Just what is a Libertarian?

Internet - Lost URL | FR Post 01-11-02 | Written by Deanna Corbeil

[MrB]

Another 500 reply thread to come.

The libertarians try to explain their philosophy of self reliance and self responsibility, and all I ever see is attacks along the lines of "Druggies!" and idiotic crap like "conservatives without morals".

If you see the lack of legislated morality use as leading to a lack of self responsibility, you're starting from the false premise that, through government, the rest of us have to take up the slack for those who can't function because of their choices.

Try this.
Start with the idea that no one need be responsible for anyone besides their dependents, unless they choose to.
Anyone who makes irresponsible choices and ends up in a rough spot has to deal with it themselves.
Anyone who commits a crime is punished accordingly, including being removed from society.
Anyone who chooses to be non-productive will live a poor lifestyle or be imprisoned.
In less than one generation, you'll see a society of self responsible, self reliant people, because there is no other choice.

So cold and cruel, I know, but this society needs some tough love.

[A CA Guy]

I agree with you that civil communication could be better accessed on all sides.
I also do understand loss of composure due to passion once in a while.

[NittanyLion]

Can an activity be immoral but at the same time legal? Can one be moral but illegal? Should this happen?

[f.Christian]

Libertarians is a loin cloth and bow tie for anarchists!

[A Navy Vet]

"I find it utopian in nature. If every nation of the earth shared the same libertarian philosophy of government, both ideally and practically, then one could consider the foreign policy put forth by libertarians."

Exactly the point I have made time and again. Libertarians are unrealistic dreamers who refuse to recognize that we can never go back to 1787. The best we can hope for is the reduction of government largess and not the elimination thereof. Until the "commerce clause" and the "general welfare" clauses are amended, the Supreme Court will continue to approve of legislation that was cleary contrary to the FF's intent. Even then, some modern legislation is needed to maintain civility in our increasingly complex society.

[A CA Guy]

I'm referring to self medication not approved by a doctor VA, like street drugs. Sorry if that was misscommunicated.

[Aron4Rep]

You seem to completely discount the evidence from Alcohol Prohibition that it is the criminality inherent in the law that leads to lawlessness amongst those addicted. Like with alcohol, the violence will drop once drugs are decriminalized. As for drug users hurting people while under the influence, the same laws apply as if they were under the influence of alcohol.

I do not approve of drug usage myself. I do however recognize that my moral choices do not extend beyond my own actions. Do you really want the Government to be the final arbiter of what is moral? Especially after the last eight years of X42 and Co.?

[Aron4Rep]

Republicans seem to be lost in a utopia where the War on Drugs can be won and that the Founders would approve of the errossion of Rights in the name of protecting us from ourselves.

[MotleyGirl70]

Just what is a Libertarian?

John McCain

[A CA Guy]

Street drugs are bad and cause addiction often. Easy to know that.

I agree with you that there are also issues that need to be taken to court because though they are legal today, they are wrong.
An example is where you might rent your home to a stranger and they participate in drug addiction. Feds get them and YOUR HOUSE as well. That isn't right if YOU knew nothing about the drug activity. If YOU knew and approved, then their house should be taken.

[A CA Guy]

Drug use as a recreation is totally immoral. You must be joking - right?

[A CA Guy]

Those that get drunk do a lot of harm. It is illegal to be drunk behind the wheel of your car or in care of your children. I wouldn't legalize that either.

[A CA Guy]

The reason there are ANY laws is because we all need to know where the limits are in what we can do. Otherwise the full extent of freedom is anarchy.
70% of all violent crime is associated with illegal drug usage and addiction.

I'd hang you hat on a better cause if I were you.

[A CA Guy]

Thanks, been fun all. Have to work now.

[A Navy Vet]

To be fair, I haven't been impressed with the Republicans since 1994. I think they've lost their vision and backbone.

[fod]

John McCain

Wrong, and if he were, the LP would have booted him, unlike the RP, which lack the balls to boot him from thier party...

[NittanyLion]

That's all well and good, but can something be immoral but still legal?

[Aron4Rep]

Libertarians believe the Law should be held within Constitutional limits as it aligns quite nicely with our advocacy of the "non-initiation of force" principle. This is hardly an endorsement of anarchy.

Anyone harming another through their action should be prosecuted under the law for that harm. On the other hand, if you not harming anyone other than your self, why should there be laws restraining you from that conduct?

[timm22]

I am saying that there is a strong immoral pro-drug addiction crowd within the party though.

When you say "pro-drug addiction," what do you mean? Do you think there are libertarians who want people to become addicted to drugs, simply because they don't believe drug use should be illegal?

[Dakmar]

Thanks, been fun all. Have to work now.

Thank you for civil discourse rather than the name calling, innuendo, and slander we have come to expect from most WOD supporters.