Posted on 06/23/2014 12:17:27 PM PDT by Kaslin
Gene and Geron; you guys realize you’ve been conversing with a retread pro-dope troll? You remember Just Say No to Nannies?
Appparently, he’s back.
To castigate the poster personally in response to non-personal criticism is simply uncalled for.
As one who is philosophically a conservative libertarian, I’m often disappointed as to how quickly these conservations degenerate into personal attacks. But it should be obvious the poster in question is concerned about the well-being of minors, and doesn’t to my knowledge deride posters personally.
You're right. GeronL, your post was slimy, but I apologize for calling you a slimeball.
the poster in question [...] doesn’t to my knowledge deride posters personally.
Sure about that? GeronL to me: "I guess you live for the day when cocaine and heroin are sold in kindergarten cafeteria’s." - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3163045/posts?page=23#23
You said your argument comes from the Constitution and nothing else, and there is no age of consent in the Constitution.
I guess in your world parents and pastors would have to the ask the school to please not provide drugs to their kids. Which would probably get them a CPS visit in the Brave New World.
No, neither I nor the FReeper to whom you addressed your slimy post said that.
Yep. I guess trying to explain license vs liberty is useless to someone who would follow Karl Marx if he made drugs legal
If the Constitution is the ONLY guide you follow, then that would be legal wouldn’t it?
The founders meant for this government for a moral people and no other.
I know that one: when GeronL wants to do something, that's liberty ... but when somebody else wants to do something GeronL doesn't want them to do, that's license.
I never said that and it isn't the case.
I didn’t say the kids were molested. Libertarians know exactly what they are saying. The phrase in use now on the libertarian pedo side is that the children have the same rights to drugs and sex as everyone else.
The libertard pervs will say the kids have the same choices eventually. Since the Constitution is your only guide show me where it says otherwise.
We both know that libertarians don’t believe that drugs and stuff are for adults only. That is just a ruse to get it legalized and then they will fight and nail against that unconstitutional “age of consent”.
Show me where I said the Constitution is my only guide.
This is a good issue to debate given the conflicting opinions that define libertarianism. While I don’t agree with GeronL’s sweeping assertion, it’s a concern that shouldn’t be dismissed given the “seriousness of the charge.”
FWIW, libertarianism like statism is not to the exclusion of liberalism nor conservatism. In reality, it’s liberalism and conservatism that determine the morality subject to the degree of statist enforcement. Arguably, some amount of statism isn’t a bad thing when it concerns the protection of minors. Of course, statism can be very bad for the obvious reasons.
I’ll conclude with this: In an anarchical population, predators wouldn’t survive the day.
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.