Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: BizBroker

Describing the positions of libertarianism is not an accusation, it is what libertarianism stands for.

If you want homosexuals banned by law from the military, then I misunderstood you, but I didn’t, you merely said that you want them to hide their homosexuality, but don’t try to talk about no “sexuality” in the military, the military is a hot bed of sexuality, it is full of aggressive and physically fit young people, overwhelmingly male.

We are past civil unions, now we are trying to block Obama’s recognition of gay marriage at the federal level, so you can drop that.

At some point you have to realize that no one cares about whether you yourself are a pure libertarian, or fall short on your commitment to your ideology, the discussion is about libertarianism itself, and it’s war against conservatism, not you.

It is silly to compare the tiny, pure, libertarian party that was founded by the libertarians to PERFECTLY reflect their libertarian ideals, and which is carefully maintained and kept on the true path of libertarian purity, with the two huge, vast, all encompassing, historical national parties in a two party system.

A libertarian party platform is a meeting of pure libertarians, concentrating on expressing libertarian purity on paper, not winning presidential elections and satisfying 60 million voters.


204 posted on 05/10/2014 10:44:38 PM PDT by ansel12 ((Ted Cruz and Mike Lee-both of whom sit on the Senate Judiciary Comm as Ginsberg's importance fades)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies ]


To: ansel12

Ok, then you must favor amnesty. You know since the Party does.
I served in the military...have you? I know there are lots of young fit people. But there is this thing called DISCIPLINE.. or following orders. Maybe you should read up on it. I know that sounds condescending, but I go where your remarks take me. When I served, outward sexuality was forbidden. And it worked, so don’t tell me it can’t. That’s defeatist and sounds like you are saying if people are going to violate the rules anyway then there shouldn’t be any. So, you are on the wrong side yet again...

I will drop NOTHING. Who says we are past civil unions? Obama himself just became pro gay marriage over the past couple of years. Nothing is set in stone and this is a solution to the problem.

I also do not care if you are a pure conservative, which I am guessing you are not as you seem to love using government power. Yes, this discussion is about libertarianism itself. And you have once again failed to see that it is NOT monolithic just as conservatism is not. But you have to try to make it that way so you have some boogey man to fight and whine about. If you cannot see that then you are not nearly as smart or politically savvy as you believe yourself to be.

I will say this however. The Libertarian Party was founded with certain principles in mind. While I do not agree with some of their prescriptions, as I have already explained, I will at least say they are true to their small government principles. Can the Republican Party say that? Can you? Right now you and your ilk are part of the statist problem. So keep villifying everyone else and gloss over your own faults. It works for 6 year olds, why not you too.


206 posted on 05/10/2014 11:08:39 PM PDT by BizBroker (There is no "radical Islam", there is only Islam itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson