Posted on 11/06/2002 5:34:44 AM PST by logic101.net
You didn't read it carefully. Therefore you didn't understand it. You are a total waste of keystrokes.
Really?
No Roscoe it isn't.
Which is why Libertarianism isn't viable. TANSTAAFL
Now that you told me what is isn't, can you define what it is?
"Prescription is the most solid of all titles, not only to property, but, which is to secure that property, to government. They harmonise with each other, and give mutual aid to one another. It is accompanied with another ground of authority in the constitution of the human mind-- presumption. It is a presumption in favour of any settled scheme of government against any untried project, that a nation has long existed and flourished under it. It is a better presumption even of the choice of a nation, far better than any sudden and temporary arrangement by actual election. Because a nation is not an idea only of local extent, and individual momentary aggregation, but it is an idea of continuity, which extends in time as well as in numbers and in space. And this is a choice not of one day, or one set of people, not a tumultuary and giddy choice; it is a deliberate election of ages and of generations; it is a Constitution made by what is ten thousand times better than choice--it is made by the peculiar circumstances, occasions, tempers, dispositions, and moral, civil, and social habitudes of the people, which disclose themselves only in a long space of time." -- Edmund Burke"It is agreed by those who have seriously considered the subject, that no individual has, of natural right, a separate property in an acre of land, for instance. By an universal law, indeed, whatever, whether fixed or movable, belongs to all men equally and in common, is the property for the moment of him who occupies it, but when he relinquishes the occupation, the property goes with it. Stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society." --Thomas Jefferson
The laws, regulations and societal traditions we have built over the centuries have served to protect and preserve our freedoms. Libertarian reductionism and fanaticism has not.
* means NRA endorsment. Grade is the NRA grade. Wisconsin:(D) Doyle 800,958 F
*(R) McCallum 732,781 A
(L) Thompson 185,085
It looks to me like 732K voters wanted stricter enforcement of existing gun-control laws and 185K voters wanted to repeal gun-control laws.
So they helped elect a Democrat with an F rating from the NRA?
Ueful idiots.
A peek into the heart of zealotry.
False.
Libertarians oppose the Welfare State which forces all of society to finance slovenly behavior. However, Republicans and Democrats have been increasing funding for all manner of socialist welfare programs for decades.
If the Libertarian ideologues want to claim that those who engage in evil will or should alone pay for the consequences of their evil deeds, try telling that to a child born with AIDS or to a transfusion patient...
How do you suggest we put an end to this?
...or to a child who got stuck with a dirty needle while playing in a park.
A government park? How come no one ever gets stuck with needles at Disneyland? How come dirty needles in government parks is a relatively recent phenomenon?
Try telling the children living in broken homes with broken hearts that there are no consequences to other's sins.
Should the state raise children? Do you agree with Hillary Clinton that "It Takes a Village?"
I voted a straight Libertarian ticket on Tuesday. In races with no Libertarian candidate I cast no vote.
They are the tragedy of the commons.
How did Libertarians "help" the Democrat win. Let's see the evidence that Libertarians would have voted Republican with no Libertarian in the race.
Again?
* means NRA endorsment. Grade is the NRA grade.It looks to me like 732K voters wanted stricter enforcement of existing gun-control laws and 185K voters wanted to repeal gun-control laws.Wisconsin:
(D) Doyle 800,958 F
*(R) McCallum 732,781 A
(L) Thompson 185,085
So they helped elect a Democrat with an F rating from the NRA?
Useful idiots.
The consequences your referring to are just a step on the road to the consequences.
Once again:
Republicans/Democrats want limited freedoms to avoid consequences.
I submit Jesus Christ the Almighty gave us moral liberalism itself, when He gave us his greatest gift of all, that of free will. Your idealogy has not allowed a true free society on this planet. Cause and affect will weed the bad seed. Even God allows this in the end of the 1000 yrs.
Impying only the "commons' would be affected by freedom. Do you really believe the elite will not aquire aids, get shot in a robbery, have his/her property stolen, get raped, taken into slavery, in a free society?
I would think the elite would be the first pickings.
Libertarians rage and rave against the nanny state, but they themselves are directly responsible for its ascendance.
How are Libertarians directly responsible for the nanny state?
2. What evidence do you have that Libertarians would have voted Republican with no Libertarian in the race?
Your own assertion.
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.