Be Libertarian: The Case for Our Own Party

[Martindr]

“Hamilton, a native of Sinton, Texas, has worked as an accountant for Murphy Oil since graduating from Harding University in 1978.

He lives in El Dorado with his wife, Jo Lynn, and their dogs. Hamilton has not held elected office but has been a member of the Libertarian Party since 1980.

Aside from his interest in politics, Hamilton enjoys bluegrass music.

Here is a brief summary of the candidates’ stands on public infrastructure projects, the U.S. response to Islamic terrorists in Syria and Iraq, and the farm bill compiled from their responses in a recent debate.”

Three issues: 4th District congressional candidates on infrastructure, ISIS, Farm Bill

The comments here don't understand the point of Libertarianism. It's to remove the government from individuals lives. It does not rely on any system of morals or goals it just promotes freedom it's then up to us to have a moral culture not a government that makes us moral.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

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.

Of course I understand the message of Libertarianism as spelled out on the website, and I stated its obvious result, which seems to be totally lost on Libertarians. I also understand that morally confused minds can easily imagine that Libertarianism sounds reasonable, because their imagination ignores the reality of the human condition.

It is a complete misunderstanding to talk about law as making someone moral, as every Christian should know thoroughly. Law can only state the standards to be upheld and the measures that will be taken to enforce those standards against lawbreakers.

"We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers..." (1 Tim 1:8-9).

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

The comments here don't understand the point of Libertarianism. It's to remove the government from individuals lives. It does not rely on any system of morals or goals it just promotes freedom it's then up to us to have a moral culture not a government that makes us moral.

The inanity of this Libertarianism cannot be overstated. Such an approach would only result in the most powerfully, violently wicked people oppressing everyone else ("might makes right") with no other recourse than to simply endure or flee their outrages, or eventually group against them in violent reprisals. Hopefully, the oppressed would finally form a more sensible order (government) that would warn such wicked people that their evil will no longer be tolerated.

The wiser among us can easily foresee this and reject such Libertarianism without committing the gross sin of perpetrating its evil experiment on society.

 

[Shoostie]

The comments here don't understand the point of Libertarianism. It's to remove the government from individuals lives. It does not rely on any system of morals or goals it just promotes freedom it's then up to us to have a moral culture not a government that makes us moral.

KenH and the LP party are frauds. KenH wanted me banned because I assumed he voted the LP presidential candidate who compared freedom of religion to allowing murder and said he wanted "all" discrimination banned. Maybe you, Martindrk, don't understand what libertarian is, if you think those libertine tyrants are libertarians.

The current LP party platform has no planks supporting free speech, other than opposing government regulation of of tech oligopoly that already censors conservatives. The LP party platform encourages people who harass those who practice freedom of association. The LP party platform is short on anything calling to reduce the welfare and nanny states. Sure, the socialist nazi LP party calls for ending the income tax, but they know that's not going to happen, and they don't support any practical measures to reduce taxes or government spending.

The LP party wants to make criminals out of people who choose not to support sodomy, prostitution, drug abuse, and illegal immigration.

What's your excuse for not understanding? When you point a finger calling others ignorant, you should take note of your own fingers pointing back at you. A free people are a moral people. The LP party loves immortality and therefor necessarily hates liberty.

 

[Roger McKinney]

Embracing the immorality of perpetrating homicide on the unborn is an untenable stance no matter how you slice it, and the Libertarian Party does this. It similarly embraces many other immoralities, a seemingly endless list of them. Their website is rather clear on this point.

It is no surprise that those who wish to perpetrate such immoralities and teach others, including children, to approve of and do the same would gravitate to such a party.

But Christians need to wake up to the realities of such untenable nonsense and have no part in it. Why? Because Christians of all people should be aware that such immoralities have negative, not neutral effects on all of society.

“Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people,” Proverbs 14:34.

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.

 

[evenifigoalone]

*sees Libertarian in title*
I have been summoned

 

[evenifigoalone]

Not pro-choice - PRO-ABORTION!

As I understand it, the definitions of "pro-life" and "pro-choice" were established in the 80's to describe a political position. Insisting on calling it anything but "pro-choice" is, imo, no better than the pro-choicers who insist on referring to pro-lifers as "pro-forced birth", "forced birth extremist", or "anti-women". We need not stoop to such low tactics imo.

(I'm a pro-life libertarian)

 

[evenifigoalone]

The LP party wants to make criminals out of people who choose not to support sodomy, prostitution, drug abuse, and illegal immigration

False. If you don't like or don't support sodomy, then don't do sodomy. If you don't like or support prostitution, then don't become a prostitute or solicit one. Etc. You can Not Support and teach against these things all you like--that's your right. The LP simply believes they should be legal.

