• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Be Libertarian: The Case for Our Own Party

Roger McKinney

New Member
Personally I'm unconcerned with a "Biblical government", particularly when we live in a nation that claims to allow religious freedom. And what the Bible has to say about running a government--we are left with no instructions to that end--is so minuscule that you can make almost whatever you want out of it. (The nation of Israel was a theocracy in the beginning, literally run directly by God's direct instruction. As God doesn't typically speak to us today as He spoke to Moses, running such a government in our day would be impossible.)

You're unconcerned with what the Bible says about government? Then why are you posting on this site? No, it's not true that the Bible has little to say about government. God created just one government, the nation of Israel. It shows what God thinks is the best government for his people. No, God did not directly run it. He merely gave it laws and structure. Other than that, he did no more for Israel than he did for any other nation. He judged Israel but he also judged other nations for their sins. The nation of Israel was a libertarian's dream. It had no human exec, legislature or standing army. It had no taxes or police. It had only courts to enforce God's civil laws, not the moral or ceremonial laws. I Sam 8 that describes God's anger at Israel for rejecting his government convinced theologians and political philosophers to adopt a republican form of government in the 16th century. We don't need God to speak directly to us today because we have the Bible. Yes, such a government is possible today. The US government as originally set up under the Articles of Confederation was very libertarian and that of the Constitution is very close. But we don't have to replicate the government of Israel exactly. The point is to keep the state as small as possible and give people as much freedom as we can.

Also, Romans 13 limits the role of the state to just punishing evil doers, but not mankind's ideas of evil, just God's.
 

RighteousnessTemperance&

Well-Known Member
You accuse me of claiming that I thought the anti-gun movement is conservative. That's accusing me of being stupid. Don't try to wiggle out of you (deleted by moderator) behavior.
OK, since you think you've been falsely accused, I'll handle that issue separately. I submit that you were not offended but rather took offense. Here's your post:

Conservatives are gullible enough to believe that the state turns evil people into saints. How naive. The drug problem is worse than ever. Yet abortions are near an all time low. Crimes with guns are worse where the government restricts them most. Reality contradicts your exalted view of the state. The state cannot male sinners act like saints. It can only punish evil people. Only Christ can turn sinners into saints and he doesn't need help from the state.

Where does it criticize the views of anyone except conservatives and myself? The post runs it all together and accuses only conservatives and myself, and does so erroneously, grossly misrepresenting both. Citing, in the midst of that, the results of a progressive/leftist "solution" does not indicate a nuanced argument, but merely conflates it with the rest of the twisted attack. It would be better not to post such sloppiness. Then you won't have to feel you're being made to look stupid when someone bothers to untwist it.

And my points in this thread are really aimed at the OP's Libertarianism Party (see the title). What an individual libertarian believes is not the real issue.
 
Last edited:

RighteousnessTemperance&

Well-Known Member
What makes you think libertarians can't recognize the difference between good and evil? That shows amazing ignorance of libertarianism. Libertarianism descends from the classical liberalism of Edmund Burke. It has always insisted on the rule of natural law that can be summed up in the rights to life, liberty, and property.
As I mentioned, my issue is with the united Libertarian platform of the OP. I've posted several comments about it already. Take issue with them, if you wish.

Bottom line, if the state cannot recognize life, it is in no position to uphold the right to it. Legalizing abortion is legalizing murder. The result has been sixty million since Roe v Wade.

Oh, and natural law is now passé to a great many in society, thanks in no small part to the growing influence of atheism.
 

Roger McKinney

New Member
As I mentioned, my issue is with the united Libertarian platform of the OP. I've posted several comments about it already. Take issue with them, if you wish.

Bottom line, if the state cannot recognize life, it is in no position to uphold the right to it. Legalizing abortion is legalizing murder. The result has been sixty million since Roe v Wade.

Oh, and natural law is now passé to a great many in society, thanks in no small part to the growing influence of atheism.

