Posted on 05/18/2007 8:13:13 AM PDT by traviskicks
I don’t disagree that there are certain aspects of social conservatism that have brownshirt tendencies. However, libertarians are not anarchists. As both Hayek and Von Mises pointed out, a certain amount of enforced social constraint is not only necessary to maintain civilization, it is healthy. For instance, the original laws against prostitution throughout most of Western Civilization were put in place to control the rampant spread of venereal diseases.
I consider myself a social conservative, but I am a strong libertarian. That means I hold conservative views with regard to morality and social interaction. However, I do not believe it is a proper function of government to enforce my social views on others. One cannot equate social conservatism with fascist policy as a blanket generalization.
” However, I do not believe it is a proper function of government to enforce my social views on others. ‘
Bingo. That’s the domain of social conservatism.
There is no historical evidence to back up such an assertion. It is pure conjecture.
It is far more dangerous because it is a religion...
How does that make a difference? I hope you're not implying that religion has any more culpability in promoting violence than any other factor. That is a canard that can easily be refuted.
The vast majority are decent folk, but when religion is involved, even the slightest incident can turn most decent folk into something very dangerous.
Evidence? Once again, this is wild conjecture based on a popular but false notion that religion causes violence.
Once Islamic controlled countries get nuclear weapons, the world will be a very different place.
How so? Will they suddenly have the abilities, namely delivery systems and consistent weaponry, that most of the rest of the nuclear club does not?
Funny how NONE of the quotes sited agree with Paul’s contention at all. As usual the Hysteric Fringers seem to think if they simply scream the lie louder and longer it will magically become “truth”
The fact is Ron Paul is actively propagaqndizing for the enemies of the USA. If anyone on the LEFT had said it the same freeper fringers who are so busy making EXCUSES for Paul would be screaming “treason”.
Maybe the Know Nothings MIGHT finally READ the Fatwa you all so blithely claiming justifies Ron Paul’s treason. DOn’t just quote a line or two, actually READ it this time.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
So Ron Paul agrees with Bin Laden. When a Democrat does that you all scream “treason”. Funny how desperate you all are to try and make excuses for Paul’s demonstrated mental incompetent.
We have had a military presence in Saudi Arabia for decades, so the answer to your question is “Yes.”
And if we don’t learn how our enemy thinks, we can never devise the proper stratagem to defeat him. Hate to be the one to tell you this, but Dr. Paul IS correct on this.
I just wish Paul didn’t bring it up in this format. It was impossible for him to summarize this arguement in 30 seconds to bunch of rabid WOT is all that matters people, especially after being set up with the questioning in the first place. I agree with him in as much as our meddling in the mid east decades ago has come back to haunt us in the form of islamofascists, 9/11 isn’t our fault but it is a great way to distract the peasants over there so they don’t kill the king/mullah keeping them in the stone age. It’s an excellent tool for the fed and govt. at all levels over here to do what govt. does best - infringe upon our liberties and consolidate power.
He lost me because he wasn’t able to communicate this subtle and important point and he shitcanned his campaign, but worse he lost his credibility and now all his wisdom will be easily discounted as “crazy talk” by the big govt. GOP cheerleaders.
Why do we have to stop supporting Israel? Why don’t we just let them blow up who ever the hell they want and sell them all the bombs they want?
So what you’re saying is that your brand of “conservatism” is anti personal freedom and anti Constitution? You are one sick puppy, me boyo. One sick puppy. But it IS good to know where you stand on the subject. Freedom isn’t conservative. The Constitution which set up this nation isn’t conservative. Who’da thunk it?
There is no historical evidence to back up such an assertion. It is pure conjecture.
The number was not important, but between just Stalin and Hitler alone, most historians would put that number at over 50 million. I am not sure what the point was in arguing about what the number is. It is unimportant to the discussion.
It is far more dangerous because it is a religion...
How does that make a difference? I hope you're not implying that religion has any more culpability in promoting violence than any other factor. That is a canard that can easily be refuted.
Religion more than an ideology can make people act irrationally. When you have a religion as Islam where it's mission it to convert people or kill them, it is more dangerous than any ideology I know of. When you have about of quarter of the world who claim that as a religion, you have the recipe for disaster. I think it is naive to think otherwise
The vast majority are decent folk, but when religion is involved, even the slightest incident can turn most decent folk into something very dangerous.