If you do openly speak against those things, then you will for sure face pushback against equally passionate people. But legal pushback, or making your pushback an actual legal crime, would go against Libertarian principles.

 

[evenifigoalone]

I’m sorry you’re so double minded.

You seem about as pleasant as a bed of nails

 

[Adonia]

The original purpose was to prevent the states from denying citizenship to the newly freed slaves. That is all. Once you start adding to it is how you end up with same-sex marriage being legalized nationwide in one fell swoop.

Marriage, same sex or otherwise is not mentioned in the Federal compact. The Supreme Court had no jurisdiction in the case at all (especially under the 14th Amendment), it should have been left to the individual states to decide per the 10th Amendment.

 

[Adonia]

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.

The abortion ruling was made up out of whole cloth. There is no total "right to privacy" in our nation as was the main reason for the abortion ruling. If there was, then prostitution would have to be allowed throughout the entire nation, as well as the use of any type of now illegal drugs. Society has a vested interest in controlling such things through the appropriate laws.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

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.

That post badly twists the truth. Conservative types don't think law makes bad people good, nor that a state can make saints of sinners. The state can neither save nor be saved.

Anti-gun laws are progressive leftist (not conservative) and ignore murder's source, namely murderers.

The legalized murder of babies, aka abortion, has led to a multifold increase in that horrendous evil. Even early proponents admit the "rare" of the "safe and rare" hope was false.

Informing the state of what is good and evil, and expecting it to commend the former and punish the latter is not exaltation of the state but realistic regarding its purpose. Again, the Bible is clear, "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people," Proverbs 14:34.

The gullibility of extremely permissive libertarians as shown in the political platform is hard to overstate—the mindset is a badly confused one and a great danger to society.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

As I understand it, the definitions of "pro-life" and "pro-choice" were established in the 80's to describe a political position. Insisting on calling it anything but "pro-choice" is, imo, no better than the pro-choicers who insist on referring to pro-lifers as "pro-forced birth", "forced birth extremist", or "anti-women". We need not stoop to such low tactics imo. (I'm a pro-life libertarian)

On its surface, that view might sound right. However, "pro-life "actually reflects the truth, as both the life of the mother and the life of the baby are to be preserved. However, "pro-choice" is a euphemism for murder of the baby, who has no choice in the matter. "Pro-choice" is a lie worthy of the devil.

 

[Shoostie]

False. If you don't like or don't support sodomy, then don't do sodomy. If you don't like or support prostitution, then don't become a prostitute or solicit one. Etc. You can Not Support and teach against these things all you like--that's your right. The LP simply believes they should be legal.

If you do openly speak against those things, then you will for sure face pushback against equally passionate people. But legal pushback, or making your pushback an actual legal crime, would go against Libertarian principles.

You appear to be another fraud, like KenH. The LP party doesn't simply believe sodomy and prostitution should be legal. The LP party supports making criminals of people who don't want to support immoral activity of others. The LP party platform is hostile to liberty, other than to personally being sexually immoral and hedonistic.

 

[evenifigoalone]

You appear to be another fraud, like KenH. The LP party doesn't simply believe sodomy and prostitution should be legal. The LP party supports making criminals of people who don't want to support immoral activity of others. The LP party platform is hostile to liberty, other than to personally being sexually immoral and hedonistic.

Repeating the same wrong opinion doesn't suddenly make it correct

Sent from my SM-J737T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Bro. Curtis]

You seem about as pleasant as a bed of nails

To know me is to love me.

 

[Roger McKinney]

That post badly twists the truth. Conservative types don't think law makes bad people good, nor that a state can make saints of sinners. The state can neither save nor be saved.

Anti-gun laws are progressive leftist (not conservative) and ignore murder's source, namely murderers.

The legalized murder of babies, aka abortion, has led to a multifold increase in that horrendous evil. Even early proponents admit the "rare" of the "safe and rare" hope was false.

Informing the state of what is good and evil, and expecting it to commend the former and punish the latter is not exaltation of the state but realistic regarding its purpose. Again, the Bible is clear, "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people," Proverbs 14:34.

The gullibility of extremely permissive libertarians as shown in the political platform is hard to overstate—the mindset is a badly confused one and a great danger to society.

No it doesn't twist the conservative position at all. Look at the war on drugs. All you conservatives think you can stop people from taking drugs with laws and massive incarceration but the drug problem is worse than it has ever been. You didn't learn a thing from the failure of prohibition.

I know anti-gun laws are not conservative. Do you really think I'm that stupid?!! It helps discussion a lot if you don't assume the other person is totally stupid. I mentioned it as another failure of the state to achieve vaunted goals. The state fails at almost everything it attempts. Conservatives refuse to see massive state failure on every hand.

