Posted on 09/16/2012 6:51:44 PM PDT by billflax
Remember the old saw about speeding: anyone zipping along faster is nuts, but slower drivers are idiots. Ideologues believing in limited government are an obstinate breed, myself included. We find anyone who wants more government as fools, but those desiring even less are crazy. In theory, if everyone went 65 we'd never have a traffic jam. Sadly, state authority is necessary because of man's fallen nature.
Many libertarians approve same-sex marriage. Likewise, some perceive abortion as fundamental to freedom, even questioning Ron Paul for championing life.
Meanwhile, Americans have grown so inured to government intervention that letting people purchase contraceptives privately construes now into waging "War on Women." "Keep politics out of people's bedrooms," the Left insists, except, of course, taxpayers should get involved with their wallets.
If men were just or could all protect themselves, government would be redundant. Political authority became necessary because, to paraphrase James Madison, we aren't angels. Governments' legitimate purpose preserves culture and protects life, liberty and property. To which our Founders rightly incorporated propriety over conscience and the "pursuit of happiness."
No group needs more protection than babies regardless of which side of the womb they presently reside. By the time a mother can even confirm pregnancy, her baby has started sprouting a unique personality, brain waves have begun and her heartbeat resonates. Everyone matures through this essential phase. Unborn babies are undeniably human beings.
Libertarianism rests on the nonaggression principle, "live and let live" they say. But then why allow life to be snatched from helpless children? Lawful abortion mocks government's very legitimacy.
Same-sex marriage also betrays libertarian principles. Unless government intervenes, matrimony remains what it has been for millennia. Why have government alter an institution antecedent to America's very existence?
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Another question.
What’s your stance on spousal visas? Gay marriage tourism is huge. Get married in America, grab a visa. :)
Isn’t that just fab?
You aren’t....
http://www.google.com/search?q=bush+amnesty&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari
You still don’t have a point.
No. Nor is birthright citizenship to children of those here illegally.
But the GOP seems ok with it...
When you agree with that position in post 19, and all the other radical leftism of your party, then you are beyond being talked to by conservatives.
No wonder that Noam Chomsky became a leading libertarian and that you guys get the Bill Mahers.
Even if what you say is true, it’s just not realistic at all to think we can close off welfare while we allow mass immigration of those likely to use it. Most Hispanic (and now most Asian) immigrants are going to vote for Democrats, and Democrats are going to be very generous spending tax payer dollars in buying the loyalty of voters. It’s really amazing (in a bad way) that libertarians think their ideas of limited govt will have appeal to immigrant communities.
But I disagree with you in part because I’m not convinced that even today’s heavily pro-Democrat immigrants are coming here for the welfare or govt freebies. I think they are coming because the US still offers more economic opportunities than their native lands. Of course once they get here...well, who’s gonna look a gift horse in the mouth?
Even if we somehow implemented libertarian policy today, it would simply be undone years from now when the Democrats have a demographic lock on power.
I just saw an amazing picture of my friend’s 21 week old baby in her womb. The baby was so beautiful with all it’s fingers, toes and even it’s private parts fully formed. It has what looked like an expression on it’s face. Anyone who could think that he wasn’t a human deserving protection has to be nuts. Every human’s life from conception must be legally protected if we are to not be a barbaric, murderous society.
So you’re in favor of eliminating public education altogether?
“Nor is birthright citizenship to children of those here illegally.”
Last I checked, we call them ‘citizens’.
If you think socialists like Noam Chomsky agree with the ideas of Libertarians you don't understand much about either. Chomsky is a libertarian socialist, which is a school of thought that is soundly rejected by non socialist libertarians.
Your argument is no different than saying that Democratic Socialists who believe in elections are the same as conservatives who also believe in elections. Obviously they don't have the same beliefs, even if they agree on some things like having elections.
Should we also presume that the Republican party is the true expression of conservatism?
If it isn't then how do you know that the true expression of libertarianism is the Libertarian party?
I don’t see anything in their current platform that disagrees with this position on child pornography....
Libertarian Presidential Front-Runner Defends Child Porn
April 25, 2008 · By Adam Dyck
Mary Ruwart, research scientist, perrenial Libertarian Senatorial candidate and front runner for this year’s Libertarian Presidential ticket is being taken to task for comments she made in her book, Short Answers to Tough Questions.
When discussing self choice in relation to child porn, she had this to say: “Children who willingly participate in sexual acts have the right to make that decision as well, even if it’s distasteful to us personally. Some children will make poor choices just as some adults do in smoking and drinking to excess. When we outlaw child pornography, the prices paid for child performers rise, increasing the incentives for parents to use children against their will.”
Because that party was founded not as a mass party, but just for that little niche of oddballs and lefties (who like low taxes).
The list of truly radical leftists that are libertarians is very long.
Noam Chomsky adheres more to the true libertarianism, not this newer version that embraces the left, except for it’s economics.
That is why libertarianism is so silly, it is really a bunch of childish nonsense for some fringe whack cases.
I’m a conservative. You are a GOP hack who forgot what it is your were trying to conserve in the first place.
We know we’ve been raping you for decades. But we can’t just stop now because people have come to expect us to rape you.
Your logic doesn’t scan. If it is wrong,cot is wrong. No matter how many people approve.
Yes. NASA and the FAA as well....
Yes... And who redefined what it takes to claim birthright citizenship. Who Los broadened the term that any illegal squatting on a roadside can claim all those freebies if she can just wait until they are over the border....
The Founders would puke up a lung at such fraud....
Considering that they were all grandfathered? I think not.
No. The term was never meant to be so broad. Just as with most "penumbras and emanations" the courts and legislatures are currently using to run our Republic into the ground.
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.