Sheer, unsupported supposition on your part.
That's the kind or rejoinder one could make against any argument -- including yours, but such a blanket dismissal doesn't carry the argument any further. Nor do the "you too" responses. Any defense of Republicans will have to take Republicans of all stripes into account, but I'm not aware of any Republicans who advocate legalizing all "victimless crimes." There are libertarians who do and one can't deny that they exist. You can't say that "no one is talking about" something that more than a few libertarians have been talking about and expect to be taken seriously.
Similarly, how can one deny that libertarianism relies more on the existence of rational and responsible individuals than other ideologies? Isn't it a staple of libertarian rhetoric that individuals know best for themselves what they want and how to get it? Isn't it a point of pride for libertarians that they represent this point of view more than those of other political stripes? And will libertarian policies encourage or discourage such intelligent and moral conduct? Simply denying these questions or my earlier assertions doesn't prove anything.
Hmmm, a little futher on, YOU say:
"That's the kind or rejoinder one could make against any argument". -- How true. Agreed.
You don't explain what makes an act "criminal" if not laws against it.
We have a body of common criminal law that the states administer, using our bill of rights as the supreme "law of the land". If state laws violate our constitutional rights, they are void. Get it?
You apparently subscribe to some cultic view that defines words differently from common usage. That's fine, I guess, but it makes your arguments difficult to follow.
That is simple bull on your part. You have no answers, so you punt 'cultic view'. Grow up.
You're using too much:
Sheer, unsupported supposition on your part.
That's the kind or rejoinder one could make against any argument -- including yours, but such a blanket dismissal doesn't carry the argument any further. Nor do the "you too" responses. Any defense of Republicans will have to take Republicans of all stripes into account, but I'm not aware of any Republicans who advocate legalizing all "victimless crimes." There are libertarians who do and one can't deny that they exist.
No one makes such denials. - You are 'hyping' my replies.
You can't say that "no one is talking about" something that more than a few libertarians have been talking about and expect to be taken seriously. Similarly, how can one deny that libertarianism relies more on the existence of rational and responsible individuals than other ideologies? Isn't it a staple of libertarian rhetoric that individuals know best for themselves what they want and how to get it? Isn't it a point of pride for libertarians that they represent this point of view more than those of other political stripes? And will libertarian policies encourage or discourage such intelligent and moral conduct?
Simply denying these questions or my earlier assertions doesn't prove anything.
Nor does your above rant 'prove anything '.
You have a 'great passion' that libertarians somehow threaten our constitutional republic. You are wrong.