What do you think will happen if we make abortion totally illegal? Women won't quit having abortions. They'll go to illegal clinics. Then organized crime will take over the industry because it will be so profitable. It will be just like the "war" on drugs and prohibition. Don't you guys ever learn anything from history? Meanwhile we have reduced abortion dramatically through persuasion. Missouri has just one abortion clinic left and it is near closing.

What is the point of "informing the state.." and "expecting it to commend the former and punish the latter..." if you don't think it will have some impact in reducing evil and forcing people to be good? I think you have contradicted yourself. The Bible gives the state one job and one only - to punish evil doers, those that violate the rights to life, liberty and property. It does a poor job of that but fails miserably at any other. Libertarians promote a Biblical government limited to its Biblical role and nothing else.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

No it doesn't twist the conservative position at all. Look at the war on drugs. All you conservatives think you can stop people from taking drugs with laws and massive incarceration but the drug problem is worse than it has ever been. You didn't learn a thing from the failure of prohibition.

I know anti-gun laws are not conservative. Do you really think I'm that stupid?!! It helps discussion a lot if you don't assume the other person is totally stupid. I mentioned it as another failure of the state to achieve vaunted goals. The state fails at almost everything it attempts. Conservatives refuse to see massive state failure on every hand.

What do you think will happen if we make abortion totally illegal? Women won't quit having abortions. They'll go to illegal clinics. Then organized crime will take over the industry because it will be so profitable. It will be just like the "war" on drugs and prohibition. Don't you guys ever learn anything from history? Meanwhile we have reduced abortion dramatically through persuasion. Missouri has just one abortion clinic left and it is near closing.

What is the point of "informing the state.." and "expecting it to commend the former and punish the latter..." if you don't think it will have some impact in reducing evil and forcing people to be good? I think you have contradicted yourself. The Bible gives the state one job and one only - to punish evil doers, those that violate the rights to life, liberty and property. It does a poor job of that but fails miserably at any other. Libertarians promote a Biblical government limited to its Biblical role and nothing else.

Yes, that post was a serious corruption of a conservative view, not to mention an affront to scripture. The state does not determine behavior, only the standards of behavior, and consequences for violating those standards. The idea that a permissive society translates to one with less crime is nonsensical.

I don’t know how stupid anyone actually is. However, that is hardly the issue, but rather how much wisdom is being expressed or ignored. The conflation of that previous post expressed obvious confusion, whether accidental or on purpose. Conflating being good with not committing gross evil is simply unbiblical.

Another case in point. Of course making abortion illegal will not eradicate that form of murder, just as other homicide laws will not eradicate murder in general. Again, not the point of laws. Laws when enforced can, however, deter some and also take convicted criminals out of play, even permanently.

Whether anyone learns from history, Christians should learn from the Bible, and the history recorded there is clear. A permissive society leads to more and more evil. As for modern history, check out what happenend in Liberty, Missouri, where they banned churches and evangelism. Bedlam.

It remains to be established how libertarians can truly claim to support a government that punishes evildoers if neither they nor that government recognize the difference between good and evil. This is where the real contradiction lies.

 

[evenifigoalone]

The Bible gives the state one job and one only - to punish evil doers, those that violate the rights to life, liberty and property. It does a poor job of that but fails miserably at any other. Libertarians promote a Biblical government limited to its Biblical role and nothing else.

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.)

 

[Roger McKinney]

Yes, that post was a serious corruption of a conservative view, not to mention an affront to scripture. The state does not determine behavior, only the standards of behavior, and consequences for violating those standards. The idea that a permissive society translates to one with less crime is nonsensical.

I don’t know how stupid anyone actually is. However, that is hardly the issue, but rather how much wisdom is being expressed or ignored. The conflation of that previous post expressed obvious confusion, whether accidental or on purpose. Conflating being good with not committing gross evil is simply unbiblical.

Another case in point. Of course making abortion illegal will not eradicate that form of murder, just as other homicide laws will not eradicate murder in general. Again, not the point of laws. Laws when enforced can, however, deter some and also take convicted criminals out of play, even permanently.

Whether anyone learns from history, Christians should learn from the Bible, and the history recorded there is clear. A permissive society leads to more and more evil. As for modern history, check out what happenend in Liberty, Missouri, where they banned churches and evangelism. Bedlam.

It remains to be established how libertarians can truly claim to support a government that punishes evildoers if neither they nor that government recognize the difference between good and evil. This is where the real contradiction lies.

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. Yes, the main point is whether laws are a deterrent to crime. That's the main difference between conservatives and libertarians. To claim that conservatives don't think laws are a deterrent is dishonest. But if laws could deter criminal behavior then we wouldn't need the Gospel would we?

You're conflating society and the state, a typical conservative fallacy. They're not the same. A permissive state does not lead to more evil but a permissive society is already evil. There is a lot more to history than Liberty, MO.

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.