Posted on 10/03/2010 5:59:15 PM PDT by Celtic Cross
Recently, I was considering becoming a member of the Libertarian Party. I admit I knew little about the party, except that they are for smaller government. I visited their website, and this is what I found...
The party's views of gay unions and abortion are as follows;
"Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships."
"Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration."
I know that there are many libertarians here on FR, and I would appreciate it if they weighed in. How can you affiliate yourselves with a party that at least appears to disagree with many basic conservative principles?
I really haven’t read everything above, too busy unfortunately. But here are a few thoughts.
First of all, you are using the word “Pharisee” entirely wrong. Their problem was that they pretended to be holy but weren’t (DJMacWoW knows about that, I learned recently). So let’s stop using that word incorrectly.
Second, this idea that “some people want to legislate their personal ideal of “morality” into the lives of everyone,” is actually inverted. The truth is that some people want to legislate their personal flavor of immorality on everyone else. For instance, the entire gamut of the homosexual agenda, the sex-positive movement which has been very influential in the form of sex-ed in schools, Planned Parenthood, and so on. How many parents are opposed to the crass and extreme immorality that is being taught in schools? Actually, many are. And many schools do everything they can to hide what they teach from parents.
The elephant in the room here is that those promoting immorality have used Big Government to force it one everyone else. Now when people are starting to fight back to bring the standard to what it always has been (before the forces promoting immorality used the courts and Big Government to change it), we are accused of being the Big Government proponents!
Take pornography for example. For the first almost 200 years of this country, pornography was illegal. No one, including the men who wrote the Constitution, thought that the First Amendment protected obscenity or pornography. But thanks to the ACLU (commie Big Government all the way) and Larry Flynt (porn producer) and a leftist Supreme Court (Big Gov. proponents), pornorgraphy was “discorvered” to be protected speech under the Constitution. How nake sex shows are “speech” is not exactly clear.
Even if a community does not want pornography, the Big Gov teamed up with porn producers make it so no community standards or desires mean squat. For instance, in my very small town (one few block main street) a porn store opened. There were petitions against it, letters to the editor and so on. Kids walk by it to and from school. But no, thanks to Larry Flynt, the ACLU and leftist SCOTUS, everyone is helpless and must tolerate that which they do not want to tolerate. IOW, the porn sellers and afficiandos have right to their obscenity sold in public, and everyone who does not want it in public have no rights.
Our government was founded upon principles of basic morality which were accepted by everyone as the common foundation of civilization. By rejecting those basic moral absolutes, the very concepts of family, duty, responsibility and respect for self and neighbor are quickly becoming things of the past. No civilization can continue without basic intact families.
Actually there is another elephant in the room. That is public expression of religious faith. For the first 200 or so years of our Republic, public expression of religious faith was not only considered beneficial for society, but perfectly in line with the Constitution (”nor the free exercise thereof”). It was expected and expressed over and over that common moral standards based on religion were not only Constitutional but indeed essential for public weal. The movement of aggressive atheism has now put God and religious faith into the closet and made the atheists’ view the default position. This of course inevitably leads to the “If it feels good, do it” foundation of legislation.
Look at it this way - something has to be the default position of moral standards in society. At this point someone may say “well, government has no business enforcing any morality at all, it should be neutral”. That is a false position, it is like saying “people should be not awake and not asleep, just neutral”, or “let’s have no light and no darkness, just neutral”. Government must by its very definition have a moral standard upon which legislation is based. Now, if someone then says that government should have no legislative power, we’re off in hookah-land.
It is not those promoting moral absolutes who want Big Government. It is those promoting license in the name of “freedom” who in the end, will force Huge Government upon everyone. The fantasy world of “freedom” where everyone is free to use any drug imaginable, there is no such thing as marriage (or anything means marriage), bestiality, polygamy, the grossest forms of pornography are not only available everywhere but shown publicly, and so on, mean that total anarchy and social breakdown are about a decade away.
And what happens when there is social breakdown and anarchy?
Tyranny.
It is a law of nature.
Our form of government works only with a moral people. We are seeing what happens when more and more people are not. Libertarianism merely accelerates that breakdown. The fantasy, if followed, would lead quickly into robber baron tyranny.
I haven’t read much of the thread but the Pharisees used the law to empower themselves and not to honor God. This is the same thing that homosexuals are trying to do, use the force of the law and become a protected group over others and tell God and His people to shut up.
Homosexuals want to use the force of government to become a protected group and silence any opposition. That's not freedom.
That's not Constitutional governance. In either scenario.
You do know that when our country was first founded, gay sex was illegal. The penalty in Virginia was death. And that Washington court martialed soldiers for it. The guys that wrote the Constitution thought it was a crime.
