thus, if you wat to read Revelation the way that John wrote it (regardless of the English translations), it is generally appropriate to read Revelations as concerning judgments upon THE LAND -- of Israel.

That could be. But when were the elect delivered before the antiChrist and awed the world with their teachings? Revelation says the kingdoms of the earth will be no more. After 70 AD there were many kingdoms that ruled the earth and even the land of Jerusalem if you want to push the locality argument.

Not "the world". THE LAND of Israel. Some examples...

I agree "erets" can be as small as a field.

I could go on like this for hours....

No point in cutting and pasting longwinded articles, I don't read it, I just delete it. No need to go on for hours, answer the kingdom question and and the ships at sea question and the elect question, then we'll go from there.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Revelation starts when a person dies.

Now that's just loopy.

[Demidog]

Some in the generation died before others.

Oh my God.....

Jesus was not talking to you or me in that passage. He was talking to his disciples on that particular day. He said this generation shall not pass.

That would indicate that the generation to which he belonged would not pass before the events he described would take place.

[#3Fan]

But you just said that, if the State outlaws the Property, then it isn't Theft. So how was the Nazi State violating the Golden Rule against Theft, when it confiscated Outlawed jewish property? After all, You just said that it isn't Theft if the State outlaws the Property.

The manner in which the Nazis took the property of the Jews was theft. Also the government did not treat the Jews as they would be treated. Two commandments broken.

The State can't morally Steal someone's intoxicants? Or, you are saying that it's not theft if the State outlaws the Property?? Well, if that's the case... when Hitler's storm troopers invaded the Private Property of Germany's Jewish population and turned them out of their shops and homes -- were they just, y'know, enforcing the Civil Law against Jews owning private property??

See answers above.

How could they be violating the Golden Rule?? For after all -- as you say -- it's not theft if the State outlaws the Property??

The Nazis treated the Jews as they would not be treated.

[Demidog]

But when were the elect delivered before the antiChrist and awed the world with their teachings?

The AntiChrist would have been the Roman Emporer who instigated the persecution of the Christians if Revelations is any sort of prophecy. Furthermore, it does seem quite amazing to me that Rome would finally become a Christian nation after having so persecuted the Christians. Amazing coincidence that Revelations describes a great tribulation for the Christians only to have Christ finally win the battle and destroy the "Beast."

[Demidog]

The manner in which the Nazis took the property of the Jews was theft.

Please explain what you mean by "the manner in which the Nazis took the property of the Jews."

Do you mean, by passing a law outlawing property, they were committing theft? Or do you mean that by removing outlawed property at gunpoint they were committing theft?

[#3Fan]

Ok then, show me any study that proves them wrong.

Personal experience. All my friends drink, none are addicted to the point that my former friends who did meth and became addicted and worthless. My sample size is big enough for me to draw a conclusion and I vote accordingly.

[#3Fan]

If you believe that Prohibitionist Muslims (or Prohibitionist Christians, for that matter) should not break into your house and put a gun to your head to prevent you from "becoming intoxicated"... ...do thou likewise. For this is the law and the prophets.

I would have them do to me that which I want done to others.

[Demidog]

I don't read it,

So you enjoy your ignorance. If I were you I wouldn't admit you are so averse to at least examining what others have to say and then continue to want to engage in discussion. Such proves that you are a waste of time. Your mind is shut tighter than a drum.

[FreeReign]

So then you agree that the Constitution is not a libertarian document?

I don't agree. I don't even agree that it is not of God

So if the Constitution is of God, then how did the listed rights of the Constitution come down from God?

[#3Fan]

You are now backing away from your previous position. It is now your position that administering drugs is perfectly fine if you are not fooling people correct?

Look up sorcerer in a concordance. A doctors purpose is not to induce a spell.

[#3Fan]

I don't agree. I don't even agree that it is not of God but #3fan has so twisted his logic that he can't possibly now say that a constitution which allows for blasphemy, adultry and abortion are "of God."

God said to allow people to believe as they wish.

Then again.....by his own logic God can't even be of God since it was he who created man and gave him the will to commit evil. He wants to make a distinction between alcohol and hard drugs where no real distinction exists.

Jesus' first miracle was to turn water into wine. Jesus wasn't a sorcerer.

Alcohol and every other drug is for the purpose of self-medication. Self-medication is an inherant right. Such cannot be converted to a crime just because a few busy-bodies think it's a good idea. Our freedom is more important than your good idea.

China is my proof of what happens when a country legalizes a hard drug. They became slaves to the British because of opium.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

When did a third of the ships at sea sink?

The account of the sea disaster is a matter of record, especially as told by Josephus. He reports that after the Jewish defenders were defeated in the northern part of Palestine, they took to the sea. Some small battles were fought on the sea of Galilee but vicious battles were fought on the shores of the Great Sea and Vespasian drove them into the sea. There they were overtaken by monstrous storms that caused them to have many wrecks.

Now as those people of Joppa were floating about in this sea, in the morning there fell a violent wind upon them; it is called by those that sail there "the black north wind," and there dashed their ships one against another, and dashed some of them against the rocks, and carried many of them by force, while they strove against the opposite waves, into the main sea; for the shore was so rocky, and had so many of the enemy upon it, that they were afraid to come to land; nay, the waves rose so very high, that they drowned them; nor was there any place whither they could fly, nor any way to save themselves; while they were thrust out of the sea, by the violence of the wind, if they staid where they were, and out of the city by the violence of the Romans. And much lamentation there was when the ships were dashed against one another, and a terrible noise when they were broken to pieces; and some of the multitude that were in them were covered with waves, and so perished, and a great many were embarrassed with shipwrecks. But some of them thought that to die by their own swords was lighter than by the sea, and so they killed themselves before they were drowned; although the greatest part of them were carried by the waves, and dashed to pieces against the abrupt parts of the rocks, insomuch that the sea was bloody a long way, and the maritime parts were full of dead bodies.... (Flavius Josephus, THE JEWISH WAR)

Substantial portions? If you really believed God's word, you'd believe it all passed. 70 AD may have been a type, there have been mant through history, but the prophesies of Revelation have not passed.

No, we are currently in the first part of Revelation 20 ("the Kingdom is in your midst"), and the latter parts of Rev.20, plus Revelation 21 and 22, are yet to come.

But Revelation chapters 1 through 19 are, for the most part, fulfilled.

[rb22982]

Ok I'll give you meth, but is Meth the only drug you consider a 'hard drug'. Your sample size on the other 'hard drugs' is probably not big enough to draw a conclusion on.

Here Ill give you some numbers.

27.7 million people in America have admitted to using cocaine, but only 1.6 million in the last month. If you assume that all 1.6 million are physically addicted (not likely at all), then 5.7% of cocaine users have become addicted.

6.2 million people in America have admitted to using crack, but only .4 million have used it in the past month. If you assume that all 400,000 are physically addictive (not likely at all), then 6.45% of all crack users have become addicted.

3 million people have admitted to using heroin, while only 120,000 have used it in the last month. If you assume all 120k are physically addicted (not likely at all), then 4% of heroin users became addicted.

Meanwhile 184.4 million Americans have admitted to digesting Alcohol with 109 million in the last month.

Source: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services, Results from the 2001 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Volume 1. Summary of National Findings (Rockville, MD: Ofice of Applied Studies, August 2002), p. 109, Table H.1; p. 110, Table H.2; p. 129, Table H.21; and p. 130, Table H.22.