[Huck]

Apparently everyone enjoys these 'discussions of what it means to have freedom and liberty', so here you go! Let's have a mature discussion, free from name calling and childish behavior.

Not likely. But an interesting article nonetheless. Libertarians will part company by paragraph 3. They do not recognize "the idea of restraints on individuals by communities " as legitimate.

[Exnihilo]

It is interesting that Libertarians are just fine with restraints on individuals imposed by the free market. I suppose though, any restraint upon individual freedom is okay so long as it doesn't violate the constitution. How arbitrary.

[decimon]

That libertarians do not recognize the restraints of communities is not true. Libertarianism would allow for any variety of communities. Those communities would comprise markets to thrive or fail within the greater "market."

[OWK]

They do not recognize "the idea of restraints on individuals by communities " as legitimate.

Not so.

Had you said "They do not recognize the idea of restraints on THE RIGHTS of individuals by communities " as legitimate.".. You would have been correct.

[seattlesue]

They do not recognize "the idea of restraints on individuals by communities " as legitimate.

Restraint of an individual's behavior in the public domain is legitimate, but not in the private domain. If someone chooses to behave in a pornographic manner in the privacy of their home, it is their right do so. If they choose to behave in a pornographic manner in public and the community is opposed to the behavior, the community does have the right to impose restraints.

Please don't take this to mean someone has the right to murder or harm someone because they are in the privacy of their home.