Funny how they forgot to add that clause into the Constitution...
Washington hated profanity. Do you really believe that the dead white guys allowed perversion?
Washington's Order Against Profanity
The problem is that we have strayed away from their morality a long time ago.
Funny how much prostitution went on back then and how many Founders were rumored to have partaken. One mans perversion is another mans punchline. As long as it's "acts of capitalism between consenting adults", it's none of my business.
This is where the Left/Right dichotomy falls apart. Dems believe humans are all too greedy and must be regulated and controlled. Repubs feel humans are all too evil/immoral and must be regulated and controlled.
Both paths lead to more government. Again, putting the same folks that thought up the EPA and the Post Office in charge of morality seems to be sheer folly at best. Insane stupidity at worst.
Can you prove that? It is known that Franklin was a libertine. You believe that Washington was? Adams? Did they hold proud prostitutes parades?
There were perversion laws in all states, that had always been there, until the 70's. Prostitution is still illegal. You want to strike down centuries of law and claim it's Constitutional when clearly it is not.
Again, we have strayed away from morality a long time ago. When men will not or cannot control themselves, the law will. And until the 1970's, the law did since the 1700's.
At a General Court Martial whereof Colo. Tupper was President (10th March 1778) Lieutt. Enslin28 of Colo. Malcom's Regiment tried for attempting to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier; Secondly, For Perjury in swearing to false Accounts, found guilty of the charges exhibited against him, being breaches of 5th. Article 18th. Section of the Articles of War and do sentence him to be dismiss'd the service with Infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with Abhorrence and Detestation of such Infamous Crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning by all the Drummers and Fifers in the [Note 28: Lieut. Frederick Gotthold Enslin.] Army never to return; The Drummers and Fifers to attend on the Grand Parade at Guard mounting for that Purpose.
For many having a piece of paper from the gubberment telling them when they are married and when the marriage can be over is a good thing. In my opinion, this way of looking at marriage has been awful for the institution, at least in modern times.
Freegards
No. They were pretty much prudes.
But Jefferson? Franklin?
You cannot force people to be moral at the point of a gun. It doesn't work. It never has and it never will.
Let people suffer the folly of their ways. Nothing good comes of such behaviors, but you don't have a Right (God given or otherwise) to stick a gun in their face to force them to your ideals.
“We must take human nature as we find it. Perfection falls not to the share of mortals.” - George Washington - to John Lay – August 1, 1786
And it was so notably rare they made special note of it. For this we need Federal regulation?
Except that is not what's happening,is it. Governments and courts are pushing a perverse agenda on our country. It must be stopped. By any legal means possible. The agenda to push perversion as normal is also the plan of communists and it became known in the 60's. And yet people swallow that there is a "right" to perversion. There isn't. It is not Constitutional. The men who wrote the Constitution did not believe immoral perversion was a right as their states had laws against it.
It was rare because it was ILLEGAL. 38 states have said "NO" to homosexual marriage. But the Federal government, Commies and marxists, are intent on destroying the moral fabric of the country. THAT is how you take down a nation, from within. Either we fight them or we let them succeed.
Why? Because Nanny Staters GAVE them that power. It's all well and good when that power is being used the way YOU want it to be used, but hell on wheels when the "other side" is in power.
Reap what you've sown.
The definition of a CONFEDERATE REPUBLIC seems simply to be "an assemblage of societies," or an association of two or more states into one state. The extent, modifications, and objects of the federal authority are mere matters of discretion. So long as the separate organization of the members be not abolished; so long as it exists, by a constitutional necessity, for local purposes; though it should be in perfect subordination to the general authority of the union, it would still be, in fact and in theory, an association of states, or a confederacy. The proposed Constitution, so far from implying an abolition of the State governments, makes them constituent parts of the national sovereignty, by allowing them a direct representation in the Senate, and leaves in their possession certain exclusive and very important portions of sovereign power. This fully corresponds, in every rational import of the terms, with the idea of a federal government.
Instead of legislating morality in your direction or their direction, how about we just take all that power away and leave it with the people of the States where it belongs?
Or is that to friggin' much to ask? Is that whole "Land of the Free" just a bunch of BS to both sides now?
No DC. There have been illegal power grabs and Washington is fine with it. The people are awake now and are not. No one gave them anything. Commies and Marxists infiltrated the government, academia and the MSM. McCarthy was right. And he was silenced. People believed the crap the MSM fed them.....until now. The reaction is called the Tea Party. Hopefully it isn't too late.
As I have shown you, perversion was never a freedom. Show me where it was a freedom. You can't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.