Replies

I am not going to get into a case by case argument as to whether a certain behavior is harmful or not. I made a point on the overall difference in ideolgy of libertarians versus conservatives.

Libertarians follow the Wiccan rede : “Do As tHou Wilt but Harm None” and feel as if this Wiccan rede is a apart of the Constitution. Alexister Crowley (the Beast) could easily serve as the Founder of the libertarian movement and was very libertine by nature but libertarianism really is more the legacy of the old school Confederate democrats who used to go out into woods and burn crosses and wear white hoods and robes and were led by types like the Grand Wizar and Cyclops, etc…

It is no coincidence that most libertarians dislike the religious right the same way that the progressives do. The KKK hated the religious right as well (very anti-Catholic) and the current libertarian party was formed even to join with the Marxists in protests against America during the Viet Nam war. Of course they also share in the drug culture of the Marxists as well.

libertarianism really is more the legacy of the old school Confederate democrats who used to go out into woods and burn crosses and wear white hoods and robes and were led by types like the Grand Wizar and Cyclops, etc…

The KKK was strongly in support of Prohibition. No matter how hard I try, I can't wrap my mind around the thought of that being a libertarian position.

They become anti-liberty once they start telling me that I have no right to have repreesntation on making law in response to limiting behavior that I believe to be harmful to me or my family. [...]
your dope is still illegal. Thanks for the incentive though to vote once again to make your lifestyle illegal.

How is his drug use harmful to your or your family?

I am not going to get into a case by case argument as to whether a certain behavior is harmful or not.

I only asked about a single case, which YOU brought up.

I made a point on the overall difference in ideolgy of libertarians versus conservatives.

And you had no response to my reply in post #30:

I have the right to represntation on issues whereas I feel the behavior of others is harmful to myself or my family.
If "what is harmful" is whatever a majority votes to be so, then those who claim to be "harmed" by you not giving them your money have won the day.
Many libertarians act as if they know better and want to deny you this right claiming that you need to have some sort of absolute proof that someones actions are directly harmful annd that all arguments that use a causation approach to showing the harm are not allowed to be used.
Libertarians are all for causation arguments - they just note that some such arguments are unfounded, for example, "some drug users harm others, therefore all drug use harms others."