Examples please?
Abortion is a special case which libertarians need to consider carefully. IF a state has an obligation to protect its citizens, then at what point does that obligation commence? Social conservatives have an answer. Libertarians need to come up with an answer too. It's not simply a case of outlawing a behavior of which you may or may not approve.
As long as a complete roll-back of the public space is politically impracticable, social conservatives will fight for the right to be represented in it.
America is a big country, and social conservatives understand that. If you don't like the culture of San Francisco, move to Boise or Plano. What makes social conservatives cranky (and should make libertarians cranky too) is when socialist bureaucrats from Washington decide that they are going to impose San Francisco culture on Boise or Plano.
Don't make the mistake that liberals make of assuming that social conservatives are all ignorant rednecks simply waiting for the chance to herd us all into religious re-education camps. Mostly what they want is to be left alone to raise their families the way they see fit.
And THAT happens to be a goal I share.
>> And what is one of the primary goals of this, except that those values that are NOT in line with the proposed agenda are suppressed. By law. That's IMPOSITION.
> Examples please?
Sure. One easy example is gay public behavior, and marriage in particular. Those who believe homosexuality is a sin against God (the majority of social conservatives agree with that statement) are generally not content to ignore it; they want it made illegal, suppressed in public, and many (perhaps a majority, I don't know) would agree to have the government snooping in the bedrooms of gay people nationwide to suppress it. Certainly they don't want it encouraged or sanctioned by the state.
The social conservative political agenda states that gay folks should not be permitted access to some of the social functions available to straight folks, such as a government-sanctioned marriage.
The libertarian doesn't want the government in the marrying business period, gay, straight, or otherwise. So while they agree on not sanctioning gay marriage, it's only because the libertarian wants the government out of all marriage. Social conservatives naturally want their own (straight) marriages sanctioned, hence the disagreement.
With regard to behavior, libertarians don't give a damn what other folks do in the privacy of their own home, and generally don't care what other folks do in public as long as it doesn't leave stains on park benches or startle the horses. They certainly don't want the government snooping in anybody's bedroom.
So any law that restricts the right of one person to pursue something which another person is free to pursue, is anathema to a libertarian. Thus, the fewer such restrictions, the better.
> Abortion is a special case which libertarians need to consider carefully. IF a state has an obligation to protect its citizens, then at what point does that obligation commence? Social conservatives have an answer. Libertarians need to come up with an answer too.
As you say, abortion is a special and difficult case -- at what point between conception and the first cry at birth does it become murder to abort? The libertarian, recognizing that reasonable people will always differ on this point, says: "Keep the government out of the abortion business in BOTH directions." That is, the government should neither fund abortions (which is onerous to those believing all abortion is murder), nor restrict access to private medical care including abortions.
So libertarians DO have an answer -- that it's none of the government's business. Waging a government-sponsored "War on Abortion" won't be any more effective than the government-sponsored War on Drugs. If as a caring individual one wishes to reduce the number of abortions, one can devote one's time and energy to supporting and extending the numerous other (better) options for what to do with an unwanted pregnancy.
The role of the govenment in protecting its citizens should be limited to protection from external threats. Protecting citizens from one another is very problematic, and protecting them from themselves is anathema, to the libertarian.
Personally I would like to see abortion become unnecessary because a) unwanted pregancies are mostly avoided through education and access to contraceptives, and b) those that do result are dealt with more lovingly (less violently). Legislation is ineffective at encouraging moral and loving behavior; the government should stay out of it.
> Don't make the mistake that liberals make of assuming that social conservatives are all ignorant rednecks simply waiting for the chance to herd us all into religious re-education camps.
No such mistake made here. I live in a rural area where social conservatism runs deep, and my neighbors are by and large good, decent folks. Moreover, they are mostly of the "leave me alone and I'll leave you alone" sort. We don't do things to piss each other off, so we get along fine.
> Mostly what they want is to be left alone to raise their families the way they see fit. And THAT happens to be a goal I share.
If in fact the social conservative political movement was driven by such "live and let live" types, I wouldn't be having this conversation with you. But in fact the political movement is populated with the same sort of power-and-control seekers that exist in the social liberal camp (who want to impose -their- beliefs on everybody in the name of socialism or whatever). You may be correct that most conservative individuals just want to be left alone. But the political movement which purports to represent them, and with which they claim to identify, does indeed want to impose a legislative agenda on everybody.
Perhaps there is where you and I can agree. I distain the big-L Libertarian party because I don't think they really represent my small-l libertarian position. You may likewise be able to see that the legislative agenda of the social conservative political movement goes beyond the simple freedoms you describe as your own desires.
Just a thought...