Posted on 09/22/2002 6:53:05 AM PDT by EggsAckley
Okay, folks. I've been hanging around here, trying to sort out the local population for about four years. I have discerned that there are "big-L" Libertarians, and there are "little-l" libertarians, and these sometimes do not agree with each other. And I've also encountered some threads where the big-L's seem to gang up on everybody, and I'm really trying to figure out why there are so MANY different ideologies here.
From what I have gleaned, Libertarians (both big-L and little-l) are against big government. Well, guess what! So am I. I think we have wa-a-a-a-y too many laws about wa-a-a-a-y too many things that should be none of the government's business. I also think that those laws favor certain groups of citizens while encumbering others. Of course, the obvious example would be the givers and takers of our nation. The hard-working give to the non-working, who gladly lap up what is offered. Or the issue that's currently a burr under my personal saddle: THE DEATH TAX. But these are just BIG examples; there are lots of little ones.
How about, when we get RID of a few laws, let's make some NEW ones, laws that really HELP people, all people. Like, a law against putting labels in the neck of women's garments? Or a law against the goofy "easy open" packaging? Or a law against too much fog (oops, just being a little selfish there.) And a law against the BIGGIE: it should be a federal offense for any book to be published WITHOUT an INDEX! Ya know, these are laws that would help EVERYONE, rich or poor, left or right.
Okay, I know this is silly, but there ARE some laws I'd like to see enacted, such as a law requiring that all appointed judges be subject to a performance review, say....every ten years. For that matter, ANY lifetime government jobs should be subject to this. In fact, even tenured professors should be reviewed regularly.
And who should review them? US. We the people. Maybe put it on the ballot so that all citizens can comment on the matter. Yeah, you're right.......too many people don't vote, and it would probably turn into a huge and expensive political football, and we don't need any more of those.
Yes, I know I'm veering off from the title of this missive, but it's all still pertinent, in a round-about way. I simply would like to understand why there is so much consternation here on FR when the word "L-libertarian" pops up. I do know that several of the "big-L's" whip out their copy of a book written by a woman whose name escapes me now. But that's NOT what I want. I want to read their OWN words, their OWN ideologies, not some L-libertarian "handbook."
I'm really serious (series?) here folks. Yes, I want less government; yes, I want less laws. Could I be (*gasp*) a closet L-libertarian??
Confusion reigns.
"The only foundation of a free Constitution is pure Virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People in a greater Measure, than they have it now, they may change their Rulers and the forms of Government, but they will not obtain a lasting liberty." John Adams
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
"Religion and virtue are the only foundations, not only of all free government, but of social felicity under all governments and in all the combinations of human society." John Adams
"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity. John Quincy Adams
"From the day of the Declaration...they (the American people) were bound by the laws of God, which they all, and by the laws of The Gospel, which they nearly all, acknowledge as the rules of their conduct." John Quincy Adams
"Man, considered as a creature, must necessarily be subject to the laws of his Creator, for he is entirely a dependent being....And, consequently, as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should in all points conform to his Maker's will...this will of his Maker is called the law of nature. These laws laid down by God are the eternal immutable laws of good and evil...This law of nature dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this... Sir William Blackstone
"Blasphemy against the Almighty is denying his being or providence, or uttering contumelious reproaches on our Savior Christ. It is punished, at common law by fine and imprisonment, for Christianity is part of the laws of the land. Sir William Blackstone
"The preservation of Christianity as a national religion is abstracted from its own intrinsic truth, of the utmost consequence to the civil state, which a single instance will sufficiently demonstrate. Sir William Blackstone
"I have carefully examined the evidences of the Christian religion, and if I was sitting as a juror upon its authenticity I would unhesitatingly give my verdict in its favor. I can prove its truth as clearly as any proposition ever submitted to the mind of man. Alexander Hamilton
"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here." Patrick Henry
"The Bible is worth all other books which have ever been printed." Patrick Henry
"Bad men cannot make good citizens. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience are incompatible with freedom." Patrick Henry
"It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains." Patrick Henry
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers. John Jay
"Religion is the only solid basis of good morals; therefore education should teach the precepts of religion, and the duties of man toward God." Gouverneur Morris
"If thou wouldst rule well, thou must rule for God, and to do that, thou must be ruled by him....Those who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants." William Penn
"By removing the Bible from schools we would be wasting so much time and money in punishing criminals and so little pains to prevent crime. Take the Bible out of our schools and there would be an explosion in crime." Benjamin Rush
As we can see here, our founders did not endorse or embrace libertarianism in the least. Our Founders understood that laws must reflect Almighty God's Moral Precepts.
