Libertarians = Small gov. democrats? Or what? (vanity)

www.lp.org | Oct. 4th, 2010 | Celtic Cross

[caww]

Ron Paul is an idiot....as are all those who refuse to identify the enemy. We have them in government offices already and he's just another one who will enable the Islamic take over and in time will show his support for Sharia law....somehow he'll present the argument as “fair” to the Moslem population...and they will support him for saying say. He's been baited and hooked....wait until he discovers they will not let him go either....like the politicians in Sweden and Netherlands who are stuck in the pockets of Islamic politicians. Once your on board with the Islamic agenda..you will not get away easily thereafter.

[Responsibility2nd]

“Low tax liberal”

Libertarians are hypocrites. Case in point is Prop. 19 (a libertarian wet dream).

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).

[Responsibility2nd]

Ron Paul is an idiot....

_______________________________

True. And I never cease to get a kick out of reminding the libertarians on Free Republic as to what their boy is saying and doing.

And an even bigger kick is to see them stutter and stammer as they try and distance themselves from the King of Libertarianism.

[metmom]

The present libertarian mindset is going to lead to a complete moral breakdown of society and ultimately anarchy.

We have to put up with whatever they choose to inflict on us because, you know, they have their rights. Ours, obviously, don’t count for anything.

Present day libertarians, for the most part, are just spoiled children in adult bodies. They have not yet grown up and understand their responsibility in contributing to an orderly and safe society.

They still don’t want anyone else telling them what to do, yet have no compunction about telling us to STFU when we comment about their obnoxious, immoral, destructive behavior.

[Nowhere Man]

Really, I go back & forth between the two. The final issue for me is personal FREEDOM. I have gay friends I’ve known for years. While I don’t think they need to marry their partner, it’s no skin off my nose if they do. Remove any gov’t subsidy (my tax dollars) & I shouldn’t really care.

Abortion is a harder problem, but it’s not likely we can totally stop it. Better to work on teaching people moral precepts & hope they make right decisions. The left has done so much to make people fear Christians (like conservatives) & for awhile we’ll just have to give them some space until they can come our way willingly.

I lean libertarian on many things, but deep inside, I am for conservative morals, but it really isn't the job of the Federal government to do anything about it on an everyday basis. Yes, you can have laws against murder of course and even for libertarians, they is OK since you are harming another person but I just believe the Federal government is there to do certain things like defense, have a road/air traffic system, handle issues between the States and work on foreign policy. You might add a few sundry things like send up a space shuttle or two, but not much beyond that.

Unless we go through the Amendment process on things like gay marriage, the Federal government should be silent on the matter. Same with abortion.

Most of these issues are to be left up for each State to decide and both sides of these issues do have access to the legislative process to change and modify the laws in the States. So it should be up to us who favor traditional marriage to work in the system to preserve it and or change it back while the other side would work to allow homosexual marriage. I know there will be States to where we would lose and we must accept that but I do believe most States would keep traditional marriage. That is the nature of our system under the Constitution.

Abortion, should be up to the States to decide. My own take on it, and I do see it as a libertarian one, is that I'm pro-life. The reason is that life begins at conception and to deny life is wrong, unless there is no other way out after seeking and weighing other options.

[wagglebee]

The present libertarian mindset is going to lead to a complete moral breakdown of society and ultimately anarchy.

Yep, at least the Marxists are open about their desire to destroy American society.

Many people do not seem to realize that when Thomas More wrote Utopia five centuries ago it was a satire where he was openly mocking the belief in a utopian society. He realized that as appealing as it sounded, it was an impossibility. Unfortunately, libertarians either don't understand that their beliefs would REQUIRE such impossible utopianism to succeed, or they do realize it and don't care because they are actually anarchists. Left unfettered, libertarians will always wind up creating a new version of Lord of the Flies.

[little jeremiah]

It's good to have it out in the open.

"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."

