The thing you’re swatting at has two distinct definitions going under one name. No wonder you can’t ever land a broadside on “it.”
One is purely about political method. George Washington’s era with its explicit Christian ethic would actually be seen as that kind of libertarian, with respect to our era. If you actually bothered to look at Gene Eric’s own freep page you’d notice it, if (as applicable) you were not quite so packed with the desire to damn everyone you disagree with right to hell. (Christians especially should know better, but how many Christians take biblical dictums right to the root of their metaphysical implications? I do, and it’s been a real revolution for me. One of those implications is that this is not the time for damning people. Criticize philosophies all you want. Fight demons with gusto. But don’t damn any person.)
Anyhow about the subject: Another definition of libertarianism is with respect to what we generally know as Judeo-Christian morality. Love God and your neighbor, with all that entails. Here’s where that kind of libertarianism falls down and breaks its crown, but badly. “Abstain from force or fraud” is something like the shadow of a shadow of a shadow. It doesn’t even serve as a good picture of God’s economy.
And notice I said all this without damning anybody.
LOL, that was a perfect example of what we are talking about, it was useless and meaningless, not saying anything.
The article of this thread is promoting how wonderful it is that republicans and the nation is moving left on social issues, we conservatives disagree with you libertarians, and want to oppose the loss of our nation to the left’s/rinos/libertarian social liberalism.