Replies

"So I again ask, what constitutes the "overall good of society"?"

The "overall good" would be defined as that which perpetuates (or leads to) an environment in which an orderly community of like minded individuals can live and raise children.

Yes, sex, drugs, porn are religious issues. So are murder, stealing, and assault. Our laws are based on moral behavior, there's nothing new with that. It's just that some laws weren't necessary in the past because a moral person, a person with character, wouldn't think of behaving that way -- keep in mind that our Constitution was written for a moral and religious people.

Nowadays, unfortunately, people look to the legal system to determine their behavior. If it's not illegal, then by golly they're going to do it and don't you dare criticize them or pass moral judgements on them.

If you believe that the "rights" of the individual are supreme (as long as the behavior does not harm others), then we'll never agree. The reason being that you think individuals operate in a vacuum -- that their behavior does not have an impact on the rest of society.

Of course it has the appearance of anarchy. These individuals who wish to participate in this lifestyle are selfish, self-centered, immoral hedonists who couldn't care less about the effect of their behavior on others and look at legalization as legitimacy.

The "overall good" would be defined as that which perpetuates (or leads to) an environment in which an orderly community of like minded individuals can live and raise children.

On this point, I agree with you in total. It was this exact point, after a good many years of arguing with libertarians, that changed my mind on libertarianism, and led me to become one myself (though I would continue for several more years to reject the LP).

As a political philosophy, libertarianism is the only one that affords people an opportunity (as a right), to form and maintain exclusive communities of like minded people, to live, work, and raise families, free of outside interference. You will not find this right and encouragement any where else on the political spectrum.

If you believe that the "rights" of the individual are supreme (as long as the behavior does not harm others), then we'll never agree.

On this, you sow the seeds that guarantee that people will never be allowed to grow communities of like minded people. You guarantee a perpetual power struggle, of which no complete community standard will ever be allowed to be tried out, let alone grow and prosper to a full maturity. You sow the seeds of anarchy, that will always exist in the one big community, where no individuals or communities can ever really successfully develop, in any meaningful way, a full moral code. Yours are the seeds of your own destruction.

...keep in mind that our Constitution was written for a moral and religious people.

Oh? Hardly so. But I'll leave this one for another time, I have to go to work.

"Ignorance of the law is no excuse." A simple phrase from a simpler time. Simpler because theft (Did that belong to you?), assault (Were you defending yourself?), and murder (Theft of anothers life.) were easy concepts to comprehend. These can be defined as property issues as well as moral issues. Actions of consenting adults which do not directly effect other people are moral control issues. Further, an examination of our "chosen" representatives shows that, in many cases, its a "do as I say, not do as I do" issue. None of these "moral" codes have improved society. A certain segment of society has ALWAYS wished to escape reality. Alcohol is a primary example. Prohibition was a CONTROL ISSUE. It not only failed miserably, but by the end of prohibition there were more drinkers than before. The Harrison Narcotics Act was passed somewhere around 1912(?), at that time 3% of the population use "hard" drugs. Has 90 years of "moral law" changed these numbers for the better? No. It does provide job security for police and prison officials though. Your real issue appears to be 'If we don't control this behavior, then others may join in.' And it should be applied in some cases. But the real destroyer of our society isn't sex, drugs and porn. Its the lessening of meaningful deterents to murder, assault and theft. Murderers should not only be publically executed, they should be killed in the same manner as their victims. Thieves should serve full sentences and make full restitution to their victims. People who commit assault should be beaten silly and released. What we have now is a society where murderers, thieves and violent criminals are being prematurely released into society to make room for potheads (the majority of people processed and jailed). Yes, a persons behavior has an impact on society around them. A black woman who, inspite of the "rules" of an "orderly community of like minded individuals" to the contrary, refused to sit in the back of the bus. There was a good example. I suspect that the actions of cancer patients, inspite of the laws of an "orderly community of like minded individuals" will have the same effect on marijuana laws. One last note, the State of Nevada shows no more societal breakdown than any other State inspite of legal gambling and prostitution. It won't change much when they pass the legalization laws on pot either. Stick with "real" crimes and real criminals. There are more than enough of them to go around.