So you think even a ‘smidgen’ of social liberalism is guaranteed to be incompatible with limited government? We already have a bit of a mixture now, ever since Johnson’s welfare and social reforms, some of which have been clipped back a little. Some social programs have to be either dumped or totally revised, such as pension plans. We cannot make that cozy promise anymore, there are too many of us, and we live too long to sustain it. Just ask Detroit about the crushing weight of pension plans, and lifelong guarantees.
Social liberalism is the libertarian platform of,
Libertarian Party Platform:
Throw open the borders completely; only a rare individual (terrorist, disease carrier etc.) can be kept from freedom of movement through “political boundaries”.
Homosexuals; total freedom in the military, gay marriage, adoption, child custody and everything else.
Abortion; zero restrictions or impediments.
Pornography; no restraint, no restrictions.
Drugs; Meth, Heroin, Crack, and anything new that science can come up with, zero restrictions.
Advertising those drugs, prostitution, and pornography; zero restrictions.
Military Strength; minimal capabilities.
Ansel12 continues to be confused. I’ve pointed out before how PERSONAL INDIVIDUAL acceptance of God weighs far more to the good than any kind of social bans on inanimate things. And in fact the second is scapegoating.
Ansel12 continues to try to paint scenes on the head of pins with a house painting brush and achieves consequences in accordance with this folly.
God did not send His Son into this fallen world to save “societies” but individual souls. And I can continue to pound on the distinctions, except that I do intend to go to a church worship service in the morning and can’t chase ansel12 around all night. So there may be (although I hope not) more inane comments I cannot reply to, or at least not soon.