Posted on 03/20/2010 10:13:57 AM PDT by Superstu321
Ever since the Reagan presidency ended in the late 1980s, certain elements in the conservative movement have gravitated toward the libertarianism – the Libertarian Party, Ron Paul followers, etc. In the past couple of years, since the middle of George W. Bush’s presidency and with the election of Barack Obama, the movement has exploded. But that’s drawn all sorts of elements – pro-marijuana legalization advocates, pro-gay marriage advocates, abortion rights advocates and of course all the usual elements with the tea party folks worried about the growth of government, etc....
More with orginal audio after the jump.
(Excerpt) Read more at threefingersofpolitics.com ...
I think some people may be calling themselves “libertarian” to do what they’ve done: confuse conservatives and split the right.
If you’re advocating for “gay marriage” you’re no libertarian. You’re a cultural saboteur. Libertarians I know believe the state has no role in marriage whatsoever, and that includes “gay marriage”. The libertarians that started this country didn’t have marriage licenses as those weren’t invented until the government decided it had to regulate human relationships.
The term “anarchist” has been similarly distorted by those who are agitating for top-down communism. Anarchists, in the true meaning of the term, do not want government. How could one of them then want nationalized health care? The two positions don’t make sense together.
We are losing the language and it is enabling communists/socialists/collectivist agitators to split the right.
Lots of people around here fall into the trap. See the arguments over the drug war, for example.
Could we please elevate our arguments a few IQ points?
“…cultural saboteur…”
What the ignorant do not realize: a government that can do something to one person can do it to all persons; arbitrarily. And those who support unconstitutional causes believe that just because the government has not done anything to them is freedom. Not true, it just means they have not gotten around to them yet; for Law is man-made while rights are derived from precepts above man.
Such is the case with Homo-Leninism, at first it was just leave us alone, ok, then we want to be free to associate, we should not be made fun of, moving to wanting social privileges, followed by extra-Constitutional status…and has now led to using the force of the state to sanctify political constructs at the end of a gun barrel.
Another such position is the fabrication of abortion as a right, combining medicine, choice, privacy…all ending with sanction and control by the state of a supposed right. Whereby, one person un-Constitutionally obligates another on one hand for a decision by someone else, while on the other hand being exempt for expunging another’s lineage. Without realizing state sponsored abortion is proxy for genocide.
The founding fathers comprehended this completely.
This is a false distinction. Our constitution is not a lbertarian document at all. As John Adams insisted, our constitution was made for a moral and religious people. Liberterianism ultimately means anarchy. We make a proper distinction on our website between Darwinian capitalism and biblical capitalism. See www.faithfacts.org, then go to “Christianity and the Culture,” then “Bible and Government.”
The author is wrong on one part of his thesis: the anti-drug law craze was a PROGRESSIVE idea, not a conservative or libertarian one.
IIRC, it was the PROGRESSIVES in the late 19th & early 20th centuries that enacted our nation’s first drug control laws @ the national level. I think the Food & Drug Act & the Harrison Narcotics Act became “law” during the Teddy Roosevelt Administration.
The Marihuana Tax Act became “law” in 1937 under FDR...& he is NO conservative; quite the opposite, in fact (another PROGRESSIVE).
I would say that many of today’s so-called “conservatives” have adopted many of the ideas of the Progressive movement. After all, if that were not the case, then how could they have nominated PROGRESSIVES like Juan McCain & Jorge W. Boosh, & “New World Order” G.H.W. Bush & Bob Dole as their Presidential nominees in the last 6 elections?
And so what do you make of people like me or Vox Day who prefer to use the term “Christian libertarian” to describe our philsophy?
We were meant to be self-governing. That’s why they said we had to be virtuous. Self-government doesn’t just mean voting.
It means ruling your own person.
That’s why Christianity and liberty are so intertwined.
And many of the progressive ideas that mainstream conservatives of GOPers embrace have their roots in racism.
The marriage license was devised to limit the human relationships that blacks could enter into.
I guess whites liked how government regulated blacks’ relationships that they wanted to be regulated as well.
Wow...I never knew about that before (re: marraige licensing), thanx for telling me.
I do know, however, that most of our nation’s anti-drug laws were steeped in racism. It was Chinese immigrants who used opium during the Progressive Era, & it was the Hispanic immigrants (& blacks in the South) that FDR’s Reefer Madness laws were pointed towards...all in the name of “saving our children”, of course.
Not quite...NEO-conservatism is a progressive form of conservatism that has its roots in the ideals of Leon Trotsky. It is the the type of conservatism that has had the leadership of the GOP w/in its grasp for the last 60+ years.
Some people....many, many freepers....will call someone “pro” abortion, gay marriage, etc etc etc if they perceive others to be less intolerant or less anti than they are.
In their terms, government staying neutral on gay marriage equates to pro gay marriage, if one wants to leave marijuana use up to the individual then one is pro drug abuse, and if isn’t ready to bomb a clinic then one is pro abortion.
It is all propaganda designed to eliminate honest debate and discussion on the issues.
It is interesting that those who rail on libertarians focus on open borders and not starting stuff with other countries and fail to even admit the pro 2A or anti income tax aspects of libertarianism.
Just my two cents.
Utter rubbish out of an ignorant mind.
Libertarianism ultimately means returning to a Constitutional republic.
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.