Libertarianism is a religion of self indulgence and hedonism. It teaches that the person can decide for himself what is right and wrong, and has to answer to no one.
It is humanistic to the core.
Libertarians believe abortion, homosexuality, fornication, adultery, sexual perversions, prostitution, drug use, gambling ect... are all things that should be practiced and enjoyed.
They hate and despise authority, and they blame government and laws for their problems.
GOD MAKES LAW. MAN's LAW MUST REFLECT GOD'S LAW.
Our Founders understood this principle. They had laws that protected the moral fabric of our nation, because they understood that a good nation must have morality. They took it for granted that the people were moral, that is why the constitution worked.
The hippies of the 1960's were not moral, their immoral/ammoral lifestyle is incompatable with the constitution.
If our founders had only known what we have become, they would have drafted a much different constitution.
Way back in 1815, The Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided an important case, here are excerpts from that case: It reflects the case law of the day, and the attitude on which our nation was founded.)
This court is...invested with power to punish not only open violations of decency and morality, but also whatever secretly tends to undermine the principles of society... Whatever tends to the destruction of morality, in general, may be punishable criminally. Crimes are public offenses, not because they are perpetrated publically, but because their effect is to injure the public. Buglary, though done in secret, is a public offense; and secretly destroying fences is indictable.
Hence it follows, that an offense may be punishable, if in it's nature and by it's example, it tends to the corruption or morals; although it not be committed in public.
Although every immoral act, such as lying, ect... is not indictable, yet where the offense charged is destructive of morality in general...it is punishable at common law. The destruction of morality renders the power of government invalid...
No man is permitted to corrupt the morals of the people, secret poision cannot be thus desseminated.
Remember:
"It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains."
I think the best description of (l)ibertarians might be the "Republican Liberty Caucus" position statement.
As follows;
REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS POSITION STATEMENT
As adopted by the General Membership of the Republican Liberty Caucus at its Biannual Meeting held December 8, 2000.
WHEREAS libertarian Republicans believe in limited government, individual freedom and personal responsibility;
WHEREAS we believe that government has no money nor power not derived from the consent of the people;
WHEREAS we believe that people have the right to keep the fruits of their labor; and
WHEREAS we believe in upholding the U. S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land;
BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Liberty Caucus endorses the following principles:
1.0 FEDERALISM
1.1 The power of the federal government should be limited, as per the tenth amendment to the U. S. Constitution.
2.0 EDUCATION
2.1 The U. S. Department of Education should be abolished, leaving education decision making at the state, local or personal level.
2.2 Parents have the right to spend their money on the school or method of schooling they deem appropriate for their children.
3.0 HEALTH CARE
3.1 Free market health care alternatives, such as medical savings accounts, should be available to everyone, including senior citizens.
3.2 The federal entitlement to Medicare should be abolished, leaving health care decision making regarding the elderly at the state, local, or personal level.
4.0 TAXATION
4.1 The tax system of the United States should be overhauled.
4.2 There should be a national debate discussing various alternative means of taxation including but not limited to a single flat income tax, repealing the income tax and replacing it with a national sales tax, and reducing spending to the point where the income tax can be repealed without the need to replace it with a national sales tax or any other form of taxation.
4.3 The capital gains tax should be *eliminated*.
4.4 The inheritance tax should be *eliminated*.
4.5 The new tax system should be implemented *promptly*.
5.0 WELFARE
5.1 The U. S. Department of Health and Human Services should be abolished, leaving decision making on welfare and related matters at the state, local or personal level. All Americans have the right to keep the fruits of their labor to support themselves, their families and whatever charities they so choose, without interference from the federal government.
5.2 All able-bodied Americans have the responsibility to support themselves and their families.
6.0 CRIMINAL JUSTICE
6.1 Every American has the right to keep and bear arms. We affirm our support for the second amendment of the U. S. Constitution.
6.2 All people, regardless of position in the public or private sector, should be held equally accountable under the law.
6.3 The *only* litmus test for Supreme Court or other judges should be their determination to accurately interpret, not amend, the Constitution. Judges have *no* authority to make new law.
