Posted on 12/22/2010 8:01:24 PM PST by Notary Sojac
The Montana Constitution does not depend on Opium dens, crack houses, prostitution, porn, and abortion, contrary to what liberal/libertarians think.
“Libertarian” lefties will create Californias everywhere if they are allowed to.
The last time I was in California (2007) you could scarcely walk a block without seeing those zoned out Chinamen all over the place.
Since FR is a pro-God, social conservative forum, it is more than a small group of freepers that are not liberal/libertarians. Neither one of you believes that you have mass support here for the homosexual agenda, legalizing drug use/sales, abortion, etc.
Surely you don’t think that drug pushers, and dopers are limited to “chinamen” as you call them.
He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle and herb for the service of man (Psalm 104:14-15)
(Jesus:) "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man." (Matt. 15:11)
Who said anything about what the Montana constitution depends upon, which does not depend upon a police state locking everyone up who offends you, in any case.
You are an atheist, skip the lessons on Christianity.
Do you accept the bible on other issues such as homosexuality?
As far as homosexuality goes, I am not a party-line Libertarian.... I'd vote against homosexual marriage and against homosexuals serving openly in the military if it were on my ballot. But I draw the line at any attempt to re-criminalize sexual acts in private between consenting adults.
In the big "homosexual agenda thread" over the weekend, God's name was used extensively...
"It's not me who hates these unrepentant fags, it's God".
"Sodomy is an abomination to God, and that's all I need to know about the issue."
Well, maybe. But when you look at the advance of the homosexual cause over the last half a century, it's hard not to think that God is saying, "I believe I'll just sit this one out. You Freepers are going to have to do all th' heavy lifting, OK??"
Western states like California, Oregon, Washington have always been libertarian, not conservative, that is why they were in time, absorbed by the left.
Many Southern and western states like Texas have always been conservative, that is why they have managed to best resist the leftwing/libertarian gains of the last 60 years, and in many ways managed to roll back some of them and even move right.
The tiny, pure white, western states that counted their population by the thousands, have managed to have a good thing, but now as post 2 shows, the world is moving in, and as this case shows, Californiafication is already taking hold unless it is resisted by the conservatives in those states.
Montana can adopt this new leftwing agenda that is coming there for the welfare and to make a living in the drug/crime culture, and have OJ Simpson juries, or they can try and fight.
Touray Cornell is a problem, not a symbol of freedom and preserving traditional America.
We freepers will advance conservatism, you will advance liberalism.
Unlike your oft-repeated, and rather tired, post about the official Libertarian party (which no libertarian I know supports), most libertarians don’t ‘support’ abortion, the homosexual agenda, open borders, etc. Quite the opposite. So your little silly game of equating libertarians with liberals by dint of sharing a few letters falls flat. The root word of libertarian is liberty, not liberal. Liberty, a concept of which you have seem to have no clue as to what it means.
Libertarians don’t believe the government had the power to make certain things illegal without a Constitutional amendment, like they had to do with booze. Banning things falls outside of the enumerated powers.
And before you go all Mojave and start accusing me of being a pothead, I have never ingested any controlled substance without a proper prescription, and as little of those as I could. Even if they did make the stuff legal tomorrow, I wouldn’t partake. Not interested in it.
But neither am I going to tell another adult they can’t partake because I personally disapprove of taking drugs, and I won’t demand the State imprison them for offending my sensibilities. That is the difference between me and you.
We are pig rasslin, MI Dude. I’m climbin outta the sty. I oughta know better........
Merry Christmas, FRiend.
And to you and yours.
The most successful libertarian candidate ever for President, was running against Reagan, and he described libertarians as "low tax, liberals", that is what destroyed California.
If Montana embraces the social liberal, pro-drugs, jury nullification world view of Touray Cornell and the radical left, then Montana will be a hell hole within a relatively short time.
The rot has already started, as we can see.
The judge should have dismissed the jury pool and started with a new one.
Such things should not be felonies, but someone who has committed eight serious crimes has shown they cannot live in society and should no longer be given the chance ever again.
Hey, I’m not arguing that this guy is a choir boy. But in America, the prosecutor doesn’t get two bites at the same apple. If you file charges for only possession of a tiny pinch of pot, and the jury nullifies, you don’t get to say “But...but, how about all that stuff he did in the past?”
Seems to me that if the prosecutor had confined the case to the dealing charge, the potential jurors might have reacted differently.
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.