So, legal abortion. Check! Homosexuals getting married, in the military, adopting children. Check!

Basically libertarians are the fringe kook wing of leftists.

[little jeremiah]

Libertarians, according to their own admission, want homosexuals in the military.

Even though most in the military abhor it.

So I guess a strong military is stupid to libertarians. Or maybe they’re Code Pinkish?

[little jeremiah]

Well, the libertarian platform is pretty clear that they want homosexuals in the military, adopting kids, marrying and so on. And illegals are fine, too.

So if you disagree with any of the above, you should take it up with the official libertarian people.

[little jeremiah]

It’s why I’m very much supportive of gay monogamy. If the term “marriage” is too incendiary, let’s find some other way of making it work, because government has no damn business telling you or anyone else who you can love.

A perfect example of why libertarianism is a childish fantasy. Homosexuals themselves have no interest in monogamy. That's not why the homosexual agenda is pushing marriage. Many militant homosexual activists have directly said that they want marriage to dismantle and change society's view of what marriage and family mean. Giving them a paper won't make them monogamous, it hasn't in any state or country that does it. You're out of touch with reality.

[little jeremiah]

With no official, enforced definition of marriage, then marriage would no longer exist.

Which is exactly what homosexual activists want. To destroy the old fashioned concepts of marriage and family.

[ansel12]

When did Americans start to think that their government got to define what marriage is instead of their Creator?

When was the definition of marriage in dispute in America, or open to debate, and when was the definition not enforced?

Also, just how does Allah define marriage, and does he speak for homosexual churches, and the FLDS as well?

[little jeremiah]

This thread is really good because it makes it clear as a bell what libertarians really are.

Pro-homosexual agenda, pro-abortion, Islam-enabling, drug tolerant/or using people who want to enfeeble and emasculate the military.

The only good thing is they want lower taxes.

[little jeremiah]

Left unfettered, libertarians will always wind up creating a new version of Lord of the Flies.

Well said!!!!

[Allegra]

Is anyone who’s a libertarian a libertarian? Reading here, seems everyone who’s a libertarian is really not a libertarian.

[freeandfreezing]

When was the definition of marriage in dispute in America, or open to debate...

Once the government had expanded the scope of its powers enough that members of the government, particularly in the courts, felt that they could, by judicial fiat, re-define a fundamental concept of humanity.

Do you really think that the courts in the less intrusive federal government we had in the earlier years of our nation's history would have ever even dreamed of trying to redefine marriage?

[caww]

His statements do create questions as to which side he stands with. I don't see him standing for the American peoples side as much as he might twist his answers to reflect that he does. Too many questions....too many statements that tell me otherwise he is not good America...rides the fence too much and therefore is supporting those who have another agenda for our country that is not in tune with the grass roots.

In my opinion Libertarians are just the soft side of the Democratic party....they love to cause division and really many are leftovers of the hippie generation still trying to make their mark. I know that might sound harsh to some, but it is my assessment of where they stand.

[Dead Corpse]

With no official, enforced definition of marriage, then marriage would no longer exist.

Your faith is so weak you need GOVERNMENT to help you follow it?

You have bigger issues.

[freeandfreezing]

So if you disagree with any of the above, you should take it up with the official libertarian people..

Why? The original poster of the thread wanted information on what libertarians believe as a political philosophy. I have tried to explain that, but as I noted before, I don't necessarily agree with them.

Your request is no more logical than someone suggesting that since you no doubt disagree with the Democratic party platform, you should "take it up with the official liberal people". So what are you waiting for?

[Responsibility2nd]

The only good thing is they want lower taxes.

Oh really?

Sorry, but they even fail (epic failure) on that issue as well.

I've had it up to here with debating libertarians who want Prop. 19 to pass. When I press them on how that will RAISE taxes - they have nothing to say.

I take that back. They do say this: I'm a nanny-stater who won't who wants to return to Prohibition, and blah, blah, blah.