7.0 CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
7.1 Election campaigns should not be subsidized by tax payers.
7.2 No individual should be compelled to support a political candidate he or she does not support. Government should not empower trade unions to collect funds from their members for use as political contributions without their members' expressed consent.
7.3 All limits on campaign contributions should be eliminated.
7.4 There should be full and timely public disclosure of all the sources and amounts of all campaign contributions upon their receipt.
8.0 FEDERAL BUDGET
8.1 There should be an amendment to the U. S. Constitution to require a balanced budget, provided it includes a supermajority requirement to raise taxes and provided it does not empower the judiciary to unilaterally raise taxes.
8.2 Honest accounting dictates that all federal expenditures should be on budget.
8.3 Each budget should be derived based upon the justification for and needs of each program, with no program being either budgeted for or increased automatically.
9.0 GOVERNMENT REFORM
9.1 The U. S. Department of Commerce should be abolished, per the tenth amendment of the U. S. Constitution.
9.2 The National Endowment for the Arts should be abolished, per the tenth amendment of the U. S. Constitution.
9.3 The National Endowment for the Humanities should be abolished, per the tenth amendment of the U. S. Constitution.
9.4 The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development should be abolished, per the tenth amendment of the U. S. Constitution.
9.5 Subsidies to agricultural and other businesses should be eliminated.
9.6 Corporate taxes should be eliminated simultaneously and proportionally with the elimination of subsidies to businesses.
9.7 Recommendations by the Grace Commission and the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) should be reviewed and implemented, where possible, beginning immediately.
9.8 Privatization of government assets, management and services should be implemented for cost-effectiveness wherever applicable.
10.0 TRADE
10.1 The U. S. government should inhibit neither the exportation of U. S. goods and services worldwide, nor the importation of goods and services.
10.2 The United States should not be answerable to any governing body outside the United States for its trade policy.
11.0 DEFENSE
11.1 U. S. military should be deployed only where there is a clear threat to vital U. S. interests and only with the consent of the U. S. Congress.
11.2 It is the duty of the federal government to provide a system to defend against missile attacks.
11.3 No branch of the military should be put in harm's way without a clear entrance and exit strategy and a goal, which when achieved, constitutes victory.
11.4 U. S military personnel should always be under U. S. command.
11.5 U. S. armed forces should be all-volunteer.
11.6 Military draft registration should be eliminated.
11.7 Foreign aid is often more harmful than helpful and should be curtailed.
12.0 PROPERTY RIGHTS
12.1 The government should not take private property without just compensation.
12.2 All unconstitutional regulation of private property should be repealed.
13.0 DRUGS
13.1 While recognizing the harm that drug abuse causes society, we also recognize that government drug policy has been ineffective and has led to frightening abuses of the Bill of Rights which could affect the personal freedom of any American. We, therefore, support alternatives to the War on Drugs.
13.2 Per the tenth amendment to the U. S. Constitution, matters such as drugs should be handled at the state or personal level.
13.3 All laws which give license to violate the Bill of Rights should be repealed.
Entered into the record December 8, 2000
HUH? I think you must have me confused with someone else. Check it out; my profile page says no such thing.
There are two types of "laws" then. Laws of prohibition (do not aggress, do not assault, do not rape, do not steal) and laws of procedure for the operation of the service (elections every four years, salaries, requirements for office, etc.)
The first type of laws are strictly constrained by the principle of individual sovereignty. They can only righly prevent infringements on indivdiual sovereignty -- an assault or rape or robbery are assaults on that individual's sovereign control over his or her own person and property.
You can see how the service agency of the government can enhance individual sovereignty by coming to the aid of individuals under assault.
Where government goes wrong when it becomes anti-Libertarian is when it starts imposing its view of other life choices -- it becomes the sovereign and individuals lose their sovereignty and must instead obey the dictates of the government (whether tyrannical or majoritarian.)
Laws against alcohol, for example, are proper if they prohibit driving while drunk (which risks the lives of other sovereigns) but improper if they seek to ban either alcohol or drunkeness in all cases (being drunk at home, for instance.)
Obviously you can apply this sovereignty test to other drugs and other behaviors.
We each have our sovereign space -- we don't owe anybody our health or productivity, and likewise neither may we infringe their health or productivity -- nor intervene on decisions they make about their own.
What do you envision they would have drafted?
I'm not so sure there can be morality in a choice that was coerced.
You mean there are socialists with three kids?
See what I mean? hahahahahahaha!
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.