Evidence? Once again, this is wild conjecture based on a popular but false notion that religion causes violence.
No evidence?!?!? I guess Islam having about 1500 history of fighting wars whose sole purpose is to advance their religion isn't evidence enough. I don't think religion inherently causes wars. Religions such as Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, etc. are capable of having peaceful co-existence with other religions. A fundamentalist Muslim who takes his/her religion as it is written, can not. Islam is inherently a religion of war.
Once Islamic controlled countries get nuclear weapons, the world will be a very different place.
How so? Will they suddenly have the abilities, namely delivery systems and consistent weaponry, that most of the rest of the nuclear club does not?
You assume it requires a missile-based delivery system. We can not even prevent 20 million people from crossing our borders. There is no reason to believe that we can stop someone who is determined to get nuclear weapons into this country from doing so. Even so, it will only take a few more Clintons or Carters and Islamic countries will have deliver systems.
Selling them bombs is supporting them. It is not like Muslims don't know who made the bombs.
It is in their nature to commit violence because unlike most religions, muzzies did not go thru a period of enlightment in their history. They went from the Middle Ages to Modern Age.
Excellent point worth repeating!
Are you seriously making the argument that if we had stayed in Camp LeJeune the Iranians would have bombed us?
Take your time....this should be good.
L
Actually, an interview.
Ronald Reagan is held as an ideal by Conservatives for the man he became as President, not for who he was when he was a registered Democrat, or when he was a libertarian governor who signed an abortion bill into law in California. The man EVOLVED into a Conservative after much soul-searching.
Wasn't he President in 1982? Why do I ask? Because he said:
[T]here is a threat posed to human freedom by the enormous power of the modern state. History teaches the dangers of government that overreaches -- political control taking precedence over free economic growth, secret police, mindless bureaucracy, all combining to stifle individual excellence and personal freedom.Oh yeah, Conservatism is against personal freedom. Yeah, right.
I was referring to your assertion that Islam will dwarf the number. There is no historical evidence to support that. The Islamic conquests of Europe and Mesopotamia were relatively bloodless.
Religion more than an ideology can make people act irrationally.
Once again, that is conjecture based on a popular myth. There is no historical evidence to support that argument.
I guess Islam having about 1500 history of fighting wars whose sole purpose is to advance their religion isn't evidence enough. I don't think religion inherently causes wars. Religions such as Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, etc. are capable of having peaceful co-existence with other religions.
Well first, that is patently untrue. Islam's history is no more violent than Christendom's. Second, the conquests of the Ottoman Turks and the Moores were more about territory than religion. Any number of generals and warlords have claimed religion in their banner, but religion usually has little to do with the fight. You might as well blame economics since it has a far bloodier history than religion.
We can not even prevent 20 million people from crossing our borders.
Indeed, and all of our interventionism in the Middle East doesn't seem to have changed that fact a bit, has it? Even worse, this neocon President seems to have facilitated that condition. In any case, the myth of the "suitcase nuke" has been adequately debunked elsewhere and is nothing but a fairy tale to frighten children and excite Hollywood producers.
As usual, it is always best to use history as our guide in geopolitical situations and it tells us there is no chance that any sovereign nation can be stopped from acquiring nuclear weapons once it is determined to do so. That leaves us only with the option of invasion and occupation, making us no better than any other thug regime who has gone before us.
Hey, OrthodoxPresbyterian, looks like someone needs to go to school.
Paul is right whether Bin Laden really means what he says or not. He may merely be trying to appeal to the masses with his talk of fighting foreign aggression, but it doesn't matter, because it does in fact appeal to the masses. The U.S.' policies in the middle east have been very helpful to AQ's recruiting, whether or not that's really Bin Laden's beef.
They proved it in 1979. Or had you forgotten?
Think about this. The people who blowed up the Barracks were Lebanese. They did so after being told to by Iran.
Why did Iran tell them to do so? Think real hard. Take your shoes off if you want to. Count your toes.
I'm sure you'll come up with the answer, what with your superior intellect and all.
Thank you for answering my question. At least someone paid attention enough to do so.
I know how our enemy thinks. They don’t hide it. They come right out and tell us. Go to www.memri.org and look for yourself.
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.