Your posts are mostly gibberish, but I'll try to clarify the issues. Conservatives think they can perfect humanity through legislation just like socialists. That's why they have spent the past 50 years making everything they don't like illegal. The best example is the conservative war on drugs. Through it, conservatives have made the drug problem worse than ever in US history, culminating in the opioid epidemic. In addition, the war on drugs has enriched cartels so much that they have been able to buy the governments of most nations south of the border. But conservatives don't care about the results of their laws. They only care about pretending to take the moral high ground. Make abortion illegal and you'll accomplish the same thing as the war on drugs, but I'm sure you don't care. You wont save a single baby, but you will continue to claim moral superiority.

Libertarianism is similar to the government God created for Israel before the monarchy. God know better what type of government will work best for humanity. Libertarians insist on the rule of law, but of natural law, or God's law defending the rights to life, liberty and property but nothing else. Claiming that libertarians want no law is simply dishonest. And those aren't my opinions but the opinions of the best libertarian writers such as Rothbard, Nozick, Hayek and others.
 

Roger McKinney

New Member
Here are key issues from the Libertarian Party platform:

1.5 Abortion

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

1.6 Parental Rights

Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, provided that the rights of children to be free from abuse and neglect are also protected.

1.7 Crime and Justice

Government force must be limited to the protection of the rights of individuals to life, liberty, and property, and governments must never be permitted to violate these rights. Laws should be limited in their application to violations of the rights of others through force or fraud, or to deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. Therefore, we favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as gambling, the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes, and consensual transactions involving sexual services. We support restitution to the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. The constitutional rights of the criminally accused, including due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must be preserved. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law. We oppose the prosecutorial practice of “over-charging” in criminal prosecutions so as to avoid jury trials by intimidating defendants into accepting plea bargains.

1.9 Self-Defense

The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights — life, liberty, and justly acquired property — against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We affirm the individual right recognized by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. Private property owners should be free to establish their own conditions regarding the presence of personal defense weapons on their own property. We oppose all laws at any level of government restricting, registering, or monitoring the ownership, manufacture, or transfer of firearms or ammunition.


2.0 ECONOMIC LIBERTY
Libertarians want all members of society to have abundant opportunities to achieve economic success. A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.

2.1 Property and Contract

As respect for property rights is fundamental to maintaining a free and prosperous society, it follows that the freedom to contract to obtain, retain, profit from, manage, or dispose of one’s property must also be upheld. Libertarians would free property owners from government restrictions on their rights to control and enjoy their property, as long as their choices do not harm or infringe on the rights of others. Eminent domain, civil asset forfeiture, governmental limits on profits, governmental production mandates, and governmental controls on prices of goods and services (including wages, rents, and interest) are abridgements of such fundamental rights. For voluntary dealings among private entities, parties should be free to choose with whom they trade and set whatever trade terms are mutually agreeable.
 

RighteousnessTemperance&

Well-Known Member
Here are key issues from the Libertarian Party platform:

1.5 Abortion

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

...
And right off the bat the Libertarian Party derails on "key issues." It is nonsensical to treat outright murder of the most innocent as a personal "sensitive issue," and abortion is outright murder of the most innocent. A "we don't want to appear insensitive" angle is just the sort of cop-out that can turn any important issue on its head and pervert justice. A party that cannot recognize life is in no position to uphold the right to it, and once the right to life is lost, the rights to liberty and property are gone as well.
 

RighteousnessTemperance&

Well-Known Member
Your posts are mostly gibberish, but I'll try to clarify the issues....
Speaking of gibberish, here, from your own post, is a doozy only worse:

"Make abortion illegal and you'll accomplish the same thing as the war on drugs, but I'm sure you don't care. You wont save a single baby, but you will continue to claim moral superiority."

Abortion was illegal until the early 1970's. After Roe v Wade, the practice mushroomed. What cartels were running the industry before that time, Planned Parenthood? The truth is that legalization of abortion incentivized millions to murder innocent babies.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Here are key issues from the Libertarian Party platform:

1.5 Abortion

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their .

Uh no slaughtering the unborn in the womb by ripping them limb by limb should not be left to each.person. Anyone who says otherwise needs their head examined
 
Top