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?
Some people use “small government” as a slogan; some people actually believe in it as a principle. The latter are libertarians (not necessarily capital-L members of the party).
This is amazing, the Party is OFFICIALLY PRO ABORTION, it is their party platform.
Freedom is a scary thing.
Repealing arbitrary government regulations that get in the way of commerce is a bedrock principle of conservatism.
"You don't like the Goths?"
"No! Not with the persecution we have to put up with!"
"Persecution?" Padway raised his eyebrows.
"Religious persecution. We won't stand for it forever."
"I thought the Goths let everybody worship as they pleased."
"That's just it! We Orthodox are forced to stand around and watch Arians and Monophysites and Nestorians and Jews going about their business unmolested as if they owned the country. If that isn't persecution, I'd like to know what is!"
--L. Sprague deCamp, Lest Darkness Fall
If a community does not want pornography, nobody will look at it, and as a result nobody will bother to create or distribute it. End of problem -- without involving the Big Government you love so very very much.
You wouldn't believe the tussle I got into with that FBI guy at the newsstand who tried to force me to buy Hustler instead of Maximum PC....
That would be news to General Charles Lee after he got an earful from Washington after his ineptitude at Monmouth:
Yes, sir, he [Washington] swore that day till the leaves shook on the trees.
--General Charles Scott, Continental Army
Some apologists for Big Government can see so many emanations from the penumbrae of the Constitution that the spectacle before their eyes makes the aurora borealis look like a damp sparkler.
Repealing arbitrary government regulations that get in the way of commerce is a bedrock principle of conservatism.
_______________________________________________
Nice comment. And made solely based on this.......
There is nothing economically conservative about legalizing marijuana.
.... it might be true. But you ignored the key point I was making. So I’ll repeat myself...
There is nothing economically conservative about legalizing marijuana. One of the major goals of Prop. 19 is to GROW (not shrink) the size of government and RAISE (not lower taxes).
So for you to say....
Repealing arbitrary government regulations that get in the way of commerce is a bedrock principle of conservatism.
... sounds pretty shallow when it comes to “repealing arbitrary government regulations” just so you can RAISE taxes and GROW the size of government.
Remember passing Prop. 19 is not done for any free market economic reasons. That might happen - the cartels might go legit and get even richer - just like bootleggers did when Prohibition ended. But again I say...
There is nothing economically conservative about legalizing marijuana. One of the major goals of Prop. 19 is to GROW (not shrink) the size of government and RAISE (not lower taxes).
This is a familiar argument. It is precisely the same one used by liberals to assert that the free market, if implemented, would quickly devolve to a Dickensian scenario of a few rich people grinding the masses into the dirt.
No. It isn't. In fact, over turning Roe V Wade to get the Federal government out of the issue, and incidentally keeping States from banning the procedure, is a long standing goal.
Technically, if he moves his lips while posting it's also slander.
Technically, there are two types of agnostics: weak agnostics who merely assert that they don’t know whether or not there is a God, and strong agnostics who assert that you don’t know, either (because the question is fundamentally unanswerable).
IMO only. Your mileage may very...
Aww, you’re a cute little libertarian.
Ootchi goochie goo! I wonder if you’re ticklish.
I posted a link to the official order. How about not making stuff up....noob.
National Review, which is the go-to source for the current pulse of conservatism, offers some observations:
Economic Issues at the ForefrontThe coalition Ronald Reagan assembled of fiscal and economic conservatives, evangelicals, and national-security advocates has always been dominated by the social issues at the grassroots level. While free-market economic conservatives lived in New York and dutifully attended their Club for Growth meetings and national-security types inhabited Washington, the Republican social conservatives dominated the grassroots of the party. They alone could turn out the numbers to rallies and to the polls on primary or Election Day.
Now, all that has changed. It is the fiscal conservatives and free-market supporters who own the Republican streets. Through the Tea Party, they have come to dominate the grassroots of the GOP. It is as if an invisible primary were held for supremacy at the grassroots and the Tea Party won.
And social issues are nowhere on the Tea Party agenda. I recently participated in a conference call with tea-party affiliates throughout the country. During the question period that followed my speech, one leader of a local tea-party group asked a question about abortion. The conference-call leader jumped in before I could answer and ruled the query out of order. "Our priorities are to oppose taxes, support fiscal conservatism, and advance free-market principles," she scolded the questioner. "We do not take a position on social issues like abortion," she added....
This shift in Republican priorities is opening up the way for social moderates and libertarians to back Republican candidates in the 2010 elections. The libertarian strain in the American electorate has long been neglected by the mainstream media. But, through the Tea Party, it has gained ascendancy on the right. Those who want the government to stay out of both boardrooms and bedrooms have come to dominate the party and its nominating process....
Indeed you did:
The General is sorry to be informed that the foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and swearing, a vice hitherto little known in our American Army is growing into fashion. He hopes that the officers will, by example as well as influence, endeavor to check it and that both they and the men will reflect that we can little hope of the blessing of Heaven on our army if we insult it by our impiety and folly. Added to this it is a vice so mean and low without any temptation that every man of sense and character detests and despises it.I must commend you for citing this bit of evidence in favor of the libertarian position (that moral leadership is to be exercised by example and influence) and against your own (that personal preferences are to be imposed by force).
Observations and OPINION.
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.