Be Libertarian: The Case for Our Own Party

[Shoostie]

Of the involved parties, the dad, the baby, the neighbor, and the mother, the only party the Libertarian Party supports having a Choice is the mother. That's not because they believe in Choice, but because they believing in the utility of killing babies.

They want the dad forced to finance choice of the mother . They want, course, to force the baby to die. They want to force the neighbor, such as a Catholic organization, to supply birth control and abortions.

 

[KenH]

They want the dad forced to finance choice of the mother . They want, course, to force the baby to die. They want to force the neighbor, such as a Catholic organization, to supply birth control and abortions.

False and...false and...false.

 

[Reynolds]

You want a more expansive federal government than I do.

I would like the Federal go t to protect us from institutionalized murder.

 

[Yeshua1]

“The point has been made that Libertarian Party candidates don’t win as often as the candidates of the two old parties. That’s true, but a vote is not a wager. Unless you have a bet on the outcome of the election, there is no prize for predicting the winner or having your vote added to their result. A vote is an opportunity to send a message about what you want and what you don’t. The only person who loses when you vote for a candidate you don’t want is you.

The compromises made in joining the two old parties are not just a matter of moving slower in a libertarian direction, but actively move in an anti-libertarian direction. The decision of whether a compromise is acceptable is a matter for each individual’s conscience, but honesty requires one to acknowledge the effect of the other policies and positions that one is supporting by being part of either the Republicans or Democrats.”

Be Libertarian: The Case for Our Own Party

Your party basically allows one to sin as they please, as its my own preference and conviction, so stop judging me and enforcing law!

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Per the U.S. Constitution, the federal government has no warrant to be involved in the abortion issue. It is, at most, an issue for the individual states.

If the Bill of Rights does not presume the right to life, then it is mere words and no one is safe. If securing the blessings of liberty does not embrace the right to life foremost, it is sham, for who can enjoy the blessings of liberty if their very life is denied them?

It is unreasonable and uncsonscionable to interpret the Consitution to say to the innocent you have these rights and blessings of liberty, but not the right to live to enjoy them.

‘Now, take thou thy pound of flesh, Shylock, but not one drop of blood.’

 

[KenH]

Your party basically allows one to sin as they please

Do you want the United States to be a theocracy? And, if so, based on the rules of which denomination?

 

[KenH]

Your party basically allows one to sin as they please

Do you want sin of fornication to be illegal? And, if so, what should be the penalty?

 

[KenH]

Your party basically allows one to sin as they please

Do you want the sin of fits of anger to be illegal? And, if so, what should be the penalty?

 

[Shoostie]

Do you want sin of fornication to be illegal? And, if so, what should be the penalty?

The fascist and libertine LP party supports the laws that make it illegal for people to say "no" to fornication.

 

[Shoostie]

The closest America has to a libertarian party is the Constitution Party which wants to whittle the federal government down to its constitutionally legitimate size.

 

[Shoostie]

About all I ever see you post are untruths. Are you that reprobate on purpose or do you have a mental problem? If the latter, then I suggest you get medical help for it. If the former, then I suggest you come to God in repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.

Why don't you stop attacking me, and make your case for the LP party being a party of liberty? If it is, you should have such an easy time, but instead you're flopping around like a fish out of water.

I've pointed out the oppressive tone of their platform and the declaration of their last presidential candidate that religious freedom is like allowing murder.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Shoostie: you've enumerated your problems with the LP's platform. However, I fear you need to produce the "murder" quote verbatim. IOW, you need to foot note your claim.
FYI, years ago, I was at a Friends of the NRA meeting wide they had an LP activist speak. Til then I occasionally voted LP. He turned me off with his pro-choice rhetoric.

I've pointed out the oppressive tone of their platform and the declaration of their last presidential candidate that religious freedom is like allowing murder.

 

[Salty]

... Til then I occasionally voted LP. He turned me off with his pro-choice rhetoric.

Not pro-choice - PRO-ABORTION!

 

[Salty]

Per the U.S. Constitution, the federal government has no warrant to be involved in the abortion issue. It is, at most, an issue for the individual states.

incorrect - IT is the Supreme court decision that keeps the govt out of the abortion issue.

 

[Shoostie]

Shoostie: you've enumerated your problems with the LP's platform. However, I fear you need to produce the "murder" quote verbatim. IOW, you need to footnote your claim.
FYI, years ago, I was at a Friends of the NRA meeting wide they had an LP activist speak. Til then I occasionally voted LP. He turned me off with his pro-choice rhetoric.

From the 7/28/2016 Washington Examiner
I mean under the guise of religious freedom, anybody can do anything. ... Why shouldn't somebody be able to shoot somebody else because their freedom of religion says that God has spoken to them and that they can shoot somebody dead. ... I just see religious freedom, as a category, as just being a black hole.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

I read the article (it's an op-ed interview). On the whole his stance on religious freedom is scary.

 

[Salty]

Do you want the United States to be a theocracy? And, if so, based on the rules of which denomination?

NO, of course not - but we need to have high morals/

 

[Yeshua1]

Do you want the United States to be a theocracy? And, if so, based on the rules of which denomination?

The entire earth will be under that form of government when Jesus comes back, may He return right now!

 

[Yeshua1]

Do you want sin of fornication to be illegal? And, if so, what should be the penalty?

Do you desire us to be free to sin against God and His law all of the time, was that not what got Isreal in trouble big time?

 

[Martindr]

“The point has been made that Libertarian Party candidates don’t win as often as the candidates of the two old parties. That’s true, but a vote is not a wager. Unless you have a bet on the outcome of the election, there is no prize for predicting the winner or having your vote added to their result. A vote is an opportunity to send a message about what you want and what you don’t. The only person who loses when you vote for a candidate you don’t want is you.

The compromises made in joining the two old parties are not just a matter of moving slower in a libertarian direction, but actively move in an anti-libertarian direction. The decision of whether a compromise is acceptable is a matter for each individual’s conscience, but honesty requires one to acknowledge the effect of the other policies and positions that one is supporting by being part of either the Republicans or Democrats.”

Be Libertarian: The Case for Our Own Party

There is no good case for the Libertarian Party. Its platform is amoral, meaning it progressively caves to the most immoral position, much like the Dems.

Where do Libertarians stand between liberals and conservatives?

I don't think you understand Libertarianism correctly. Yes it's amoral that's the point. It removes morality from politics and just lets people do what they want. Now culturally that should not be allowed but legally absolutely.